Lian, Jane B.

The chromokinesin KIF22 generates forces that contribute to mitotic chromosome congression and alignment. Mutations in the α2 helix of the motor domain of KIF22 have been identified in patients with abnormal skeletal development, and we report the identification of a patient with a novel mutation in the KIF22 tail. We demonstrate that pathogenic mutations do not result in a loss of KIF22’s functions in early mitosis. Instead, mutations disrupt chromosome segregation in anaphase, resulting in reduced proliferation, abnormal daughter cell nuclear morphology, and, in a subset of cells, cytokinesis failure. This phenotype could be explained by a failure of KIF22 to inactivate in anaphase. Consistent with this model, constitutive activation of the motor via a known site of phosphoregulation in the tail phenocopied the effects of pathogenic mutations. These results suggest that the motor domain α2 helix may be an important site for regulation of KIF22 activity at the metaphase to anaphase transition. In support of this conclusion, mimicking phosphorylation of α2 helix residue T158 also prevents inactivation of KIF22 in anaphase. These findings demonstrate the importance of both the head and tail of the motor in regulating the activity of KIF22 and offer insight into the cellular consequences of preventing KIF22 inactivation and disrupting force balance in anaphase.

Transcriptional control of Runx2 gene expression through two alternative promoters (P1 and P2) is critical for the execution of its function as an osteogenic cell fate determining factor. Using genomic DNaseI footprinting and in vivo DNA binding assays, we identified a helix‐loop‐helix (HLH) motif that overlaps with a Runx motif in the P1 promoter. The HLH mutation decreases P1 transcription 10‐fold in mesenchymal cells, while mutation of the Runx site enhances transcription 2 fold. Although the HLH element is not cell‐type specific, its function may depend on promoter context. Promoter deletion analysis shows that a GA‐rich region (−200 to −128) positively regulates Runx2 P1 transcription and synergizes with the HLH motif. Examination of the −200/−128 region reveals two tandemly repeated GA‐rich elements (GAY motifs) that each contain recognition motifs for purine‐rich DNA binding factors (i.e., SP1 and KLF10/TGFâ Inducible Factor [TIEG]). Forced expression of SP1 or TIEG modulates Runx2 P1 promoter activity through the GAY motifs. Taken together, our data suggest that the Runx2 gene transcription is regulated by synergistic interactions at multiple conserved composite promoter elements to control Runx2 expression and skeletal development.

Cells establish and sustain structural and functional integrity of the genome to support cellular identity and prevent malignant transformation. In this review, we present a strategic overview of epigenetic regulatory mechanisms including histone modifications and higher order chromatin organization (HCO) that are perturbed in breast cancer onset and progression. Implications for dysfunctions that occur in hormone regulation, cell cycle control, and mitotic bookmarking in breast cancer are considered, with an emphasis on epithelial‐to‐mesenchymal transition and cancer stem cell activities. The architectural organization of regulatory machinery is addressed within the contexts of translating cancer‐compromised genomic organization to advances in breast cancer risk assessment, diagnosis, prognosis, and identification of novel therapeutic targets with high specificity and minimal off target effects.

AbstractThe RUNX1 transcription factor has recently been shown to be obligatory for normal development. RUNX1 controls the expression of genes essential for proper development in many cell lineages and tissues including blood, bone, cartilage, hair follicles, and mammary glands. Compromised RUNX1 regulation is associated with many cancers. In this review, we highlight evidence for RUNX1 control in both invertebrate and mammalian development and recent novel findings of perturbed RUNX1 control in breast cancer that has implications for other solid tumors. As RUNX1 is essential for definitive hematopoiesis, RUNX1 mutations in hematopoietic lineage cells have been implicated in the etiology of several leukemias. Studies of solid tumors have revealed a context‐dependent function for RUNX1 either as an oncogene or a tumor suppressor. These RUNX1 functions have been reported for breast, prostate, lung, and skin cancers that are related to cancer subtypes and different stages of tumor development. Growing evidence suggests that RUNX1 suppresses aggressiveness in most breast cancer subtypes particularly in the early stage of tumorigenesis. Several studies have identified RUNX1 suppression of the breast cancer epithelial‐to‐mesenchymal transition. Most recently, RUNX1 repression of cancer stem cells and tumorsphere formation was reported for breast cancer. It is anticipated that these new discoveries of the context‐dependent diversity of RUNX1 functions will lead to innovative therapeutic strategies for the intervention of cancer and other abnormalities of normal tissues.

