![]() | ![]() |
Formats:
|
||||||||||
Epigenetic Reprogramming by Adenovirus e1a 1Department of Biological Chemistry, University of California, Los Angeles, CA 90095, USA 2Department of Molecular, Cell and Developmental Biology, University of California, Los Angeles, CA 90095, USA 3Molecular Biology Institute, University of California, Los Angeles, CA 90095, USA 4Department of Microbiology, Immunology and Molecular Genetics, University of California, Los Angeles, CA 90095, USA 5Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles, CA 90095, USA 6Eli and Edythe Broad Center of Re-generative Medicine and Stem Cell Research, David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles, CA 90095, USA *To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: skurdistani/at/mednet.ucla.edu Abstract Adenovirus e1a induces quiescent human cells to replicate. We found that e1a causes global relocalization of the RB (retinoblastoma) proteins (RB, p130, and p107) and p300/CBP histone acetyltransferases on promoters, the effect of which is to restrict the acetylation of histone 3 lysine-18 (H3K18ac) to a limited set of genes, thereby stimulating cell cycling and inhibiting antiviral responses and cellular differentiation. Soon after expression, e1a binds transiently to promoters of cell cycle and growth genes, causing enrichment of p300/CBP, PCAF (p300/CBP-associated factor), and H3K18ac; depletion of RB proteins; and transcriptional activation. e1a also associates transiently with promoters of antiviral genes, causing enrichment for RB, p130, and H4K16ac; increased nucleosome density; and transcriptional repression. At later times, e1a and p107 bind mainly to promoters of development and differentiation genes, repressing transcription. The temporal order of e1a binding requires its interactions with p300/CBP and RB proteins. Our data uncover a defined epigenetic reprogramming leading to cellular transformation. The adenovirus small e1a oncoprotein interacts with multiple cellular factors to induce cell cycling in G0-arrested cells to favor viral replication. Mutations of e1a regions that interact with the RB proteins or p300/CBP [cyclic adenosine monophosphate response element-binding protein (CREB)-binding protein] result in loss of e1a-transforming and mitogenic activities (1-3) (figs. S1 and S2). Binding of e1a to p300/CBP inhibits transcriptional activation by certain enhancers (4); however, it is unclear how this interaction promotes cell cycling and why it is required for e1a oncogenicity. The e1a-p300/CBP interaction causes a factor of ~3 reduction in total cellular histone 3 Lys18 acetylation (H3K18ac) specifically (5). Therefore, we sought to determine how e1a affects the genome-wide distributions of its interacting cellular factors as well as histone modifications (including H3K18ac) to establish an oncogenic gene expression program. Using chromatin immunoprecipitation (ChIP) combined with microarrays (6), we examined the genome-wide binding of e1a at 2, 6, 12, and 24 hours (here and below, all times are post-infection) of confluent, contact-inhibited human IMR90 primary fibroblasts (ATCC CCL-186) in which e1a induces entry into S phase between 18 and 24 hours (fig. S2). We used an Agilent microarray containing probes for ~17,000 promoters, tiling an 8-kb region, which we divided computationally into 16 fragments of 500 base pairs (bp) each, spanning -5.5 to +2.5 kb of the transcription start site (TSS). Cells were infected with Ad5 mutant dl1500, which expresses only the small e1a protein (7). Using unbiased partitional clustering, we grouped the genes primarily into three clusters that captured the main trends in the data. We calculated a Z score to indicate the degree of enrichment for a given factor in each cluster. During the 24-hour period after expression, at a cutoff of Z ≥ 2, e1a bound to ~70% (9753) of the examined promoters in a temporal manner (Fig. 1A
Because e1a directly displaces the RB proteins from E2F transcription factors (1), we determined the average levels of e1a binding across promoter regions bound by E2Fs as determined in other cell lines (9). E2F-target genes were greatly enriched in cluster 2 (fig. S5), as were consensus E2F binding sites (10) (fig. S6), and were bound by e1a predominantly within 2 kb of the TSS at 6 hours but not at 24 hours (fig. S5, A to C). Thus, E2F-RB protein complexes may help e1a target the promoters of cell cycle genes early after infection. To determine how e1a affects gene expression, we compared the expression profile of dl1500-infected to mock-infected confluent cells at 6, 12, and 24 hours. Cluster 1 genes were activated at 6 hours, consistent with a cellular response to viral infection, but were considerably repressed by 24 hours (Fig. 1B We next analyzed H3K18ac. Relative to results from mock-infected cells, H3K18ac anti-body ChIP yielded about one-third as much DNA from dl1500-infected cells, consistent with e1a-induced global H3K18 hypoacetylation (5) (fig. S7); we used equal amounts of ChIPed DNA for microarray analyses. Clusters 1 and 2 were enriched for H3K18ac at 6 hours mainly in regions away from the TSS, but only cluster 2 genes retained significant H3K18ac by 24 hours (Fig. 2
