Refine
Document Type
- Article (4)
Language
- English (4)
Has Fulltext
- yes (4)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (4) (remove)
Keywords
- Cell biology (4) (remove)
Institute
Leukemia patients bearing the t(4;11)(q21;q23) translocations can be divided into two subgroups: those expressing both reciprocal fusion genes, and those that have only the MLL-AF4 fusion gene. Moreover, a recent study has demonstrated that patients expressing both fusion genes have a better outcome than patients that are expressing the MLL-AF4 fusion protein alone. All this may point to a clonal process where the reciprocal fusion gene AF4-MLL could be lost during disease progression, as this loss may select for a more aggressive type of leukemia. Therefore, we were interested in unraveling the decisive role of the AF4-MLL fusion protein at an early timepoint of disease development. We designed an experimental model system where the MLL-AF4 fusion protein was constitutively expressed, while an inducible AF4-MLL fusion gene was induced for only 48 h. Subsequently, we investigated genome-wide changes by RNA- and ATAC-Seq experiments at distinct timepoints. These analyses revealed that the expression of AF4-MLL for only 48 h was sufficient to significantly change the genomic landscape (transcription and chromatin) even on a longer time scale. Thus, we have to conclude that the AF4-MLL fusion protein works through a hit-and-run mechanism, probably necessary to set up pre-leukemic conditions, but being dispensable for later disease progression.
Leukemia patients bearing t(6;11)(q27;q23) translocations can be divided in two subgroups: those with breakpoints in the major breakpoint cluster region of MLL (introns 9–10; associated mainly with AML M1/4/5), and others with breakpoints in the minor breakpoint cluster region (introns 21–23), associated with T-ALL. We cloned all four of the resulting fusion genes (MLL-AF6, AF6-MLL, exMLL-AF6, AF6-shMLL) and subsequently transfected them to generate stable cell culture models. Their molecular function was tested by inducing gene expression for 48 h in a Doxycycline-dependent fashion. Here, we present our results upon differential gene expression (DGE) that were obtained by the “Massive Analyses of cDNA Ends” (MACE-Seq) technology, an established 3′-end based RNA-Seq method. Our results indicate that the PHD/BD domain, present in the AF6-MLL and the exMLL-AF6 fusion protein, is responsible for chromatin activation in a genome-wide fashion. This led to strong deregulation of transcriptional processes involving protein-coding genes, pseudogenes, non-annotated genes, and RNA genes, e.g., LincRNAs and microRNAs, respectively. While cooperation between the MLL-AF6 and AF6-MLL fusion proteins appears to be required for the above-mentioned effects, exMLL-AF6 is able to cause similar effects on its own. The exMLL-AF6/AF6-shMLL co-expressing cell line displayed the induction of a myeloid-specific and a T-cell specific gene signature, which may explain the T-ALL disease phenotype observed in patients with such breakpoints. This again demonstrated that MLL fusion proteins are instructive and allow to study their pathomolecular mechanisms.
Leukemia patients bearing t(6;11)(q27;q23) translocations can be divided in two subgroups: those with breakpoints in the major breakpoint cluster region of MLL (introns 9–10; associated mainly with AML M1/4/5), and others with breakpoints in the minor breakpoint cluster region (introns 21–23), associated with T-ALL. We cloned all four of the resulting fusion genes (MLL-AF6, AF6-MLL, exMLL-AF6, AF6-shMLL) and subsequently transfected them to generate stable cell culture models. Their molecular function was tested by inducing gene expression for 48 h in a Doxycycline-dependent fashion. Here, we present our results upon differential gene expression (DGE) that were obtained by the “Massive Analyses of cDNA Ends” (MACE-Seq) technology, an established 3′-end based RNA-Seq method. Our results indicate that the PHD/BD domain, present in the AF6-MLL and the exMLL-AF6 fusion protein, is responsible for chromatin activation in a genome-wide fashion. This led to strong deregulation of transcriptional processes involving protein-coding genes, pseudogenes, non-annotated genes, and RNA genes, e.g., LincRNAs and microRNAs, respectively. While cooperation between the MLL-AF6 and AF6-MLL fusion proteins appears to be required for the above-mentioned effects, exMLL-AF6 is able to cause similar effects on its own. The exMLL-AF6/AF6-shMLL co-expressing cell line displayed the induction of a myeloid-specific and a T-cell specific gene signature, which may explain the T-ALL disease phenotype observed in patients with such breakpoints. This again demonstrated that MLL fusion proteins are instructive and allow to study their pathomolecular mechanisms.
Chromosomal translocations (CTs) are a genetic hallmark of cancer. They could be identified as recurrent genetic aberrations in hemato-malignancies and solid tumors. More than 40% of all “cancer genes” were identified in recurrent CTs. Most of these CTs result in the production of oncofusion proteins of which many have been studied over the past decades. They influence signaling pathways and/or alter gene expression. However, a precise mechanism for how these CTs arise and occur in a nearly identical fashion in individuals remains to be elucidated. Here, we performed experiments that explain the onset of CTs: (1) proximity of genes able to produce prematurely terminated transcripts, which lead to the production of (2) trans-spliced fusion RNAs, and finally, the induction of (3) DNA double-strand breaks which are subsequently repaired via EJ repair pathways. Under these conditions, balanced chromosomal translocations could be specifically induced. The implications of these findings will be discussed.