Phenotype-independent DNA methylation changes in prostate cancer

BACKGROUND: Human prostate cancers display numerous DNA methylation changes compared to normal tissue samples. However, definitive identification of features related to the cells' malignant status has been compromised by the predominance of cells with luminal features in prostate cancers. METHODS: We generated genome-wide DNA methylation profiles of cell subpopulations with basal or luminal features isolated from matched prostate cancer and normal tissue samples. RESULTS: Many frequent DNA methylation changes previously attributed to prostate cancers are here identified as differences between luminal and basal cells in both normal and cancer samples. We also identified changes unique to each of the two cancer subpopulations. Those specific to cancer luminal cells were associated with regulation of metabolic processes, cell proliferation and epithelial development. Within the prostate cancer TCGA dataset, these changes were able to distinguish not only cancers from normal samples, but also organ-confined cancers from those with extraprostatic extensions. Using changes present in both basal and luminal cancer cells, we derived a new 17-CpG prostate cancer signature with high predictive power in the TCGA dataset. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates the importance of comparing phenotypically matched prostate cell populations from normal and cancer tissues to unmask biologically and clinically relevant DNA methylation changes

ERF mutations reveal a balance of ETS factors controlling prostate oncogenesis

Half of all prostate cancers are caused by the TMPRSS2-ERG gene-fusion, which enables androgens to drive expression of the normally silent E26 transformation-specific (ETS) transcription factor ERG in prostate cells. Recent genomic landscape studies of such cancers have reported recurrent point mutations and focal deletions of another ETS member, the ETS2 repressor factor ERF. Here we show these ERF mutations cause decreased protein stability and mostly occur in tumours without ERG upregulation. ERF loss recapitulates the morphological and phenotypic features of ERG gain in normal mouse prostate cells, including expansion of the androgen receptor transcriptional repertoire, and ERF has tumour suppressor activity in the same genetic background of Pten loss that yields oncogenic activity by ERG. In the more common scenario of ERG upregulation, chromatin immunoprecipitation followed by sequencing indicates that ERG inhibits the ability of ERF to bind DNA at consensus ETS sites both in normal and in cancerous prostate cells. Consistent with a competition model, ERF overexpression blocks ERG-dependent tumour growth, and ERF loss rescues TMPRSS2-ERG-positive prostate cancer cells from ERG dependency. Collectively, these data provide evidence that the oncogenicity of ERG is mediated, in part, by competition with ERF and they raise the larger question of whether other gain-of-function oncogenic transcription factors might also inactivate endogenous tumour suppressors