Noncoding deletions reveal a gene that is critical for intestinal function.

Large-scale genome sequencing is poised to provide a substantial increase in the rate of discovery of disease-associated mutations, but the functional interpretation of such mutations remains challenging. Here we show that deletions of a sequence on human chromosome 16 that we term the intestine-critical region (ICR) cause intractable congenital diarrhoea in infants1,2. Reporter assays in transgenic mice show that the ICR contains a regulatory sequence that activates transcription during the development of the gastrointestinal system. Targeted deletion of the ICR in mice caused symptoms that recapitulated the human condition. Transcriptome analysis revealed that an unannotated open reading frame (Percc1) flanks the regulatory sequence, and the expression of this gene was lost in the developing gut of mice that lacked the ICR. Percc1-knockout mice displayed phenotypes similar to those observed upon ICR deletion in mice and patients, whereas an ICR-driven Percc1 transgene was sufficient to rescue the phenotypes found in mice that lacked the ICR. Together, our results identify a gene that is critical for intestinal function and underscore the need for targeted in vivo studies to interpret the growing number of clinical genetic findings that do not affect known protein-coding genes

Exploring the link between MORF4L1 and risk of breast cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Proteins encoded by Fanconi anemia (FA) and/or breast cancer (BrCa) susceptibility genes cooperate in a common DNA damage repair signaling pathway. To gain deeper insight into this pathway and its influence on cancer risk, we searched for novel components through protein physical interaction screens. METHODS: Protein physical interactions were screened using the yeast two-hybrid system. Co-affinity purifications and endogenous co-immunoprecipitation assays were performed to corroborate interactions. Biochemical and functional assays in human, mouse and Caenorhabditis elegans models were carried out to characterize pathway components. Thirteen FANCD2-monoubiquitinylation-positive FA cell lines excluded for genetic defects in the downstream pathway components and 300 familial BrCa patients negative for BRCA1/2 mutations were analyzed for genetic mutations. Common genetic variants were genotyped in 9,573 BRCA1/2 mutation carriers for associations with BrCa risk. RESULTS: A previously identified co-purifying protein with PALB2 was identified, MRG15 (MORF4L1 gene). Results in human, mouse and C. elegans models delineate molecular and functional relationships with BRCA2, PALB2, RAD51 and RPA1 that suggest a role for MRG15 in the repair of DNA double-strand breaks. Mrg15-deficient murine embryonic fibroblasts showed moderate sensitivity to γ-irradiation relative to controls and reduced formation of Rad51 nuclear foci. Examination of mutants of MRG15 and BRCA2 C. elegans orthologs revealed phenocopy by accumulation of RPA-1 (human RPA1) nuclear foci and aberrant chromosomal compactions in meiotic cells. However, no alterations or mutations were identified for MRG15/MORF4L1 in unclassified FA patients and BrCa familial cases. Finally, no significant associations between common MORF4L1 variants and BrCa risk for BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation carriers were identified: rs7164529, Ptrend = 0.45 and 0.05, P2df = 0.51 and 0.14, respectively; and rs10519219, Ptrend = 0.92 and 0.72, P2df = 0.76 and 0.07, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: While the present study expands on the role of MRG15 in the control of genomic stability, weak associations cannot be ruled out for potential low-penetrance variants at MORF4L1 and BrCa risk among BRCA2 mutation carriers.RIGHTS : This article is licensed under the BioMed Central licence at http://www.biomedcentral.com/about/license which is similar to the 'Creative Commons Attribution Licence'. In brief you may : copy, distribute, and display the work; make derivative works; or make commercial use of the work - under the following conditions: the original author must be given credit; for any reuse or distribution, it must be made clear to others what the license terms of this work are

Common Breast Cancer Susceptibility Alleles and the Risk of Breast Cancer for BRCA1 and BRCA2 Mutation Carriers: Implications for Risk Prediction

