Explore the vast range of titles available.

An epigenetic mechanism in which gain-of-function IDH mutations promote gliomagenesis by disrupting chromosomal topology is presented, with IDH mutations causing the binding sites of the methylation-sensitive insulator CTCF to become hypermethylated; disruption of a CTCF boundary near the glioma oncogene PDGFRA allows a constitutive enhancer to contact and activate the oncogene aberrantly. IDH mutant gliomas characterized Cancer genome sequencing studies have identified recurrent IDH mutations in brain tumours and other cancers. IDH mutant gliomas have altered DNA methylation landscapes, such as hypermethylation of CpG island promoters. Here, Brad Bernstein and colleagues show that the effects of IDH1 mutation in gliomas are not limited to CpG islands, and the binding sites of the methylation-sensitive insulator CTCF are also hypermethylated. Disruption of a CTCF boundary near the glioma oncogene PDGFRA allows a constitutive enhancer to aberrantly contact and activate it. IDH mutations can therefore promote gliomagenesis by disrupting chromosomal topology and allowing aberrant gene regulatory interactions. Gain-of-function IDH mutations are initiating events that define major clinical and prognostic classes of gliomas 1 , 2 . Mutant IDH protein produces a new onco-metabolite, 2-hydroxyglutarate, which interferes with iron-dependent hydroxylases, including the TET family of 5′-methylcytosine hydroxylases 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 . TET enzymes catalyse a key step in the removal of DNA methylation 8 , 9 . IDH mutant gliomas thus manifest a CpG island methylator phenotype (G-CIMP) 10 , 11 , although the functional importance of this altered epigenetic state remains unclear. Here we show that human IDH mutant gliomas exhibit hypermethylation at cohesin and CCCTC-binding factor (CTCF)-binding sites, compromising binding of this methylation-sensitive insulator protein. Reduced CTCF binding is associated with loss of insulation between topological domains and aberrant gene activation. We specifically demonstrate that loss of CTCF at a domain boundary permits a constitutive enhancer to interact aberrantly with the receptor tyrosine kinase gene PDGFRA , a prominent glioma oncogene. Treatment of IDH mutant gliomaspheres with a demethylating agent partially restores insulator function and downregulates PDGFRA . Conversely, CRISPR-mediated disruption of the CTCF motif in IDH wild-type gliomaspheres upregulates PDGFRA and increases proliferation. Our study suggests that IDH mutations promote gliomagenesis by disrupting chromosomal topology and allowing aberrant regulatory interactions that induce oncogene expression.

Long‐range regulatory elements and higher‐order chromatin structure coordinate the expression of multiple genes in cluster, and CTCF/cohesin‐mediated chromatin insulator may be a key in this regulation. The human apolipoprotein ( APO ) A1 / C3 / A4 / A5 gene region, whose alterations increase the risk of dyslipidemia and atherosclerosis, is partitioned at least by three CTCF‐enriched sites and three cohesin protein RAD21‐enriched sites (two overlap with the CTCF sites), resulting in the formation of two transcribed chromatin loops by interactions between insulators. The C3 enhancer and APOC3 / A4 / A5 promoters reside in the same loop, where the APOC3 / A4 promoters are pointed towards the C3 enhancer, whereas the APOA1 promoter is present in the different loop. The depletion of either CTCF or RAD21 disrupts the chromatin loop structure, together with significant changes in the APO expression and the localization of transcription factor hepatocyte nuclear factor (HNF)‐4α and transcriptionally active form of RNA polymerase II at the APO promoters. Thus, CTCF/cohesin‐mediated insulators maintain the chromatin loop formation and the localization of transcriptional apparatus at the promoters, suggesting an essential role of chromatin insulation in controlling the expression of clustered genes.

Increasing evidence suggests functional similarities between promoters and insulators. The authors propose that these findings unify existing models of insulator function, provide new directions for understanding how insulators work and suggest that insulators have evolved from promoters. Insulators prevent promiscuous gene regulation by restricting the action of enhancers and silencers. Recent studies have revealed a number of similarities between insulators and promoters, including binding of specific transcription factors, chromatin-modification signatures and localization to specific subnuclear positions. We propose that enhancer-blockers and silencing barrier-insulators might have evolved as specialized derivatives of promoters and that the two types of element use related mechanisms to mediate their distinct functions. These insights can help to reconcile different models of insulator action.

