TBX3-Mutationsanalysen und Konstruktion einer Zelllinie für TBX2-Inhibitorscreenings

Die nahe verwandten T-box Transkriptionsfaktoren TBX2 und TBX3 werden in zahlreichen humanen Krebsarten überexprimiert, insbesondere in Brustkrebs und Melanomen. Die Überexpression von TBX2 und TBX3 hat verschiedene zelluläre Effekte, darunter die Unterdrückung der Seneszenz, die Förderung der Epithelialen-Mesenchymalen Transition sowie invasive Zellmotilität. Im Gegensatz dazu führt ein Funktionsverlust von TBX3 und der meisten anderen humanen T-box-Gene zu haploinsuffizienten Entwicklungsdefekten. Durch Sequenzierung des Exoms von Brustkrebsproben identifizierten Stephens et al. fünf verschiedene Mutationen in TBX3, welche allesamt die DNA-bindende T-box-Domäne betrafen. Die In-Frame-Deletion N212delN wurde zweimal gefunden. Aus der Anhäufung der Mutationen innerhalb der T-box-Domäne wurde geschlossen, dass TBX3 bei Brustkrebs ein Treibergen ist. Da Mutationen innerhalb der T-box-Domäne im Allgemeinen zu einem Funktionsverlust führen, aber die onkogene Aktivität von TBX3 meist auf eine Überexpression zurückzuführen ist, wurden die potentiellen Treibermutationen hinsichtlich einer verminderten oder gesteigerten TBX3-Funktion geprüft. Getestet wurden zwei In-Frame Deletionen, eine Missense- sowie eine Frameshift-Mutante bezüglich der DNA-Bindung in vitro und der Zielgen-Repression in Zellkultur. Zusätzlich wurde eine in silico Analyse der im The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) gelisteten somatischen TBX-Brustkrebsmutationen durchgeführt. Sowohl die experimentelle als auch die in silico Analyse zeigten, dass die untersuchten Mutationen vorwiegend zum Verlust der TBX3-Funktion führen. Um den Mechanismus der Genrepression durch TBX3 besser zu verstehen, wurden weitere TBX3-Mutanten bezüglich ihrer Wirkung auf die p21-Promotoraktivität (p21-Luc-Reporter und endogene p21-Expression) analysiert. Wildtypische p21-Luc-Repression zeigten die zwei Mutationen S674A (Phosphorylierung) und D275K (SUMOylierung), welche posttranslationale Modifikationen verhindern, sowie die Interaktion mit dem Tumorsuppressor Rb1 unterbindende M302A/V304A-Mutation. Erstaunlicherweise war die endogene p21-Repression dieser Mutanten stärker als die des wildtypischen TBX3-Proteins. Alle drei Mutationen führten zu einer Stabilisierung des TBX3-Proteins. Die ursprünglich in Patienten mit Ulna-Mamma Syndrom identifizierte, DNA-bindungsdefekte Y149S-Mutante konnte weder p21-Luc noch endogenes p21 reprimieren. Mutationen in potentiellen Interaktionsdomänen für die Bindung der Co-Repressoren Groucho und C-terminalem Bindeprotein zeigten sowohl auf p21-Luc als auch auf endogenes p21-Gen wildtypische Repressoraktivität, so dass diese Co-Repressoren in COS-7-Zellen wahrscheinlich nicht an der Repression dieses Gens beteiligt sind. Da TBX2 und TBX3 interessante Ziele zur direkten Krebsbekämpfung darstellen, sollte ein zelluläres Reportersystem zur Identifikation TBX2-inhibierender, pharmakologisch aktiver Substanzen etabliert werden. Dazu sollte eine stabile Zelllinie mit vom p21-Promotor reguliertem d2EGFP-Reporter und Doxyzyklin-induzierbarem TBX2-Protein erzeugt werden, da ektopische Expression von TBX2 genetische Instabilität und Toxizität induzieren kann. In dieser Zelllinie sollte die TBX2-Expression zur Reduktion der d2EGFP-Fluoreszenz führen. Zur Erzeugung der Zelllinie wurden die folgenden drei Konstrukte Schritt-für-Schritt stabil in das Genom der Zielzelllinie COS-7 integriert: pEF1alpha-Tet3G, pTRE3G-TBX2 und p21-d2EGFP. Während die Herstellung der doppelt stabilen COS-7-Zelllinie gelang, scheiterte die Herstellung der dreifach stabilen Zelllinie.

