Explore the vast range of titles available.

Cell identity is controlled by regulatory elements, such as promoters, enhancers, and insulators, within the genome. These regulatory elements interact in the nucleus and form tissue‐specific chromatin structures. Dysregulation of these elements and their interactions can lead to loss of cell identity and promote the development of diseases such as cancer. Tumor cells acquire aberrantly activated enhancers at oncogenic driver genes through various mechanisms. Small genomic changes such as mutations, insertions, and amplifications can form aberrant enhancers. Genomic rearrangements at the chromosomal level, including translocations and inversions, are also often observed in cancers. These rearrangements can result in repositioning of enhancers to locations near tumor‐type‐specific oncogenes. Chromatin structural changes caused by genomic or epigenomic changes lead to mis‐interaction between enhancers and proto‐oncogenes, ultimately contributing to tumorigenesis through activation of oncogenic signals. Additional epigenomic mechanisms can also cause aberrant enhancer activation, including those associated with overexpression of oncogenic transcription factors and the mutation of transcriptional cofactors. Exogenous viral DNA can also lead to enhancer aberrations. Here, we review the mechanisms underlying aberrant oncogene activation through enhancer activation and rewiring, both of which are caused by genomic or epigenomic alterations in non‐coding regions. Chromatin structural changes caused by genomic changes, including mutations, insertions, amplifications, or chromosomal translocations and inversions, lead to mis‐interaction between enhancers and proto‐oncogenes, ultimately contributing to tumorigenesis through activation of oncogenic signals. Epigenomic mechanisms can also cause aberrant enhancer activation, including those associated with overexpression of oncogenic transcription factors and the mutation of transcriptional cofactors. Here, we review these tumorigenic mechanisms through aberrant enhancer activation and rewiring that should help to understand how genomic or epigenomic alterations in non‐coding regions can contribute to cancer development.

The mu variant of SARS-CoV-2 was 10.6 times as resistant to neutralization by serum samples obtained from persons who had recovered from Covid-19 as the B.1 lineage virus and 9.1 times as resistant to neutralization by serum samples from persons who had received the BNT162b2 vaccine.

Epstein–Barr virus (EBV) is associated with several human malignancies including 8–10% of gastric cancers (GCs). Genome-wide analysis of 3D chromatin topologies across GC lines, primary tissue and normal gastric samples revealed chromatin domains specific to EBV-positive GC, exhibiting heterochromatin-to-euchromatin transitions and long-range human–viral interactions with non-integrated EBV episomes. EBV infection in vitro suffices to remodel chromatin topology and function at EBV-interacting host genomic loci, converting H3K9me3 + heterochromatin to H3K4me1 + /H3K27ac + bivalency and unleashing latent enhancers to engage and activate nearby GC-related genes (for example TGFBR2 and MZT1 ). Higher-order epigenotypes of EBV-positive GC thus signify a novel oncogenic paradigm whereby non-integrative viral genomes can directly alter host epigenetic landscapes (‘enhancer infestation’), facilitating proto-oncogene activation and tumorigenesis. Genome-wide analysis of 3D chromatin topologies across gastric cancers suggests that Epstein–Barr virus infection may induce the epigenetic rewiring of EBV-positive tumors through human–viral chromatin interactions, a phenomenon termed ‘enhancer infestation’.

Thirty years have passed since a possible association of Epstein-Barr virus (EBV) with gastric carcinoma was reported. We now know EBV-associated gastric carcinoma to be a specific subtype of gastric carcinoma. Global epigenetic methylation and counteraction of the antitumour microenvironment are two major characteristics of this subtype of gastric carcinoma. Recent development of therapeutic modalities for gastric carcinoma, such as endoscopic mucosal dissection and immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy, has made the presence of EBV infection a biomarker for the treatment of gastric carcinoma. This review presents a portrait of EBV-associated gastric carcinoma from initiation to maturity that we define as the ‘gastritis-infection-cancer sequence’, followed by its molecular abnormalities and interactions with immune checkpoint molecules and the microenvironment. EBV non-coding RNAs (microRNA and circular RNA) and exosomes derived from EBV-infected cells that were previously behind the scenes are now recognized for their roles in EBV-associated gastric carcinoma. The virus utilizes cellular machinery skilfully to control infected cells and their microenvironment. We should thus strive to understand virus-host interactions more fully in the following years to overcome this virus-driven subtype of gastric carcinoma.