In eukaryotic cells, local chromatin structure and chromatin organization in the nucleus both influence transcriptional regulation. At the local level, the Fun30 chromatin remodeler Fft3 is essential for maintaining proper chromatin structure at centromeres and subtelomeres in fission yeast. Using genome-wide mapping and live cell imaging, we show that this role is linked to controlling nuclear organization of its targets. In fft3∆ cells, subtelomeres lose their association with the LEM domain protein Man1 at the nuclear periphery and move to the interior of the nucleus. Furthermore, genes in these domains are upregulated and active chromatin marks increase. Fft3 is also enriched at retrotransposon-derived long terminal repeat (LTR) elements and at tRNA genes. In cells lacking Fft3, these sites lose their peripheral positioning and show reduced nucleosome occupancy. We propose that Fft3 has a global role in mediating association between specific chromatin domains and the nuclear envelope.

Glioblastoma (GBM) is the most aggressive primary brain tumor, having a poor prognosis and a median overall survival of less than two years. Over the last decade, numerous findings regarding the distinct molecular and genetic profiles of GBM have led to the emergence of several therapeutic approaches. Unfortunately, none of them has proven to be effective against GBM progression and recurrence. Epigenetic mechanisms underlying GBM tumor biology, including histone modifications, DNA methylation, and chromatin architecture, have become an attractive target for novel drug discovery strategies. Alterations on chromatin insulator elements (IEs) might lead to aberrant chromatin remodeling via DNA loop formation, causing oncogene reactivation in several types of cancer, including GBM. Importantly, it is shown that mutations affecting the isocitrate dehydrogenase (IDH) 1 and 2 genes, one of the most frequent genetic alterations in gliomas, lead to genome-wide DNA hypermethylation and the consequent IE dysfunction. The relevance of IEs has also been observed in a small population of cancer stem cells known as glioma stem cells (GSCs), which are thought to participate in GBM tumor initiation and drug resistance. Recent studies revealed that epigenomic alterations, specifically chromatin insulation and DNA loop formation, play a crucial role in establishing and maintaining the GSC transcriptional program. This review focuses on the relevance of IEs in GBM biology and their implementation as a potential theranostic target to stratify GBM patients and develop novel therapeutic approaches. We will also discuss the state-of-the-art emerging technologies using big data analysis and how they will settle the bases on future diagnosis and treatment strategies in GBM patients.

The Shelterin component Rif1 has emerged as a global regulator of the replication-timing program in all eukaryotes examined to date, possibly by modulating the 3D-organization of the genome. In fission yeast a second Shelterin component, Taz1, might share similar functions. Here, we identified unexpected properties for Rif1 and Taz1 by conducting high-throughput genetic screens designed to identify cis- and trans-acting factors capable of creating heterochromatin–euchromatin boundaries in fission yeast. The preponderance of cis-acting elements identified in the screens originated from genomic loci bound by Taz1 and associated with origins of replication whose firing is repressed by Taz1 and Rif1. Boundary formation and gene silencing by these elements required Taz1 and Rif1 and coincided with altered replication timing in the region. Thus, small chromosomal elements sensitive to Taz1 and Rif1 (STAR) could simultaneously regulate gene expression and DNA replication over a large domain, at the edge of which they established a heterochromatin–euchromatin boundary. Taz1, Rif1, and Rif1-associated protein phosphatases Sds21 and Dis2 were each sufficient to establish a boundary when tethered to DNA. Moreover, efficient boundary formation required the amino-terminal domain of the Mcm4 replicative helicase onto which the antagonistic activities of the replication-promoting Dbf4-dependent kinase and Rif1-recruited phosphatases are believed to converge to control replication origin firing. Altogether these observations provide an insight into a coordinated control of DNA replication and organization of the genome into expression domains.