The known breast cancer (BC) susceptibility polymorphisms in FGFR2, TNRC9/TOX3, MAP3K1,LSP1 and 2q35 confer increased risks of BC for BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation carriers. We evaluated the associations of three additional SNPs, rs4973768 in SLC4A7/NEK10, rs6504950 in STXBP4/COX11 and rs10941679 at 5p12 and reanalyzed the previous associations using additional carriers in a sample of 12,525 BRCA1 and 7,409 BRCA2 carriers. Additionally, we investigated potential interactions between SNPs and assessed the implications for risk prediction. The minor alleles of rs4973768 and rs10941679 were associated with increased BC risk for BRCA2 carriers (per-allele Hazard Ratio (HR)=1.10, 95%CI:1.03-1.18, p=0.006 and HR=1.09, 95%CI:1.01-1.19, p=0.03, respectively). Neither SNP was associated with BC risk for BRCA1 carriers and rs6504950 was not associated with BC for either BRCA1 or BRCA2 carriers. Of the nine polymorphisms investigated, seven were associated with BC for BRCA2 carriers (FGFR2, TOX3, MAP3K1, LSP1, 2q35, SLC4A7, 5p12, p-values:7×10−11-0.03), but only TOX3 and 2q35 were associated with the risk for BRCA1 carriers (p=0.0049, 0.03 respectively). All risk associated polymorphisms appear to interact multiplicatively on BC risk for mutation carriers. Based on the joint genotype distribution of the seven risk associated SNPs in BRCA2 mutation carriers, the 5% of BRCA2 carriers at highest risk (i.e. between 95th and 100th percentiles) were predicted to have a probability between 80% and 96% of developing BC by age 80, compared with 42-50% for the 5% of carriers at lowest risk. Our findings indicated that these risk differences may be sufficient to influence the clinical management of mutation carriers

CANDIDATE GENE ANALYSIS IN ISRAELI SOLDIERS WITH STRESS FRACTURES

To investigate the association of polymorphisms within candidate genes which we hypothesized may contribute to stress fracture predisposition, a case-control, cross- sectional study design was employed. Genotyping 268 Single Nucleotide Polymorphisms- SNPs within 17 genes in 385 Israeli young male and female recruits (182 with and 203 without stress fractures). Twenty-five polymorphisms within 9 genes (NR3C1, ANKH, VDR, ROR2, CALCR, IL6, COL1A2, CBG, and LRP4) showed statistically significant differences (p < 0.05) in the distribution between stress fracture cases and non stress fracture controls. Seventeen genetic variants were associated with an increased stress fracture risk, and eight variants with a decreased stress fracture risk. None of the SNP associations remained significant after correcting for multiple comparisons (false discovery rate- FDR). Our findings suggest that genes may be involved in stress fracture pathogenesis. Specifically, the CALCR and the VDR genes are intriguing candidates. The putative involvement of these genes in stress fracture predisposition requires analysis of more cases and controls and sequencing the relevant genomic regions, in order to define the specific gene mutation

Ligand-controlled interaction of histone acetyltransferase binding to ORC-1 (HBO1) with the N-terminal transactivating domain of progesterone receptor induces steroid receptor coactivator 1-dependent coactivation of transcription

