Cell cycle regulation of the E2F transcription factor involves an interaction with cyclin A

Cell ◽  
1991 ◽  
Vol 65 (7) ◽  
pp. 1243-1253 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maria Mudryj ◽  
Stephen H. Devoto ◽  
Scott W. Hiebert ◽  
Tony Hunter ◽  
Jonathon Pines ◽  
...  
Cancer Cell ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 34 (4) ◽  
pp. 626-642.e8 ◽  
Author(s):  
Natalia Martinez-Soria ◽  
Lynsey McKenzie ◽  
Julia Draper ◽  
Anetta Ptasinska ◽  
Hasan Issa ◽  
...  

2002 ◽  
Vol 22 (11) ◽  
pp. 3663-3673 ◽  
Author(s):  
Xiaolin Li ◽  
Donald P. McDonnell

ABSTRACT The B-Myb transcription factor has been implicated in coordinating the expression of genes involved in cell cycle regulation. Although it is expressed in a ubiquitous manner, its transcriptional activity is repressed until the G1-S phase of the cell cycle by an unknown mechanism. In this study we used biochemical and cell-based assays to demonstrate that the nuclear receptor corepressors N-CoR and SMRT interact with B-Myb. The significance of these B-Myb-corepressor interactions was confirmed by the finding that B-Myb mutants, which were unable to bind N-CoR, exhibited constitutive transcriptional activity. It has been shown previously that phosphorylation of B-Myb by cdk2/cyclin A enhances its transcriptional activity. We have now determined that phosphorylation by cdk2/cyclin A blocks the interaction between B-Myb and N-CoR and that mutation of the corepressor binding site within B-Myb bypasses the requirement for this phosphorylation event. Cumulatively, these findings suggest that the nuclear corepressors N-CoR and SMRT serve a previously unappreciated role as regulators of B-Myb transcriptional activity.


Blood ◽  
2009 ◽  
Vol 114 (22) ◽  
pp. 2519-2519
Author(s):  
Stephan Lindsey ◽  
Eleftherios Papoutsakis

Abstract Abstract 2519 Poster Board II-496 Understanding the mechanisms underlying megakaryocytic (Mk) differentiation and maturation is vital to the discovery of novel approaches to treating Mk and platelet disorders such as thrombocytopenia, megakaryoblastic leukemia, and thrombocythemia. The number of platelets released is proportional to the amount of DNA present in a given Mk, so insights into the molecular basis of Mk polyploidization could inspire improved ex vivo culturing methods to promote Mk commitment, expansion, and differentiation, leading to improved autologous transfusion protocols to offset thrombocytopenia associated with HSC transplants following high-dose chemotherapy or MDS progression. Microarray analyses on ex vivo Mk-differentiated primary human CD34+ cells showed that mRNA levels of the Aryl Hydrocarbon Receptor (AhR) increased during Mk differentiation and was elevated 4–6 fold in Mks compared to isogenic granulocytic cultures. These data were further confirmed by quantitative(Q)-RT-PCR analysis of differentiating Mks derived from primary human CD34+ cells as well as from CHRF cells (human megakaryoblastic leukemia). We have shown that CHRF cells are a valid model of human Mk differentiation (Fuhrken PG et al. Exp Hematol, 2007; 35:476–489). Thus, we hypothesized that AhR may act as a novel Mk transcription factor, possibly by influencing or regulating Mk polyploidization. Known as a “toxin sensor”, AhR is involved in the mechanism of action of environmental toxins, likely by altering cell cycle regulation. Epidemiological studies of toxic waste spills and Vietnam veterans suggest that exposure to known AhR ligands may result in increased platelet counts proportional to dioxin exposure level (Webb K et al. Am J Ind Med, 1987;11:685–691, Michalek JE Arch Environ Health, 2001; 56:396–405). These studies offer the intriguing possibility that AhR activation modulates megakaryocyte differentiation and/or platelet production. Interestingly, AhR influences the differentiation of other myeloid lineages including monocytes (Hayashi S et al. Carcinogenesis, 1995; 16:1403–1409) and is upregulated after leukocyte activation (Crawford RB et al. Mol Pharmacol, 1997; 52:921–927). Western blot analyses determined that although initially expressed in both the cytoplasm and nucleus, AhR became solely nuclear in differentiating CHRF cells. EMSA analysis using CHRF nuclear extracts demonstrated that AhR binding to a consensus binding sequence increased as megakaryopoiesis progressed (n=3). Increased AhR-DNA binding during CHRF Mk differentiation correlated with 4.6-fold increased mRNA expression of the AhR transcriptional target Hes1 (n=3, p<0.005), a known cell-cycle regulator and mediator of notch signaling. In order to examine the functional role of AhR in megakaryopoiesis, we generated 3 independent AhR knockdown (KD) CHRF cell lines. Depending on the day of culture, AhR-KD CHRF cell lines differentiated into Mk cells expressed 2-3 fold less AhR mRNA (n=3; p<0.02), 40–60% less AhR protein (n=3), 2.7 times less Hes1 mRNA (n=3; p=0.018), displayed Mk-ploidy distributions shifted towards lower ploidy classes, and were incapable of reaching higher ploidy classes (i.e., ≥32n) seen in control cells. Ploidy levels on day 7 (maximal ploidy in control cells) were 3-fold lower in AhR-KD CHRF cells (n=3; p=0.012 or p=0.005 depending on KD cell line). AhR KD resulted in increased DNA synthesis of low ploidy (<8n; n=3; p<0.05) without influencing apoptosis (n=3, p=0.37). These data suggest that AhR may regulate the cell cycle differently in Mks compared to other cell types, where loss of AhR results in cell cycle blockage and increased apoptosis. As such, AhR deregulation provides a mechanistic explanation for chemical-induced thrombocytopenia, including chemotherapy, and suggests that AhR agonists may provide novel therapies for megakaryoblastic leukemia. AhR-mediated expression of Hes1, an established regulator of the Notch signaling pathway, provides a novel molecular model of endomitotic entry and Mk polyploidization; in drosophila, Notch cell-cycle regulation controls the initial switch toward endomitosis. Disclosures: No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.