The e1a N terminus and conserved region 1 (CR1) directly bind p300/CBP (2); therefore, we asked whether these histone acetyltransferases and PCAF (p300/CBP-associated factor) were present at the e1a-target genes. p300 associated with genes in clusters 1 and 2, but at 6 and 24 hours p300 was significantly depleted from cluster 3 (Fig. 2 In wild-type e1a (WTe1a)-expressing cells, p107 mRNA and protein increased at 24 hours, whereas expression of RB and p130 remained unchanged (fig. S9). To determine whether the RB proteins contribute to e1a-mediated gene repression, we mapped genome-wide binding patterns of the three RB proteins at 24 hours in dl1500-infected versus mock-infected cells. RB and p130 were significantly enriched in cluster 1, consistent with repression of these genes at 24 hours (Fig. 2 Next, we analyzed gene expression, histone modifications, and e1a binding after expression of two e1a mutants. The Arg2 → Gly (R2Ge1a) mutation disrupts the e1a-p300/CBP interaction, whereas deletion of CR2 (ΔCR2e1a) abolishes the high-affinity e1a interaction with RB proteins, but not the weaker e1a CR1-RB interactions (1). The R2G mutation greatly reduced binding of e1a to cluster 1 and to regions of cluster 2 genes away from the TSS (Fig. 3A
ΔCR2e1a bound significantly to cluster 1 and 2 genes, including E2F-target genes at 6 hours, despite the CR2 deletion (Fig. 3C By binding to the promoters of a large number of genes in a precise, time-dependent manner, e1a orchestrates redistribution of specific transcriptional co-regulators with associated epigenetic activities to promote S-phase entry and active repression of differentiation (fig. S13). Transcriptional reprogramming through use of epigenetic modifiers may have parallels in nonviral mechanisms of oncogenesis (3). Ferrari et al. Suppl Material Click here to view.(4.0M, pdf) Acknowledgments We thank M. Carey for critical comments, M. Grunstein for providing the histone acetylation antibodies, and C. Millar and A. Sperling and for help with microarrays. Supported by U.S. Public Health Service grant CA25235 (A.J.B.), an HHMI Early Career Award, a UCLA Specialized Program of Research Excellence in Prostate Cancer grant, and an American Cancer Society grant (S.K.K.). Microarray data have been deposited in the Gene Expression Omnibus under accession numbers GSE12045, GSE12046, and GSE12047. Footnotes Supporting Online Material www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/321/5892/1086/DC1 References and Notes 1. Liu X, Marmorstein R. Genes Dev. 2007;21:2711. [PubMed] 2. Berk AJ. Oncogene. 2005;24:7673. [PubMed] 3. See supporting material on Science Online. 4. Chakravarti D, et al. Cell. 1999;96:393. [PubMed] 5. Horwitz GA, et al. Science. 2008;321:1084. [PubMed] 6. Ren B, et al. Science. 2000;290:2306. [PubMed] 7. Montell C, Courtois G, Eng C, Berk A. Cell. 1984;36:951. [PubMed] 8. Ghosh MK, Harter ML. Mol. Cell. 2003;12:255. [PubMed] 9. Xu X, et al. Genome Res. 2007;17:1550. [PubMed] 10. Elemento O, Slonim N, Tavazoie S. Mol. Cell. 2007;28:337. [PubMed] 11. Miller DL, Myers CL, Rickards B, Coller HA, Flint SJ. Genome Biol. 2007;8:R58. [PubMed] 12. Mujtaba S, Zeng L, Zhou MM. Oncogene. 2007;26:5521. [PubMed] 13. Nevins JR. Curr. Opin. Genet. Dev. 1994;4:130. [PubMed] |
PubMed related articles
Your browsing activity is empty. Activity recording is turned off. |
|||||||||
Genes Dev. 2007 Nov 1; 21(21):2711-6.
[Genes Dev. 2007]Cell. 1999 Feb 5; 96(3):393-403.
[Cell. 1999]Science. 2008 Aug 22; 321(5892):1084-5.
[Science. 2008]Science. 2000 Dec 22; 290(5500):2306-9.
[Science. 2000]Cell. 1984 Apr; 36(4):951-61.
[Cell. 1984]Mol Cell. 2003 Jul; 12(1):255-60.
[Mol Cell. 2003]Genes Dev. 2007 Nov 1; 21(21):2711-6.
[Genes Dev. 2007]Genome Res. 2007 Nov; 17(11):1550-61.
[Genome Res. 2007]Mol Cell. 2007 Oct 26; 28(2):337-50.
[Mol Cell. 2007]Genome Biol. 2007; 8(4):R58.
[Genome Biol. 2007]Science. 2008 Aug 22; 321(5892):1084-5.
[Science. 2008]Oncogene. 2005 Nov 21; 24(52):7673-85.
[Oncogene. 2005]Cell. 1999 Feb 5; 96(3):393-403.
[Cell. 1999]Oncogene. 2007 Aug 13; 26(37):5521-7.
[Oncogene. 2007]Genes Dev. 2007 Nov 1; 21(21):2711-6.
[Genes Dev. 2007]Curr Opin Genet Dev. 1994 Feb; 4(1):130-4.
[Curr Opin Genet Dev. 1994]Genes Dev. 2007 Nov 1; 21(21):2711-6.
[Genes Dev. 2007]Genes Dev. 2007 Nov 1; 21(21):2711-6.
[Genes Dev. 2007]Oncogene. 2005 Nov 21; 24(52):7673-85.
[Oncogene. 2005]