Molecular role of the PAX5-ETV6 oncoprotein in promoting B-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia

PAX5 is a tumor suppressor in B-ALL, while the role of PAX5 fusion proteins in B-ALL development is largely unknown. Here, we studied the function of PAX5-ETV6 and PAX5-FOXP1 in mice expressing these proteins from the Pax5 locus. Both proteins arrested B-lymphopoiesis at the pro-B to pre-B-cell transition and, contrary to their proposed dominant-negative role, did not interfere with the expression of most regulated Pax5 target genes. Pax5-Etv6, but not Pax5-Foxp1, cooperated with loss of the Cdkna2a/b tumor suppressors in promoting B-ALL development. Regulated Pax5-Etv6 target genes identified in these B-ALLs encode proteins implicated in pre-B-cell receptor (BCR) signaling and migration/adhesion, which could contribute to the proliferation, survival, and tissue infiltration of leukemic B cells. Together with similar observations made in human PAX5-ETV6+ B-ALLs, these data identified PAX5-ETV6 as a potent oncoprotein that drives B-cell leukemia development

The leukemic oncogene EVI1 hijacks a MYC super-enhancer by CTCF-facilitated loops

Chromosomal rearrangements are a frequent cause of oncogene deregulation in human malignancies. Overexpression of EVI1 is found in a subgroup of acute myeloid leukemia (AML) with 3q26 chromosomal rearrangements, which is often therapy resistant. In AMLs harboring a t(3;8)(q26;q24), we observed the translocation of a MYC super-enhancer (MYC SE) to the EVI1 locus. We generated an in vitro model mimicking a patient-based t(3;8)(q26;q24) using CRISPR-Cas9 technology and demonstrated hyperactivation of EVI1 by the hijacked MYC SE. This MYC SE contains multiple enhancer modules, of which only one recruits transcription factors active in early hematopoiesis. This enhancer module is critical for EVI1 overexpression as well as enhancer-promoter interaction. Multiple CTCF binding regions in the MYC SE facilitate this enhancer-promoter interaction, which also involves a CTCF binding site upstream of the EVI1 promoter. We hypothesize that this CTCF site acts as an enhancer-docking site in t(3;8) AML. Genomic analyses of other 3q26-rearranged AML patient cells point to a common mechanism by which EVI1 uses this docking site to hijack enhancers active in early hematopoiesis.</p

Genome-wide profiling of p63 DNA-binding sites identifies an element that regulates gene expression during limb development in the 7q21 SHFM1 locus.

Contains fulltext : 88501.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access)Heterozygous mutations in p63 are associated with split hand/foot malformations (SHFM), orofacial clefting, and ectodermal abnormalities. Elucidation of the p63 gene network that includes target genes and regulatory elements may reveal new genes for other malformation disorders. We performed genome-wide DNA-binding profiling by chromatin immunoprecipitation (ChIP), followed by deep sequencing (ChIP-seq) in primary human keratinocytes, and identified potential target genes and regulatory elements controlled by p63. We show that p63 binds to an enhancer element in the SHFM1 locus on chromosome 7q and that this element controls expression of DLX6 and possibly DLX5, both of which are important for limb development. A unique micro-deletion including this enhancer element, but not the DLX5/DLX6 genes, was identified in a patient with SHFM. Our study strongly indicates disruption of a non-coding cis-regulatory element located more than 250 kb from the DLX5/DLX6 genes as a novel disease mechanism in SHFM1. These data provide a proof-of-concept that the catalogue of p63 binding sites identified in this study may be of relevance to the studies of SHFM and other congenital malformations that resemble the p63-associated phenotypes

Genetic Aspects and Molecular Testing in Prostate Cancer: A Report from a Dutch Multidisciplinary Consensus Meeting

Background: Germline and tumour genetic testing in prostate cancer (PCa) is becoming more broadly accepted, but testing indications and clinical consequences for carriers in each disease stage are not yet well defined. Objective: To determine the consensus of a Dutch multidisciplinary expert panel on the indication and application of germline and tumour genetic testing in PCa. Design, setting, and participants: The panel consisted of 39 specialists involved in PCa management. We used a modified Delphi method consisting of two voting rounds and a virtual consensus meeting. Outcome measurements and statistical analysis: Consensus was reached if ?75% of the panellists chose the same option. Appropriateness was assessed by the RAND/UCLA appropriateness method. Results and limitations: Of the multiple-choice questions, 44% reached consensus. For men without PCa having a relevant family history (familial PCa/BRCA-related hereditary cancer), follow-up by prostate-specific antigen was considered appropriate. For patients with low-risk localised PCa and a family history of PCa, active surveillance was considered appropriate, except in case of the patient being a BRCA2 germline pathogenic variant carrier. Germline and tumour genetic testing should not be done for nonmetastatic hormone-sensitive PCa in the absence of a relevant family history of cancer. Tumour genetic testing was deemed most appropriate for the identification of actionable variants, with uncertainty for germline testing. For tumour genetic testing in metastatic castration-resistant PCa, consensus was not reached for the timing and panel composition. The principal limitations are as follows: (1) a number of topics discussed lack scientific evidence, and therefore the recommendations are partly opinion based, and (2) there was a small number of experts per discipline. Conclusions: The outcomes of this Dutch consensus meeting may provide further guidance on genetic counselling and molecular testing related to PCa. Patient summary: A group of Dutch specialists discussed the use of germline and tumour genetic testing in prostate cancer (PCa) patients, indication of these tests (which patients and when), and impact of these tests on the management and treatment of PCa