Explore the vast range of titles available.

Biological data visualization is challenged by the growing complexity of datasets. Traditional single-data plots or simple juxtapositions often fail to fully capture dataset intricacies and interrelations. To address this, we introduce “cross-layout,” a novel visualization paradigm that integrates multiple plot types in a cross-like structure, with a central main plot surrounded by secondary plots for enhanced contextualization and interrelation insights. We also introduce “Marsilea,” a Python-based implementation of cross-layout visualizations, available in both programmatic and web-based interfaces to support users of all experience levels. This paradigm and its implementation offer a customizable, intuitive approach to advance biological data visualization.

Animal interphase chromosomes are organized into topologically associating domains (TADs). How TADs are formed is not fully understood. Here, we combined high-throughput chromosome conformation capture and gene silencing to obtain insights into TAD dynamics in Xenopus tropicalis embryos. First, TAD establishment in X. tropicalis is similar to that in mice and flies and does not depend on zygotic genome transcriptional activation. This process is followed by further refinements in active and repressive chromatin compartments and the appearance of loops and stripes. Second, within TADs, higher self-interaction frequencies at one end of the boundary are associated with higher DNA occupancy of the architectural proteins CTCF and Rad21. Third, the chromatin remodeling factor ISWI is required for de novo TAD formation. Finally, TAD structures are variable in different tissues. Our work shows that X. tropicalis is a powerful model for chromosome architecture analysis and suggests that chromatin remodeling plays an essential role in de novo TAD establishment. Hi-C and single-molecule sequencing analysis provide an improved assembly of the Xenopus tropicalis genome and insights into three-dimensional genome dynamics throughout embryogenesis.

We elucidated the anti-inflammatory mechanisms of IL-38 in allergic asthma. Human bronchial epithelial cells and eosinophils were cocultured upon stimulation with the viral RLR ligand poly (I:C)/LyoVec or infection-related cytokine TNF-α to induce expression of cytokines/chemokines/adhesion molecules. House dust mite (HDM)-induced allergic asthma and humanized allergic asthma NOD/SCID murine models were established to assess anti-inflammatory mechanisms in vivo. IL-38 significantly inhibited induced proinflammatory IL-6, IL-1β, CCL5, and CXCL10 production, and antiviral interferon-β and intercellular adhesion molecule-1 expression in the coculture system. Mass cytometry and RNA-sequencing analysis revealed that IL-38 could antagonize the activation of the intracellular STAT1, STAT3, p38 MAPK, ERK1/2, and NF-κB pathways, and upregulate the expression of the host defense-related gene POU2AF1 and anti-allergic response gene RGS13 . Intraperitoneal injection of IL-38 into HDM-induced allergic asthma mice could ameliorate airway hyperreactivity by decreasing the accumulation of eosinophils in the lungs and inhibiting the expression of the Th2-related cytokines IL-4, IL-5, and IL-13 in the bronchoalveolar lavage fluid (BALF) and lung homogenates. Histological examination indicated lung inflammation was alleviated by reductions in cell infiltration and goblet cell hyperplasia, together with reduced Th2, Th17, and innate lymphoid type 2 cell numbers but increased proportions of regulatory T cells in the lungs, spleen, and lymph nodes. IL-38 administration suppressed airway hyperreactivity and asthma-related IL-4 and IL-5 expression in humanized mice, together with significantly decreased CCR3 + eosinophil numbers in the BALF and lungs, and a reduced percentage of human CD4 + CRTH2 + Th2 cells in the lungs and mediastinal lymph nodes. Together, our results demonstrated the anti-inflammatory mechanisms of IL-38 and provided a basis for the development of a regulatory cytokine-based treatment for allergic asthma.

Transcriptional corepressors are frequently aberrantly over‐expressed in prostate cancers. However, their crosstalk with the Androgen receptor (AR), a key player in prostate cancer development, is unclear. Using ChIP‐Seq, we generated extensive global binding maps of AR, ERG, and commonly over‐expressed transcriptional corepressors including HDAC1, HDAC2, HDAC3, and EZH2 in prostate cancer cells. Surprisingly, our results revealed that ERG, HDACs, and EZH2 are directly involved in androgen‐regulated transcription and wired into an AR centric transcriptional network via a spectrum of distal enhancers and/or proximal promoters. Moreover, we showed that similar to ERG, these corepressors function to mediate repression of AR‐induced transcription including cytoskeletal genes that promote epithelial differentiation and inhibit metastasis. Specifically, we demonstrated that the direct suppression of Vinculin expression by ERG, EZH2, and HDACs leads to enhanced invasiveness of prostate cancer cells. Taken together, our results highlight a novel mechanism by which, ERG working together with oncogenic corepressors including HDACs and the polycomb protein, EZH2, could impede epithelial differentiation and contribute to prostate cancer progression, through directly modulating the transcriptional output of AR. This paper uncovers novel co‐regulatory networks that govern androgen responses in prostate cancer based on global binding maps for the androgen receptor with ERG (frequently over‐expressed in tumours) and EZH2/HDAC‐co‐repressors.