Modulators of cofactor recruitment by nuclear receptors are expected to play an important role in the coordination of hormone-induced transactivation processes. To identify such factors interacting with the N-terminal domain (NTD) of the progesterone receptor (PR), we used this domain as bait in the yeast Sos-Ras two-hybrid system. cDNAs encoding the C-terminal MYST (MOZ-Ybf2/Sas3-Sas2-Tip60 acetyltransferases) domain of HBO1 [histone acetyltransferase binding to the origin recognition complex (ORC) 1 subunit], a member of the MYST acetylase family, were thus selected from a human testis cDNA library. In transiently transfected CV1 cells, the wildtype HBO1 [611 amino acids (aa)] enhanced transcription mediated by steroid receptors, notably PR, mineralocorticoid receptor, and glucocorticoid receptor, and strongly induced PR and estrogen receptor coactivation by steroid receptor coactivator 1a (SRC-1a). As assessed by two-hybrid and glutathione-S-transferase pull-down assays, the HBO1 MYST acetylase domain (aa 340-611) interacts mainly with the NTD, and also contacts the DNA-binding domain and the hinge domains of hormone-bound PR. The HBO1 N-terminal region (aa 1-340) associates additionally with PR ligand-binding domain (LBD). HBO1 was found also to interact through its NTD with SRC-1a in the absence of steroid receptor. The latter coassociation enhanced specifically activation function 2 activation function encompassed in the LBD. Conversely, the MYST acetylase domain specifically enhanced SRC-1 coupling with PR NTD, through a hormone-dependent mechanism. In human embryonic kidney 293 cells expressing human PRA or PRB, HBO1 raised selectively an SRC-1-dependent response of PRB but failed to regulate PRA activity. We show that HBO1 acts through modification of an LBD-controlled structure present in the N terminus of PRB leading to the modulation of SRC-1 functional coupling with activation function 3-mediated transcription. Importantly, real-time RT-PCR analysis also revealed that HBO1 enhanced SRC-1 coactivation of PR-dependent transcription of human endogenous genes such as α-6 integrin and 11β-hydroxydehydrogenase 2 but not that of amphiregulin. Immunofluorescence and confocal microscopy of human embryonic kidney-PRB cells demonstrated that the hormone induces the colocalization of HBO1 with PR-SRC-1 complex into nuclear speckles characteristic of PR-mediated chromatin remodeling. Our results suggest that HBO1 might play an important physiological role in human PR signaling. Copyrigh

Interplay between BRCA1 and RHAMM regulates epithelial apicobasal polarization and may influence risk of breast cancer.

Differentiated mammary epithelium shows apicobasal polarity, and loss of tissue organization is an early hallmark of breast carcinogenesis. In BRCA1 mutation carriers, accumulation of stem and progenitor cells in normal breast tissue and increased risk of developing tumors of basal-like type suggest that BRCA1 regulates stem/progenitor cell proliferation and differentiation. However, the function of BRCA1 in this process and its link to carcinogenesis remain unknown. Here we depict a molecular mechanism involving BRCA1 and RHAMM that regulates apicobasal polarity and, when perturbed, may increase risk of breast cancer. Starting from complementary genetic analyses across families and populations, we identified common genetic variation at the low-penetrance susceptibility HMMR locus (encoding for RHAMM) that modifies breast cancer risk among BRCA1, but probably not BRCA2, mutation carriers: n = 7,584, weighted hazard ratio ((w)HR) = 1.09 (95% CI 1.02-1.16), p(trend) = 0.017; and n = 3,965, (w)HR = 1.04 (95% CI 0.94-1.16), p(trend) = 0.43; respectively. Subsequently, studies of MCF10A apicobasal polarization revealed a central role for BRCA1 and RHAMM, together with AURKA and TPX2, in essential reorganization of microtubules. Mechanistically, reorganization is facilitated by BRCA1 and impaired by AURKA, which is regulated by negative feedback involving RHAMM and TPX2. Taken together, our data provide fundamental insight into apicobasal polarization through BRCA1 function, which may explain the expanded cell subsets and characteristic tumor type accompanying BRCA1 mutation, while also linking this process to sporadic breast cancer through perturbation of HMMR/RHAMM

Interplay between BRCA1 and RHAMM regulates epithelial apicobasal polarization and may influence risk of breast

