The Unconserved Groucho Central Region Is Essential for Viability and Modulates Target Gene Specificity

Groucho (Gro) is a Drosophila corepressor required by numerous DNA-binding repressors, many of which are distributed in gradients and provide positional information during development. Gro contains well-conserved domains at its N- and C-termini, and a poorly conserved central region that includes the GP, CcN, and SP domains. All lethal point mutations in gro map to the conserved regions, leading to speculation that the unconserved central domains are dispensable. However, our sequence analysis suggests that the central domains are disordered leading us to suspect that the lack of lethal mutations in this region reflects a lack of order rather than an absence of essential functions. In support of this conclusion, genomic rescue experiments with Gro deletion variants demonstrate that the GP and CcN domains are required for viability. Misexpression assays using these same deletion variants show that the SP domain prevents unrestrained and promiscuous repression by Gro, while the GP and CcN domains are indispensable for repression. Deletion of the GP domain leads to loss of nuclear import, while deletion of the CcN domain leads to complete loss of repression. Changes in Gro activity levels reset the threshold concentrations at which graded repressors silence target gene expression. We conclude that co-regulators such as Gro are not simply permissive components of the repression machinery, but cooperate with graded DNA-binding factors in setting borders of gene expression. We suspect that disorder in the Gro central domains may provide the flexibility that allows this region to mediate multiple interactions required for repression

Loss of TLE1 and TLE4 from the del(9q) commonly deleted region in AML cooperates with AML1-ETO to affect myeloid cell proliferation and survival

Deletions on chromosome 9q are seen in a subset of acute myeloid leukemia (AML) cases and are specifically associated with t(8;21) AML. We previously defined the commonly deleted region in del(9q) AML and characterized the genes in this interval. To determine the critical lost gene(s) that might cooperate with the AML1-ETO fusion gene produced by t(8;21), we developed a set of shRNAs directed against each gene in this region. Within this library, shRNAs to TLE1 and TLE4 were the only shRNAs capable of rescuing AML1-ETO expressing U937T-A/E cells from AML1-ETO–induced cell-cycle arrest and apoptosis. Knockdown of TLE1 or TLE4 levels increased the rate of cell division of the AML1-ETO–expressing Kasumi-1 cell line, whereas forced expression of either TLE1 or TLE4 caused apoptosis and cell death. Knockdown of Gro3, a TLE homolog in zebrafish, cooperated with AML1-ETO to cause an accumulation of noncirculating hematopoietic blast cells. Our data are consistent with a model in which haploinsufficiency of these TLEs overcomes the negative survival and antiproliferative effects of AML1-ETO on myeloid progenitors, allowing preleukemic stem cells to expand into AML. This study is the first to implicate the TLEs as potential tumor suppressor genes in myeloid leukemia

Thrombin-receptor antagonist vorapaxar in acute coronary syndromes

BACKGROUND Vorapaxar is a new oral protease-activated–receptor 1 (PAR-1) antagonist that inhibits thrombin-induced platelet activation. METHODS In this multinational, double-blind, randomized trial, we compared vorapaxar with placebo in 12,944 patients who had acute coronary syndromes without ST-segment elevation. The primary end point was a composite of death from cardiovascular causes, myocardial infarction, stroke, recurrent ischemia with rehospitalization, or urgent coronary revascularization. RESULTS Follow-up in the trial was terminated early after a safety review. After a median follow-up of 502 days (interquartile range, 349 to 667), the primary end point occurred in 1031 of 6473 patients receiving vorapaxar versus 1102 of 6471 patients receiving placebo (Kaplan–Meier 2-year rate, 18.5% vs. 19.9%; hazard ratio, 0.92; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.85 to 1.01; P = 0.07). A composite of death from cardiovascular causes, myocardial infarction, or stroke occurred in 822 patients in the vorapaxar group versus 910 in the placebo group (14.7% and 16.4%, respectively; hazard ratio, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.81 to 0.98; P = 0.02). Rates of moderate and severe bleeding were 7.2% in the vorapaxar group and 5.2% in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 1.35; 95% CI, 1.16 to 1.58; P<0.001). Intracranial hemorrhage rates were 1.1% and 0.2%, respectively (hazard ratio, 3.39; 95% CI, 1.78 to 6.45; P<0.001). Rates of nonhemorrhagic adverse events were similar in the two groups. CONCLUSIONS In patients with acute coronary syndromes, the addition of vorapaxar to standard therapy did not significantly reduce the primary composite end point but significantly increased the risk of major bleeding, including intracranial hemorrhage