Human pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) harboring one KRAS mutant allele often displays increasing genomic loss of the remaining wild-type (WT) allele (known as LOH at KRAS ) as tumors progress to metastasis, yet the molecular ramification of this WT allelic loss is unknown. In this study, we showed that the restoration of WT KRAS expression in human PDAC cell lines with LOH at KRAS significantly attenuated the malignancy of PDAC cells both in vitro and in vivo, demonstrating a tumor-suppressive role of the WT KRAS allele. Through RNA-Seq, we identified the HIPPO signaling pathway to be positively regulated by WT KRAS in PDAC cells. In accordance with this observation, PDAC cells with LOH at KRAS exhibited increased nuclear localization and activation of transcriptional co-activator YAP1. Mechanistically, we discovered that WT KRAS expression sequestered YAP1 from the nucleus, through enhanced 14-3-3zeta interaction with phosphorylated YAP1 at S127. Consistently, expression of a constitutively-active YAP1 mutant in PDAC cells bypassed the growth inhibitory effects of WT KRAS. In patient samples, we found that the YAP1-activation genes were significantly upregulated in tumors with LOH at KRAS , and YAP1 nuclear localization predicted poor survival for PDAC patients. Collectively, our results reveal that the WT allelic loss leads to functional activation of YAP1 and enhanced tumor malignancy, which explains the selection advantage of the tumor cells with LOH at KRAS during pancreatic cancer clonal evolution and progression to metastasis, and should be taken into consideration in future therapeutic strategies targeting KRAS.

Using a chromatin immunoprecipitation-paired end diTag cloning and sequencing strategy, we mapped estrogen receptor alpha (ERalpha) binding sites in MCF-7 breast cancer cells. We identified 1,234 high confidence binding clusters of which 94% are projected to be bona fide ERalpha binding regions. Only 5% of the mapped estrogen receptor binding sites are located within 5 kb upstream of the transcriptional start sites of adjacent genes, regions containing the proximal promoters, whereas vast majority of the sites are mapped to intronic or distal locations (>5 kb from 5' and 3' ends of adjacent transcript), suggesting transcriptional regulatory mechanisms over significant physical distances. Of all the identified sites, 71% harbored putative full estrogen response elements (EREs), 25% bore ERE half sites, and only 4% had no recognizable ERE sequences. Genes in the vicinity of ERalpha binding sites were enriched for regulation by estradiol in MCF-7 cells, and their expression profiles in patient samples segregate ERalpha-positive from ERalpha-negative breast tumors. The expression dynamics of the genes adjacent to ERalpha binding sites suggest a direct induction of gene expression through binding to ERE-like sequences, whereas transcriptional repression by ERalpha appears to be through indirect mechanisms. Our analysis also indicates a number of candidate transcription factor binding sites adjacent to occupied EREs at frequencies much greater than by chance, including the previously reported FOXA1 sites, and demonstrate the potential involvement of one such putative adjacent factor, Sp1, in the global regulation of ERalpha target genes. Unexpectedly, we found that only 22%-24% of the bona fide human ERalpha binding sites were overlapping conserved regions in whole genome vertebrate alignments, which suggest limited conservation of functional binding sites. Taken together, this genome-scale analysis suggests complex but definable rules governing ERalpha binding and gene regulation.

A major question in transcription factor (TF) biology is why a TF binds to only a small fraction of motif eligible binding sites in the genome. Using the estrogen receptor‐α as a model system, we sought to explicitly define parameters that determine TF‐binding site selection. By examining 12 genetic and epigenetic parameters, we find that an energetically favorable estrogen response element (ERE) motif sequence, co‐occupancy by the TF FOXA1, the presence of the H3K4me1 mark and an open chromatin configuration in the pre‐ligand state provide specificity for ER binding. These factors can model estrogen‐induced ER binding with high accuracy (ROC‐AUC=0.95 and 0.88 using different genomic backgrounds). Moreover, when assessed in another estrogen‐responsive cell line, this model was highly predictive for ERα binding (ROC‐AUC=0.86). Variance in binding site selection between MCF‐7 and T47D resides in sites with suboptimal ERE motifs, but modulated by the chromatin configuration. These results suggest a definable interplay between sequence motifs and local chromatin in selecting TF binding. Synopsis A major question in transcription factor (TF) biology is why a TF binds to only a small fraction of motif eligible binding sites in the genome. Estrogen receptor‐α (ERα) binds only to 2% of optimal sequence eligible sites. Using ERα as a model ligand‐inducible TF, we sought to explicitly define parameters that determine TF‐binding site selection on a genomic scale in an inducible system that minimizes confounding chromatin effects by the TF itself. By examining 12 separate genetic and epigenetic parameters, we find that an energetically favorable estrogen response element (ERE) motif sequence, evidence of occupancy of a ‘pioneering’ TF FOXA1, the presence of the enhancer mark, H3K4me1 and an open chromatin configuration at the pre‐ligand state provide specificity for ER binding. These factors can model estrogen‐induced ER binding with high accuracy (ROC‐AUC=0.95 using random genomic regions as background). Moreover, when ERα and FOXA1 binding as well as H3K4me1 and FAIRE localization (measure of open chromatin) was assessed in another estrogen‐responsive cell line, T47D, this model was shown to be highly predictive for ER binding (ROC‐AUC=0.86). Variance in binding site selection between MCF‐7 and T47D appeared to reside in sites with suboptimal ERE‐binding motifs but modulated by the chromatin configuration. Taken together, these results suggest definable interplay between sequence motifs and local chromatin characteristics in determining TF‐binding site selection. Besides the estrogen receptor response elements (EREs), estrogen receptor‐α binding is augmented by FOXA1 co‐binding, the presence of the histone mark, histone 3 monomethylated at the lysine 4 position and the presence of open chromatin. The major determinant of ER binding is the strength of the ERE. The differences in estrogen receptor‐binding profiles between breast cancer cell lines appear to be at sites with less ‘attractive’ EREs but modulated by the non‐sequence factors.