Background: Gastric cancer (GC) is one of the leading causes of cancer-related deaths worldwide. GC is a pathologically and molecularly heterogeneous disease. DNA hypermethylation in promoter CpG islands causes silencing of tumor-suppressor genes and thus contributes to gastric carcinogenesis. In addition, various molecular aberrations, including aberrant chromatin structures, gene mutations, structural variants, and somatic copy number alterations, are involved in gastric carcinogenesis. Summary: Comprehensive DNA methylation analyses revealed multiple DNA methylation patterns in GCs and classified GC into distinct molecular subgroups: extremely high-methylation epigenotype uniquely observed in GC associated with Epstein-Barr virus (EBV), high-methylation epigenotype associated with microsatellite instability (MSI), and low-methylation epigenotype. In The Cancer Genome Atlas classification, EBV and MSI are extracted as independent subgroups of GC, whereas the remaining GCs are categorized into genomically stable (GS) and chromosomal instability (CIN) subgroups. EBV-positive GC, exhibiting the most extreme DNA hypermethylation in the whole human malignancies, frequently shows CDKN2A silencing, PIK3CA mutations, PD-L1/2 overexpression, and lack of TP53 mutations. MSI, exhibiting high DNA methylation, often has MLH1 silencing and abundant gene mutations. GS is generally a diffuse-type GC and frequently shows CDH1/RHOA mutations or CLDN18–ARHGAP fusion. CIN is generally an intestinal-type GC and frequently has TP53 mutations and genomic amplification of receptor tyrosine kinases. Key Messages: The frequency and targets of genetic aberrations vary depending on the epigenotype. Aberrations in the genome and epigenome are expected to synergistically interact and contribute to gastric carcinogenesis and comprehensive analyses of those in GCs may help elucidate the mechanism of carcinogenesis.

Skeletal muscle atrophy is caused by various conditions, including aging, disuse related to a sedentary lifestyle and lack of physical activity, and cachexia. Our insufficient understanding of the molecular mechanism underlying muscle atrophy limits the targets for the development of effective pharmacologic treatments and preventions. Here, we identified Krüppel-like factor 5 (KLF5), a zinc-finger transcription factor, as a key mediator of the early muscle atrophy program. KLF5 was up-regulated in atrophying myotubes as an early response to dexamethasone or simulated microgravity in vitro. Skeletal muscle–selective deletion of Klf5 significantly attenuated muscle atrophy induced by mechanical unloading in mice. Transcriptome- and genome-wide chromatin accessibility analyses revealed that KLF5 regulates atrophy-related programs, including metabolic changes and E3-ubiquitin ligase-mediated proteolysis, in coordination with Foxo1. The synthetic retinoic acid receptor agonist Am80, a KLF5 inhibitor, suppressed both dexamethasone- and microgravity-induced muscle atrophy in vitro and oral Am80 ameliorated disuse– and dexamethasone-induced atrophy in mice. Moreover, in three independent sets of transcriptomic data from human skeletal muscle, KLF5 expression significantly increased with age and the presence of sarcopenia and correlated positively with the expression of the atrophy-related ubiquitin ligase genes FBXO32 and TRIM63. These findings demonstrate that KLF5 is a key transcriptional regulator mediating muscle atrophy and that pharmacological intervention with Am80 is a potentially preventive treatment.

Epstein‐Barr virus (EBV) is associated with approximately 10% of gastric cancers (GCs). We previously showed that EBV infection of gastric epithelial cells induces aberrant DNA methylation in promoter regions, which causes silencing of critical tumor suppressor genes. Here, we analyzed gene expressions and active histone modifications (H3K4me3, H3K4me1, and H3K27ac) genome‐widely in EBV‐positive GC cell lines and in vitro EBV‐infected GC cell lines to elucidate the transcription factors contributing to tumorigenesis through enhancer activation. Genes associated with “signaling of WNT in cancer” were significantly enriched in EBV‐positive GC, showing increased active β‐catenin staining. Genes neighboring activated enhancers were significantly upregulated, and EHF motif was significantly enriched in these active enhancers. Higher expression of EHF in clinical EBV‐positive GC compared with normal tissue and EBV‐negative GC was confirmed by RNA‐seq using The Cancer Genome Atlas cohort, and by immunostaining using our cohort. EHF knockdown markedly inhibited cell proliferation. Moreover, there was significant enrichment of critical cancer pathway–related genes (eg, FZD5) in the downstream of EHF. EBV protein LMP2A caused upregulation of EHF via phosphorylation of STAT3. STAT3 knockdown was shown to inhibit cellular growth of EBV‐positive GC cells, and the inhibition was rescued by EHF overexpression. Our data highlighted the important role of EBV infection in gastric tumorigenesis via enhancer activation. We here analyzed the global alteration of gene expressions and active histone modifications to identify activated enhancer regions after EBV infection and to predict the master transcription factors in EBV‐positive GC. We identified that EHF was a critical transcription factor at active enhancers, which promoted cell proliferation in EBV‐positive GC. In addition, we identified its downstream target gene, FZD5, which is a potential oncogene that regulates cell growth after EBV infection.