Abstract Expression of Runx2/p57 is a hallmark of the osteoblast‐lineage identity. Although several regulators that control the expression of Runx2/p57 during osteoblast‐lineage commitment have been identified, the epigenetic mechanisms that sustain this expression in differentiated osteoblasts remain to be completely determined. Here, we assess epigenetic mechanisms associated with Runx2/p57 gene transcription in differentiating MC3T3 mouse osteoblasts. Our results show that an enrichment of activating histone marks at the Runx2/p57 P1 promoter is accompanied by the simultaneous interaction of Wdr5 and Utx proteins, both are components of COMPASS complexes. Knockdown of Wdr5 and Utx expression confirms the activating role of both proteins at the Runx2‐P1 promoter. Other chromatin modifiers that were previously described to regulate Runx2/p57 transcription in mesenchymal precursor cells (Ezh2, Prmt5, and Jarid1b proteins) were not found to contribute to Runx2/p57 transcription in full‐committed osteoblasts. We also determined the presence of additional components of COMPASS complexes at the Runx2/p57 promoter, evidencing that the Mll2/COMPASS‐ and Mll3/COMPASS‐like complexes bind to the P1 promoter in osteoblastic cells expressing Runx2/p57 to modulate the H3K4me1 to H3K4me3 transition.

Breast cancer is the most common cancer in women, and accounts for ~30% of new cancer cases and 15% of cancer‐related deaths. Tumor relapse and metastasis are primary factors contributing to breast cancer‐related deaths. Therefore, the challenge for breast cancer treatment is to sustain remission. A driving force behind tumor relapse is breast cancer heterogeneity (both intertumor, between different patients, and intratumor, within the same tumor). Understanding breast cancer heterogeneity is necessary to develop preventive interventions and targeted therapies. A recently emerging concept is that intratumor heterogeneity is driven by cancer stem cells (CSCs) that are capable of giving rise to a multitude of different cells within a tumor. Studies have highlighted linkage of CSC formation with epithelial‐to‐mesenchymal transition (EMT). In this review, we summarize the current understanding of breast cancer heterogeneity, links between EMT and CSCs, regulation of EMT by Runx transcription factors, and potential therapeutic strategies targeting these processes.

Fidelity of histone gene regulation, and ultimately of histone protein biosynthesis, is obligatory for packaging of newly replicated DNA into chromatin. Control of histone gene expression within the 3‐dimensional context of nuclear organization is reflected by two well documented observations. DNA replication‐dependent histone mRNAs are synthesized at specialized subnuclear domains designated histone locus bodies (HLBs), in response to activation of the growth factor dependent Cyclin E/CDK2/HINFP/NPAT pathway at the G1/S transition in mammalian cells. Complete loss of the histone gene regulatory factors HINFP or NPAT disrupts HLB integrity that is necessary for coordinate control of DNA replication and histone gene transcription. Here we review the molecular histone‐related requirements for G1/S‐phase progression during the cell cycle. Recently developed experimental strategies, now enable us to explore mechanisms involved in dynamic control of histone gene expression in the context of the temporal (cell cycle) and spatial (HLBs) remodeling of the histone gene loci.

Alterations in nuclear morphology are common in cancer progression. However, the degree to which gross morphological abnormalities translate into compromised higher‐order chromatin organization is poorly understood. To explore the functional links between gene expression and chromatin structure in breast cancer, we performed RNA‐seq gene expression analysis on the basal breast cancer progression model based on human MCF10A cells. Positional gene enrichment identified the major histone gene cluster at chromosome 6p22 as one of the most significantly upregulated (and not amplified) clusters of genes from the normal‐like MCF10A to premalignant MCF10AT1 and metastatic MCF10CA1a cells. This cluster is subdivided into three sub‐clusters of histone genes that are organized into hierarchical topologically associating domains (TADs). Interestingly, the sub‐clusters of histone genes are located at TAD boundaries and interact more frequently with each other than the regions in‐between them, suggesting that the histone sub‐clusters form an active chromatin hub. The anchor sites of loops within this hub are occupied by CTCF, a known chromatin organizer. These histone genes are transcribed and processed at a specific sub‐nuclear microenvironment termed the major histone locus body (HLB). While the overall chromatin structure of the major HLB is maintained across breast cancer progression, we detected alterations in its structure that may relate to gene expression. Importantly, breast tumor specimens also exhibit a coordinate pattern of upregulation across the major histone gene cluster. Our results provide a novel insight into the connection between the higher‐order chromatin organization of the major HLB and its regulation during breast cancer progression.