The function of the class I TCP transcription factor TCP15 fromArabidopsis thalianahas been studied through the analysis of plants that express a fusion of this protein to the EAR repressor domain. Constitutive expression of TCP15-EAR produces growth arrest at the seedling stage, before leaf emergence. Expression of the repressor fusion from theAtTCP15promoter produces small plants with leaves whose margins progressively curve upwards, starting from the basal part of the lamina. Leaves contain smaller and less differentiated cells, both on the adaxial and abaxial sides. The abaxial domain is relatively enlarged, with disorganized cells separated by empty spaces. TCP15-EAR also affects the growth of leaf petioles, flower pedicels, and anther filaments. Flowers show reduced elongation of the three outer whorls and altered gynoecia with irregular carpel surfaces and enlarged repla. Ectopic stigma-like structures develop from medial and basal parts of the replum. TCP15-EAR produces an increase in expression of the boundary-specific genesLOB, CUC1, andCUC2. Changes inCUC1andCUC2expression can be explained by the existence of lower levels of miR164 in leaves and the repression ofIAA3/SHY2and the SAUR-like gene At1g29460 in leaves and flowers. TCP15 binds to the promoter regions ofIAA3/SHY2andAt1g29460, suggesting that these genes may be direct targets of the transcription factor. The results indicate that TCP15 regulates the expression of boundary-specific genes through a pathway that affects auxin homeostasis and partially overlaps with the one modulated by class II CIN-like TCP proteins.

Biotechnology has several advantages over conventional breeding for the precise engineering of gene function and provides a powerful tool for the genetic improvement of agronomically important traits in crops. In particular, it has been exploited for the improvement of multiple traits through the simultaneous introduction or stacking of several genes driven by distinct tissue-specific promoters. Since transcriptional enhancer elements have been shown to override the specificity of nearby promoters in a position- and orientation-independent manner, the co-existence of multiple enhancers/promoters within a single transgenic construct could be problematic as it has the potential to cause the mis-expression of transgene product(s). In order to develop strategies with, which to prevent such interference, a clear understanding of the mechanisms underlying enhancer-mediated activation of target promoters, as well as the identification of DNA sequences that function to block these interactions in plants, will be necessary. To date, little is known concerning enhancer function in plants and only a very limited number of enhancer-blocking insulators that operate in plant species have been identified. In this review, we discuss the current knowledge surrounding enhancer–promoter interactions, as well as possible means of minimizing such interference during plant transformation experiments.

Chromatin insulators are DNA sequences found in eukaryotes that may organize genomes into chromatin domains by blocking enhancer-promoter interactions and preventing heterochromatin spreading. Considering that insulators play important roles in organizing higher order chromatin structure and modulating gene expression, very little is known about their phylogenetic distribution. To date, six insulators and their associated proteins have been characterized, including Su(Hw), Zw5, CTCF, GAF, Mod(mdg4), and BEAF-32. However, all insulator proteins, with the exception of CTCF, which has also been identified in vertebrates and worms, have been exclusively described in Drosophila melanogaster. In this work, we have performed database searches utilizing each D. melanogaster insulator protein as a query to find orthologs in other organisms, revealing that except for CTCF all known insulator proteins are restricted to insects. In particular, the boundary element-associated factor of 32 kDa (BEAF-32), which binds to thousands of sites throughout the genome, was only found in the Drosophila lineage. Accordingly, we also found a significant bias of BEAF-32 binding sites in relation to transcription start sites (TSSs) in D. melanogaster but not in Anopheles gambiae, Apis mellifera, or Tribolium castaneum. These data suggest that DNA binding proteins such as BEAF-32 may have a dramatic impact in the genome of single evolutionary lineages. A more thorough evaluation of the phylogenetic distribution of insulator proteins will allow for a better understanding of whether the mechanism by which these proteins exert their function is conserved across phyla and their impact in genome evolution.

Insulators define interactions between transcriptional control elements in eukaryotic genomes. The gypsy insulator found in the gypsy retrovirus binds the zinc-finger Suppressor of Hairy-wing [Su(Hw)] protein that associates with hundreds of non-gypsy regions throughout the Drosophila genome. Models of insulator function predict that the gypsy insulator forms chromatin loop domains through interactions with endogenous Su(Hw) insulators (SIs) to limit the action of transcriptional control elements. Here we study SI 62D and show that interactions occur between two SI 62D elements, but not between SI 62D and the gypsy insulator, limiting the scope of genomic gypsy insulator interactions. Enhancer blocking by SI 62D requires fewer Su(Hw)-binding sites than needed for gypsy insulator function, with these target regions having distinct zinc-finger requirements for in vivo Su(Hw) association. These observations led to an investigation of the role of the Su(Hw) zinc-finger domain in insulator function. Using a combination of in vitro and in vivo studies, we find that this domain makes sequence-dependent and -independent contributions to in vivo chromosome association, but is not essential for enhancer or silencer blocking. These studies extend our understanding of the properties of Su(Hw) and the endogenous genomic regions to which this protein localizes.