L-type amino acid transporter 1 (LAT1) plays a role in transporting essential amino acids including leucine, which regulates the mTOR signaling pathway. Here, we studied the expression profile and functional role of LAT1 in bladder cancer. Furthermore, the pharmacological activity of JPH203, a specific inhibitor of LAT1, was studied in bladder cancer. LAT1 expression in bladder cancer cells was higher than that in normal cells. SiLAT1 and JPH203 suppressed cell proliferative and migratory and invasive abilities in bladder cancer cells. JPH203 inhibited leucine uptake by > 90%. RNA-seq analysis identified insulin-like growth factor-binding protein-5 (IGFBP-5) as a downstream target of JPH203. JPH203 inhibited phosphorylation of MAPK / Erk, AKT, p70S6K and 4EBP-1. Multivariate analysis revealed that high LAT1 expression was found as an independent prognostic factor for overall survival (HR3.46 P = 0.0204). Patients with high LAT1 and IGFBP-5 expression had significantly shorter overall survival periods than those with low expression (P = 0.0005). High LAT1 was related to the high Grade, pathological T stage, LDH, and NLR. Collectively, LAT1 significantly contributed to bladder cancer progression. Targeting LAT1 by JPH203 may represent a novel therapeutic option in bladder cancer treatment.

Epstein‐Barr virus (EBV) is associated with particular forms of gastric cancer (GC). We previously showed that EBV infection into gastric epithelial cells induced aberrant DNA hypermethylation in promoter regions and silencing of tumor suppressor genes. We here undertook integrated analyses of transcriptome and epigenome alteration during EBV infection in gastric cells, to investigate activation of enhancer regions and related transcription factors (TFs) that could contribute to tumorigenesis. Formaldehyde‐assisted isolation of regulatory elements (FAIRE) sequencing (‐seq) data revealed 19 992 open chromatin regions in putative H3K4me1+ H3K4me3− enhancers in EBV‐infected MKN7 cells (MKN7_EB), with 10 260 regions showing increase of H3K27ac. Motif analysis showed candidate TFs, eg activating transcription factor 3 (ATF3), to possibly bind to these activated enhancers. ATF3 was considerably upregulated in MKN7_EB due to EBV factors including EBV‐determined nuclear antigen 1 (EBNA1), EBV‐encoded RNA 1, and latent membrane protein 2A. Expression of mutant EBNA1 decreased copy number of the EBV genome, resulting in relative downregulation of ATF3 expression. Epstein‐Barr virus was also infected into normal gastric epithelial cells, GES1, confirming upregulation of ATF3. Chromatin immunoprecipitation‐seq analysis on ATF3 binding sites and RNA‐seq analysis on ATF3 knocked‐down MKN7_EB revealed 96 genes targeted by ATF3‐activating enhancers, which are related with cancer hallmarks, eg evading growth suppressors. These 96 ATF3 target genes were significantly upregulated in MKN7_EB compared with MKN7 and significantly downregulated when ATF3 was knocked down in EBV‐positive GC cells SNU719 and NCC24. Knockdown of ATF3 in EBV‐infected MKN7, SNU719, and NCC24 cells all led to significant decrease of cellular growth through an increase of apoptotic cells. These indicate that enhancer activation though ATF3 might contribute to tumorigenesis of EBV‐positive GC. Through integrated analyses on alterations of transcriptome, histone modification, and open chromatin status during Epstein‐Barr virus (EBV) infection in gastric cells, we here identified activating transcription factor 3 (ATF3) as a critical transcriptional activator with involvement in enhancer activation. We undertook screening of putative transcription factors binding to activated enhancer regions and identified ATF3 as a transcription factor that is upregulated by EBV infection and induces aberrant enhancer activation. Effect of ATF3 expression on cellular proliferation was confirmed, suggesting a tumorigenic role of aberrant enhancer activation by ATF3 upregulation, which could help our understanding of the tumorigenic mechanisms in this particular subtype of gastric cancer.

A subgroup of colorectal cancer (CRC) shows non‐random accumulation of aberrant DNA methylation, so‐called CpG island methylator phenotype (CIMP), which was associated with microsatellite instability and BRAF mutation. As just one group of methylation markers was suitable to extract CIMP+/CIMP‐high, and had been commonly used in the “one‐panel method”, it had been unclear whether another cluster of CRC with DNA methylation accumulation exists in microsatellite‐stable CRC. We therefore epigenotyped CRC by a comprehensive approach, that is, the two‐way unsupervised hierarchical clustering method using highly quantitative methylation data by a single detection method, MALDI‐TOF mass spectrometry, on novel regions selected genome‐widely through methylated DNA immunoprecipitation on array analysis. CRC was clearly clustered into three DNA methylation epigenotypes, high‐, intermediate‐ and low‐methylation epigenotypes (HME, IME, and LME, respectively). Methylation markers are clustered into two distinct groups: Group‐1 methylated specifically in HME and including most reported CIMP‐related markers; and Group‐2 methylated both in HME and IME. While suitable markers to detect a subgroup of CRC with intermediate methylation and correlation to KRAS mutation have been expected to be developed, our data indicated that a “two‐panel method” is necessary to properly classify CRC into three epigenotypes, the first panel to extract HME using Group‐1 markers, and the second panel to divide the remaining into IME and LME using Group‐2 markers. Here we review and compare our recent study and reported CRC classification methods by DNA methylation information, and propose the use of two panels of methylation markers as CRC classifiers. (Cancer Sci 2011; 102: 18–24)