Differential cell type-specific transcriptional regulation of the CYP1A1 gene

Cytochrome P450 1A1 (CYP1A1) monooxygenase plays an important role in the metabolism of environmental pollutants such as polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) and halogenated polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (HAHs). Oxidation of these compounds converts them to the metabolites that subsequently can be conjugated to hydrophilic endogenous entities e.g. glutathione. Derivates generated in this way are water soluble and can be excreted in bile or urine, which is a defense mechanism. Besides detoxification, metabolism by CYP1A1 may lead to deleterious effects since the highly reactive intermediate metabolites are able to react with DNA and thus cause mutagenic effects, as it is in the case of benzo(a) pyrene (B[a]P). CYP1A1 is normally not expressed or expressed at a very low level in the cells but it is inducible by many PAHs and HAHs e.g. by B[a]P or 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin (TCDD). Transcriptional activation of the CYP1A1 gene is mediated by aryl hydrocarbon receptor (AHR), a basic-helix-loop-helix (bHLH) transcription factor. In the absence of a ligand AHR stays predominantly in the cytoplasm. Ligand binding causes translocation of AHR to the nuclear compartment, its heterodimerization with another bHLH protein, the aryl hydrocarbon nuclear translocator (ARNT) and binding of the AHR/ARNT heterodimer to a DNA motif designated dioxin responsive element (DRE). This process leads to the transcriptional activation of the responsive genes containing DREs in their regulatory regions, e.g. that coding for CYP1A1. TCDD is the most potent known agonist of AHR. Since it is not metabolized by the activated enzymes, exposure to this compound leads to a persisting activation of AHR resulting in diverse toxic effects in the organism. To enlighten the molecular mechanisms that mediate the toxicity of xenobiotics like TCDD and related compounds, the AHR-dependent regulation of the CYP1A1 gene was investigated in two cell lines: human cervix carcinoma (HeLa) and mouse hepatoma (Hepa). Study of AHR activation and its consequence concerning expression of the CYP1A1 enzyme confirmed the TCDD-dependent formation of the AHR/ARNT complex on DRE leading to an increase of the CYP1A1 transcription in Hepa cells. In contrast, in HeLa cells formation of the AHR/ARNT heterodimer and binding of a protein complex containing AHR and ARNT to DRE occurred naturally in the absence of TCDD. Moreover, treatment with TCDD did not affect the AHR/ARNT dimer formation and binding of these proteins to DRE in these cells. Even though the constitutive complex on DRE exists in HeLa, transcription of the CYP1A1 gene was not increased. Furthermore, the CYP1A1 level in HeLa cells remained unchanged in the presence of TCDD suggesting repressional mechanism of the AHR complex function which may hinder the TCDD-dependent mechanisms in these cells. Similar to the native, the mouse CYP1A1-driven reporter constructs containing different regulatory elements were not inducible by TCDD in HeLa cells, which supported a presence of cell type specific trans-acting factor in HeLa cells able to repress both the native CYP1A1 and CYP1A1-driven reporter genes rather than species specific differences between CYP1A1 genes of human and rodent origin. The different regulation of the AHR-mediated transcription of CYP1A1 gene in Hepa and HeLa cells was further explored in order to elucidate two aspects of the AHR function: (I) mechanism involved in the activation of AHR in the absence of exogenous ligand and (II) factor that repress function of the exogenous ligand-independent AHR/ARNT complex. Since preliminary studies revealed that the activation of PKA causes an activation of AHR in Hepa cells in the absence of TCDD, the PKA-dependent signalling pathway was the proposed endogenous mechanism leading to the TCDD-independent activation of AHR in HeLa cells. Activation of PKA by forskolin or db-cAMP as well as inhibition of the kinase by H89 in both HeLa and Hepa cells did not lead to alterations in the AHR interaction with ARNT in the absence of TCDD and had no effect on binding of these proteins to DRE. Moreover, the modulators of PKA did not influence the CYP1A1 activity in these cells in the presence and in the absence of TCDD. Thus, an involvement of PKA in the regulation of the CYP1A1 Gen in HeLa cells was not evaluated in the course of this study. Repression of genes by transcription factors bound to their responsive elements in the absence of ligands has been described for nuclear receptors. These receptors interact with protein complex containing histone deacetylase (HDAC), enzyme responsible for the repressional effect. Thus, a participation of histone deacetylase in the transcriptional modulation of CYP1A1 gene by the constitutively DNA-bound AHR/ARNT complex was supposed. Inhibition of the HDAC activity by trichostatin A (TSA) or sodium butyrate (NaBu) led to an increase of the CYP1A1 transcription in the presence but not in the absence of TCDD in Hepa and HeLa cells. Since amount of the AHR and ARNT proteins remained unchanged upon treatment of the cells with TSA or NaBu, the transcriptional upregulation of CYP1A1 gene was not due to an increased expression of the regulatory proteins. These findings strongly suggest an involvement of HDAC in the repression of the CYP1A1 gene. Similar to the native human CYP1A1 also the mouse CYP1A1-driven reporter gene transfected into HeLa cells was repressed by histone deacetylase since the presence of TSA or NaBu led to an increase in the reporter activity. Induction of reporter gene did not require a presence of the promoter or negative regulatory regions of the CYP1A1 gene. A promoter-distal fragment containing three DREs together with surrounding sequences was sufficient to mediate the effects of the HDAC inhibitors suggesting that the AHR/ARNT binding to its specific DNA recognition site may be important for the CYP1A1 repression. Histone deacetylase is recruited to the specific genes by corepressors, proteins that bind to the transcription factors and interact with other members of the HDAC complex. Western blot analyses revealed a presence of HDAC1 and the corepressors mSin3A (mammalian homolog of yeast Sin3) and SMRT (silencing mediator for retinoid and thyroid hormone receptor) in both cell types, while the corepressor NCoR (nuclear receptor corepressor) was expressed exclusively in HeLa cells. Thus the high inducibility of CYP1A1 in Hepa cells may be due to the absence of NCoR in these cells in contrast to the non-responsive HeLa cells, where the presence of NCoR would support repression of the gene by histone deacetylase. This hypothesis was verified in reporter gene experiments where expression constructs coding for the particular members of the HDAC complex were cotransfected in Hepa cells together with the TCDD-inducible reporter constructs containing the CYP1A1 regulatory sequences. An overexpression of NCoR however did not decrease but instead led to a slight increase of the reporter gene activity in the cells. The expected inhibition was observed solely in the case of SMRT that slightly reduced constitutive and TCDD-induced reporter gene activity. A simultaneous expression of NCoR and SMRT shown no further effects and coexpression of HDAC1 with the two corepressors did not alter this situation. Thus, additional factors that are likely involved in the repression of CYP1A1 gene by HDAC complex remained to be identified. Taking together, characterisation of an exogenous ligand independent AHR/ARNT complex on DRE in HeLa cells that repress transcription of the CYP1A1 gene creates a model system enabling investigation of endogenous processes involved in the regulation of AHR function. This study implicates HDAC-mediated repression of CYP1A1 gene that contributes to the xenobiotic-induced expression in a tissue specific manner. Elucidation of these processes gains an insight into mechanisms leading to deleterious effects of TCDD and related compounds.