Smads are intracellular transducers for TGF‐β superfamily ligands, but little is known about the mechanism by which complexes of receptor‐phosphorylated Smad2 and Smad4 regulate transcription. Using an in vitro transcription system, we have discovered that, unlike most transcription factors that are sufficient to recruit the basal transcription machinery and therefore activate transcription on both naked DNA and chromatin templates, the Smads only activate transcription from chromatin templates. We demonstrate that Smad2‐mediated transcription requires the histone acetyltransferase, p300. Smad2‐recruited p300 exhibits an altered substrate specificity, specifically acetylating nucleosomal histone H3 at lysines 9 and 18, and these modifications are also detected on an endogenous Smad2‐dependent promoter in a ligand‐induced manner. Furthermore, we show that endogenous Smad2 interacts with the SWI/SNF ATPase, Brg1, in a TGF‐β‐dependent manner, and demonstrate that Brg1 is recruited to Smad2‐dependent promoters and is specifically required for TGF‐β‐induced expression of endogenous Smad2 target genes. Our data indicate that the Smads define a new class of transcription factors that absolutely require chromatin to assemble the basal transcription machinery and activate transcription.

Abstract Disclosure: E. Cheung: None. C. Zhang: None. Androgen receptor (AR) is a master transcriptional regulator in prostate cancer, interacting with and recruiting distinct sets of coregulator proteins to mediate the expression of direct target genes. What are the coregulators of AR and how they function in AR transcriptional activity and prostate cancer biology are still unclear. Using chromatin-immunoprecipitation coupled with mass spectrometry, we identified a set of AR interacting proteins that are present in multiple prostate cancer cell lines. We provide biochemical, cell-based, and genomic evidence to show that Nucleostemin, also known as Guanine nucleotide-binding protein-like 3, is a novel AR coregulator. Specifically, we demonstrate Nucleostemin has dual coregulator activities, functioning as both a coactivator and a corepressor of AR-dependent transcription to regulate the expression of genes that are involved for prostate cancer progression and immune response. From cellular and animal studies, we found that inhibiting Nucleostemin sensitizes prostate cancer cells to Enzalutamide. Clinical analyses of Nucleostemin from prostate cancer patient cohorts revealed that it is expressed significantly higher in cancer than normal in tissues. Finally, we found Nucleostemin expression is an excellent predictor of disease-free survival. In conclusion, our work suggests that Nucleostemin is a novel AR coregulator and is a promising diagnostic and therapeutic target for prostate cancer treatment. Presentation: 6/2/2024

The growth of sequencing-based Chromatin Immuno-Precipitation studies call for a more in-depth understanding of the nature of the technology and of the resultant data to reduce false positives and false negatives. Control libraries are typically constructed to complement such studies in order to mitigate the effect of systematic biases that might be present in the data. In this study, we explored multiple control libraries to obtain better understanding of what they truly represent. First, we analyzed the genome-wide profiles of various sequencing-based libraries at a low resolution of 1 Mbp, and compared them with each other as well as against aCGH data. We found that copy number plays a major influence in both ChIP-enriched as well as control libraries. Following that, we inspected the repeat regions to assess the extent of mapping bias. Next, significantly tag-rich 5 kbp regions were identified and they were associated with various genomic landmarks. For instance, we discovered that gene boundaries were surprisingly enriched with sequenced tags. Further, profiles between different cell types were noticeably distinct although the cell types were somewhat related and similar. We found that control libraries bear traces of systematic biases. The biases can be attributed to genomic copy number, inherent sequencing bias, plausible mapping ambiguity, and cell-type specific chromatin structure. Our results suggest careful analysis of control libraries can reveal promising biological insights.