1995 ◽  
Vol 14 (18) ◽  
pp. 4514-4522 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. Zwicker ◽  
F. C. Lucibello ◽  
L. A. Wolfraim ◽  
C. Gross ◽  
M. Truss ◽  
...  

Cancer Cell ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 35 (4) ◽  
pp. 705 ◽  
Author(s):  
Natalia Martinez-Soria ◽  
Lynsey McKenzie ◽  
Julia Draper ◽  
Anetta Ptasinska ◽  
Hasan Issa ◽  
...  

Blood ◽  
2003 ◽  
Vol 101 (1) ◽  
pp. 278-285 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas Decker ◽  
Susanne Hipp ◽  
Ingo Ringshausen ◽  
Christian Bogner ◽  
Madlene Oelsner ◽  
...  

Abstract In B-cell chronic lymphocytic leukemia (B-CLL), malignant cells seem to be arrested in the G0/early G1phase of the cell cycle, and defective apoptosis might be involved in disease progression. However, increasing evidence exists that B-CLL is more than a disease consisting of slowly accumulating resting B cells: a proliferating pool of cells has been described in lymph nodes and bone marrow and might feed the accumulating pool in the blood. Rapamycin has been reported to inhibit cell cycle progression in a variety of cell types, including human B cells, and has shown activity against a broad range of human tumor cell lines. Therefore, we investigated the ability of rapamycin to block cell cycle progression in proliferating B-CLL cells. We have recently demonstrated that stimulation with CpG-oligonucleotides and interleukin-2 provides a valuable model for studying cell cycle regulation in malignant B cells. In our present study, we demonstrated that rapamycin induced cell cycle arrest in proliferating B-CLL cells and inhibited phosphorylation of p70s6 kinase (p70s6k). In contrast to previous reports on nonmalignant B cells, the expression of the cell cycle inhibitor p27 was not changed in rapamycin-treated leukemic cells. Treatment with rapamycin prevented retinoblastoma protein (RB) phosphorylation in B-CLL cells without affecting the expression of cyclin D2, but cyclin D3 was no longer detectable in rapamycin-treated B-CLL cells. In addition, rapamycin treatment inhibited cyclin-dependent kinase 2 activity by preventing up-regulation of cyclin E and cyclin A. Interestingly, survivin, which is expressed in the proliferation centers of B-CLL patients in vivo, is not up-regulated in rapamycin-treated cells. Therefore, rapamycin interferes with the expression of many critical molecules for cell cycle regulation in cycling B-CLL cells. We conclude from our study that rapamycin might be an attractive substance for therapy for B-CLL patients by inducing a G1 arrest in proliferating tumor cells.


1994 ◽  
Vol 14 (7) ◽  
pp. 4779-4787
Author(s):  
F R Cross ◽  
M Hoek ◽  
J D McKinney ◽  
A H Tinkelenberg

Expression of the Saccharomyces cerevisiae CLN1 and CLN2 genes is cell cycle regulated, and the genes may be controlled by positive feedback. It has been proposed that positive feedback operates via Cln/Cdc28 activation of the Swi4/Swi6 transcription factor, leading to CLN1 and CLN2 transcription due to Swi4 binding to specific sites (SCBs) in the CLN1 and CLN2 promoters. To test this proposal, we have examined the effects of deletion either of the potential SCBs in the CLN2 promoter or of the SWI4 gene on CLN2 transcriptional control. Deletion of a restriction fragment containing the identified SCBs from the promoter does not prevent cell cycle regulation of CLN2 expression, although expression is lowered at all cell cycle positions. A promoter containing a 5.5-kb plasmid insertion or an independent 2.5-kb insertion at the point of deletion of the SCB-containing restriction fragment also exhibits cell cycle regulation, so involvement of unidentified upstream SCBs is unlikely. Neither Swi4 nor the related Mbp1 transcription factor is required for cell cycle regulation of the intact CLN2 promoter. In contrast, Swi4 (but not Mbp1) is required for correct cell cycle regulation of the insertion/deletion promoter lacking SCB sites. We have extended previous genetic evidence for involvement of Swi4 in some aspect of CLN2 function: a mutant hunt for CLN2 positive regulatory factors yielded only swi4 mutations at saturation. Swi4 may bind to nonconsensus sequences in the CLN2 promoter (possibly in addition to consensus sites), or it may act indirectly to regulate CLN2 expression.


2005 ◽  
Vol 346 (1) ◽  
pp. 29-42 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mathieu Gissot ◽  
Sylvie Briquet ◽  
Philippe Refour ◽  
Charlotte Boschet ◽  
Catherine Vaquero

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document