Consequences of DNA damage for gene transcription : direct effects of modified nucleobases and the role of base excision repair = Folgen von DNA-Schäden für die Gentranskription

The presence of damaged nucleobases in DNA can negatively influence transcription of genes. One of the mechanisms by which DNA damage interferes with reading of genetic information is a direct blockage of the elongating RNA polymerase complexes – an effect well described for bulky adducts induced by several chemical substances and UV-irradiation. However, other mechanisms must exist as well because many of the endogenously occurring non-bulky DNA base modifications have transcription-inhibitory properties in cells, whilstrnnot constituting a roadblock for RNA polymerases under cell free conditions. The inhibition of transcription by non-blocking DNA damage was investigated in this work by employing the reporter gene-based assays. Comparison between various types of DNA damage (UV-induced pyrimidine photoproducts, oxidative purine modifications induced by photosensitisation, defined synthetic modified bases such as 8-oxoguanine and uracil, and sequence-specific single-strand breaks) showed that distinct mechanisms of inhibition of transcription can be engaged, and that DNA repair can influence transcription of the affectedrngenes in several different ways.rnQuantitative expression analyses of reporter genes damaged either by the exposure of cells to UV or delivered into cells by transient transfection supported the earlier evidence that transcription arrest at the damage sites is the major mechanism for the inhibition of transcription by this kind of DNA lesions and that recovery of transcription requires a functional nucleotide excision repair gene Csb (ERCC6) in mouse cells. In contrast, oxidisedrnpurines generated by photosensitisation do not cause transcriptional blockage by a direct mechanism, but rather lead to transcriptional repression of the damaged gene which is associated with altered histone acetylation in the promoter region. The whole chain of events leading to transcriptional silencing in response to DNA damage remains to be uncovered. Yet, the data presented here identify repair-induced single-strand breaks – which arise from excision of damaged bases by the DNA repair glycosylases or endonucleases – as arnputative initiatory factor in this process. Such an indirect mechanism was supported by requirement of the 8-oxoguanine DNA glycosylase (OGG1) for the inhibition of transcription by synthetic 8-oxodG incorporated into a reporter gene and by the delays observed for the inhibition of transcription caused by structurally unrelated base modifications (8-oxoguanine and uracil). It is thereby hypothesized that excision of the modified bases could be a generalrnmechanism for inhibition of transcription by DNA damage which is processed by the base excision repair (BER) pathway. Further gene expression analyses of plasmids containing single-strand breaks or abasic sites in the transcribed sequences revealed strong transcription inhibitory potentials of these lesions, in agreement with the presumption that BER intermediates are largely responsible for the observed effects. Experiments with synthetic base modifications positioned within the defined DNA sequences showed thatrninhibition of transcription did not require the localisation of the lesion in the transcribed DNA strand; therefore the damage sensing mechanism has to be different from the direct encounters of transcribing RNA polymerase complexes with DNA damage.rnAltogether, this work provides new evidence that processing of various DNA basernmodifications by BER can perturb transcription of damaged genes by triggering a gene silencing mechanism. As gene expression can be influenced even by a single DNA damage event, this mechanism could have relevance for the endogenous DNA damage induced in cells under normal physiological conditions, with a possible link to gene silencing in general.