Differentiated mammary epithelium shows apicobasal polarity, and loss of tissue organization is an early hallmark of breast carcinogenesis. In BRCA1 mutation carriers, accumulation of stem and progenitor cells in normal breast tissue and increased risk of developing tumors of basal-like type suggest that BRCA1 regulates stem/progenitor cell proliferation and differentiation. However, the function of BRCA1 in this process and its link to carcinogenesis remain unknown. Here we depict a molecular mechanism involving BRCA1 and RHAMM that regulates apicobasal polarity and, when perturbed, may increase risk of breast cancer. Starting from complementary genetic analyses across families and populations, we identified common genetic variation at the low-penetrance susceptibility HMMR locus (encoding for RHAMM) that modifies breast cancer risk among BRCA1, but probably not BRCA2, mutation carriers: n = 7,584, weighted hazard ratio (wHR) = 1.09 (95% CI 1.02–1.16), ptrend = 0.017; and n = 3,965, wHR = 1.04 (95% CI 0.94–1.16), ptrend = 0.43; respectively. Subsequently, studies of MCF10A apicobasal polarization revealed a central role for BRCA1 and RHAMM, together with AURKA and TPX2, in essential reorganization of microtubules. Mechanistically, reorganization is facilitated by BRCA1 and impaired by AURKA, which is regulated by negative feedback involving RHAMM and TPX2. Taken together, our data provide fundamental insight into apicobasal polarization through BRCA1 function, which may explain the expanded cell subsets and characteristic tumor type accompanying BRCA1 mutation, while also linking this process to sporadic breast cancer through perturbation of HMMR/RHAMM.This work was funded by the Spanish Ministries of Health, and Science ane Innovation (CB07/02/2005; FIS 08/1120, 08/1359, 08/1635, and 09/02483; RTICCC RD06/0020/1060 and RD06/0020/0028; Transversal Action Against Cancer; the Spanish Biomedical Research Centre Networks for Epidemiology and Public Health, and Rare Diseases; and the ‘‘Ramón y Cajal’’ Young Investigator Program), the Spanish National Society of Medical Oncology (2010), the SpanishAssociation Against Cancer (AECC 2010), the AGAUR Catalan Government Agency (2009SGR1489 and 2009SGR293; and the Beatriu Pinós Postdoctoral Program), the Ramón Areces Foundation (XV), the ‘‘Roses Contra el Caàncer’’ Foundation, the Michael Cuccione Foundation for Childhood Cancer Research, Cancer Research–UK (C490/A10119, C1287/A8874, C1287/A10118, C5047/A8385, and C8197/A10123), the National Institute for Health Research (UK), the Association for International Cancer Research (AICR-07-0454), the Ligue National Contre le Cancer (France), the Association ‘‘Le cancer du sein, parlons en!’’, the Dutch Cancer Society (NKI 1998–1854, 2004–3088, and 2007–3756), the Fondazione Italiana per la Ricerca sul Cancro (‘‘Hereditary Tumors’’), the Associazione Italiana per la Ricerca sul Cancro (4017), the Italian Ministero della Salute (RFPS-2006-3-340203 and ‘‘Progetto Tumori Femminili’’), the Italian Ministero dell’Universita’ e Ricerca(RBLAO3-BETH), the Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale Tumori (INT ‘‘561000’’), the Fondazione Cassa di Risparmio di Pisa (Istituto Toscano Tumori), the National Breast Cancer Foundation (Australia), the Australian National Health and Medical Research Council (145684, 288704, and 454508), the Queensland Cancer Fund, the Cancer Councils of New South Wales, Victoria, Tasmania, and South Australia, the Cancer Foundation of Western Australia, the German Cancer Aid (107054), the Center for Molecular Medicine Cologne (TV93), the National Cancer Institute (USA; CA128978 and CA122340), National Institutes of Health (RFA-CA-06-503, BCFR U01 CA69398, CA69417, CA69446, CA69467, CA69631, and CA69638), the Research Triangle Institute Informatics Support Center (RFP N02PC45022-4/n6), the Specialized Program of Research Excellence (SPORE P50 CA83638 and CA113916), the Department of Defense Breast Cancer Research Program (05/0612), the Eileen Stein Jacoby Fund, the Breast Cancer Research Foundation, the Marianne and Robert MacDonald Foundation, the Komen Foundation, the Helsinki University Central Hospital Research Fund, the Academy of Finland (110663), the Finnish Cancer Society, the Sigrid Juselius Foundation, and the EU FP7 (223175,HEALTH-F2-2009-223175). The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscrip