DOCSLIB.ORG

Atf1 Arid3a Atf2

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Atf1 Arid3a Atf2 TFs Datasets Sequence logos of information models showing cofactor motifs Top 500 peaks (FOXA motif) HepG2, Stanford ARID3A (optimal IDR thresholded) Top 5000 peaks (FOXA motif) All 14818 peaks (IRF motif) K562, HMS ATF1 (optimal IDR thresholded) Top 2500 peaks (SP motif) H1-hESC, HAIB ATF2 Protocol: v042211.1 (optimal IDR thresholded) All 1860 peaks (USF motif) GM12878, HAIB Protocol: PCR1x (SPP obtained from Factorbook) All 1670 peaks (SP motif) GM12878, HAIB Protocol: PCR1x (optimal IDR thresholded) 1550 peaks (USF motif), after masking the SP motif All 4803 peaks (SP motif) H1-hESC, HAIB Protocol: v041610.2 (optimal IDR thresholded) 4697 peaks (USF motif), after masking the SP motif ATF3 All 3284 peaks (SP motif) HepG2, HAIB Protocol: v041610.1 (optimal IDR thresholded) 3209 peaks (USF motif), after masking the SP motif All 11098 peaks (SP motif) K562, HAIB, Replicate 1 Protocol: v041610.1 (raw peaks) All 1232 peaks (SP motif) K562, HMS (optimal IDR thresholded) 1210 peaks (USF motif), after masking the SP motif All 4448 peaks (AP1 motif) BAF155/ HeLa-S3, Stanford SMARCC1 (SPP obtained from Factorbook) 1342 peaks (AP1 motif), after using masking BAF170/ HeLa-S3, Stanford SMARCC2 (SPP obtained from Factorbook) All 17809 peaks (IRF motif) GM12878, HAIB Protocol: PCR1x (optimal IDR thresholded) 17321 peaks (RUNX motif), after masking the IRF motif BCL11A All 2513 peaks (SOX2-OCT4 motif) H1-hESC, HAIB Protocol: PCR1x (optimal IDR thresholded) All 7707 peaks (AP1 motif), after masking noise A549, HAIB Protocol: v042211.1 BCL3 Treatment: 0.02% ethanol for 1 hour (optimal IDR thresholded) Top 500 peaks (SP motif) GM12878, HAIB, Replicate 2 Protocol: v041610.1 (raw peaks) All 2297 peaks (SP motif) K562, HAIB, Replicate 1 BCLAF1 Protocol:PCR1x (raw peaks) All 2362 peaks (SP motif) K562, HAIB, Replicate 2 Protocol:PCR1x (raw peaks) All 507 peaks (B-Box motif) H1-hESC, HMS (optimal IDR thresholded) BDP1 All 569 peaks (A-Box motif) K562, HMS (optimal IDR thresholded) Top 4500 peaks (SP motif) BHLHE32/MI K562, HAIB TF (optimal IDR thresholded) All 550 peaks (ZBTB33 motif) GM12878, Stanford (optimal IDR thresholded) All 1999 peaks (SP motif) H1-hESC, Stanford (optimal IDR thresholded) Top 1000 peaks (ZBTB33 motif) All 8081 peaks (SP motif) BRCA1 Top 500 peaks (ZBTB33 motif) HeLa-S3, Stanford (optimal IDR thresholded) Top 800 peaks (ZBTB33 motif) All 1489 peaks (SP motif) HepG2, Stanford (optimal IDR thresholded) Top 800 peaks (ZBTB33 motif) All 192 peaks (B-Box motif) HeLa-S3, HMS (optimal IDR thresholded) 192 peaks (A-Box motif), after masking the B-Box motif BRF1 All 217 peaks (B-Box motif) K562, HMS (optimal IDR thresholded) 220 peaks (A-Box motif), after masking the B-Box motif All 316 peaks (AP1 motif), after using masking HeLa-S3, Yale (SPP obtained from Factorbook) BRG1 All 1544 peaks (GATA motif) K562, Stanford (SPP obtained from Factorbook) All 708 peaks (SP motif) HepG2, HAIB CBX1 (conservative IDR thresholded) All 19951 peaks (SP motif) K562, HMS CCNT2 (optimal IDR thresholded) All 5774 peaks (IRF motif) GM12878, HAIB CEBPB Protocol: v042211.1 (optimal IDR thresholded) 5759 peaks (RUNX motif), after masking the IRF motif All 11382 peaks (SP motif) HepG2, HAIB CEBPD Protocol: v041610.1 (optimal IDR thresholded) Top 2000 peaks (SP motif) GM12878, Stanford (optimal IDR thresholded) All 2184 peaks (SP motif) H1-hESC, Stanford CHD1 (optimal IDR thresholded) All 7226 peaks (SP motif) H1-hESC, Broad (optimal IDR thresholded) All 35861 peaks (SP motif) HeLa-S3, Stanford (raw peaks) All 28621 peaks (SP motif) HepG2, Stanford CHD2 (raw peaks) All 29104 peaks (SP motif) K562, Stanford (raw peaks) All 3773 peaks (YY motif) K562, Stanford DDX20 Target: eGFP-DDX20 (optimal IDR thresholded) All 2227 peaks (SP motif) GM12878, Yale (optimal IDR thresholded) 2184 peaks (NFY motif), after masking the SP motif All 7628 peaks (a mix of primary AP1 motif and NFY motif) K562, Yale FOS (optimal IDR thresholded) All 5781 peaks (SP motif) K562, Yale (SPP obtained from Factorbook) 5601 peaks (a mix of primary AP1 motif and NFY motif) All 4542 peaks (SP motif) H1-hESC, Stanford (optimal IDR thresholded) All 5414 peaks (SP motif) HeLa-S3, Yale (SPP obtained from Factorbook) All 5134 peaks (SP motif) HUVEC, UTA (optimal IDR thresholded) All 24096 peaks (SP motif) K562, Stanford (optimal IDR thresholded) All 22384 peaks (SP motif) K562, Stanford Treatment: IFNg for 30 minutes (SPP obtained from Factorbook) All 5011 peaks (SP motif) K562, Yale (optimal IDR thresholded) All 7742 peaks (SP motif) K562, Yale Treatment: IFNa for 30 minutes (optimal IDR thresholded) All 10570 peaks (SP motif) K562, Yale MYC Treatment: IFNa for 6 hours (optimal IDR thresholded) All 19252 peaks (SP motif) K562, Yale Treatment: IFNg for 6 hours (optimal IDR thresholded) All 11688 peaks (SP motif) K562, UTA (optimal IDR thresholded) All 4403 peaks (SP motif) HepG2, UTA (optimal IDR thresholded) All 25644 peaks (AP1 motif) MCF10A-Er-Src, HMS Treatment: 1µM afimoxifene for 4 hours 25486 peaks (TEAD motif), after masking the AP1 motif (optimal IDR thresholded) Top 25000 peaks (AP1 motif) MCF10A-Er-Src, HMS Treatment: 0.01% ethanol for 36 hours (optimal IDR thresholded) All 26215 peaks (SP motif) NB4, Stanford (optimal IDR thresholded) All 15886 peaks (SP motif) A549, HAIB Protocol: v041610.2 Treatment: 100nM dexamethasone for 1 hour (optimal IDR thresholded) All 2902 peaks (SP motif) ECC-1, HAIB, Replicate 1 Protocol: v042211.1 (raw peaks) All 10018 peaks (SP motif) ECC-1, HAIB, Replicate 2 Protocol: v042211.1 (raw peaks) CREB1 All 6816 peaks (SP motif) K562, HAIB, Replicate 1 Protocol: v042211.1 (raw peaks) All 9966 peaks (SP motif) HepG2, HAIB, Replicate 1 Protocol: v042211.1 (raw peaks) All 5299 peaks (SP motif) HepG2, HAIB, Replicate 2 Protocol: v042211.1 (raw peaks) All 23689 peaks (IRF motif) GM12878, HAIB CREM (optimal IDR thresholded) Top 10000 peaks (SP motif) All 5041 peaks (SP motif) HeLa-S3, USC (optimal IDR thresholded) E2F1 All 10247 peaks (SP motif) HeLa-S3, USC Target: HA-E2F1 (optimal IDR thresholded) All 3429 peaks (SP motif) GM12878, Stanford (optimal IDR thresholded) All 2824 peaks (SP motif) HeLa-S3, USC E2F4 (optimal IDR thresholded) All 8170 peaks (SP motif) K562, USC (optimal IDR thresholded) All 3426 peaks (SP motif) HeLa-S3, USC (SPP obtained from Factorbook) All 14305 peaks (SP motif) K562, HAIB, Replicate 1 Protocol: v041610.2 (raw peaks) E2F6 All 41821 peaks (SP motif) K562, HAIB, Replicate 2 Protocol: v041610.2 (raw peaks) All 11853 peaks (SP motif) K562, USC (raw peaks) All 22962 peaks (SP motif) GM12878, HAIB Protocol: v041610.1 (optimal IDR thresholded) All 10176 peaks (SP motif) MCF7, HAIB, Replicate 2 ELF1 Protocol: v042211.1 (raw peaks) All 3558 peaks (SP motif) SK-N-SH, HAIB, Replicate 2 Protocol: v042211.1 (raw peaks) All 5577 peaks (SP motif) GM12878, Stanford (optimal IDR thresholded) ELK1 All 4807 peaks (SP motif) HeLa-S3, Stanford (optimal IDR thresholded) All 5514 peaks (SP motif) A549, HAIB Protocol: v042211.1 Treatment: 0.02% ethanol for 1 hour Top 5000 peaks (ZNF143 motif) (optimal IDR thresholded) (optimal IDR thresholded) All 4107 peaks (SP motif) ETS1 GM12878, HAIB Protocol: PCR1x (optimal IDR thresholded) Top 500 peaks (ZBTB33 motif) Top 2500 peaks (ZNF143 motif) K562, HAIB Protocol: v041610.1 (optimal IDR thresholded) All 10802 peaks (IRF motif) GM12878, HAIB ETV6 (conservative IDR thresholded) All 6484 peaks (SP motif) Astrocyte, Broad (optimal IDR thresholded) All 5730 peaks (SP motif) Fibroblast of dermis, Broad (optimal IDR thresholded) All 2467 peaks (IRF motif) GM12878, Broad EZH2 (optimal IDR thresholded) All 1685 peaks (IRF motif) K562, Broad (optimal IDR thresholded) All 1721 peaks (SP motif) T-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia, Broad (optimal IDR thresholded) All 1394 peaks (SP motif) H1-hESC, HAIB, Replicate 1 FOSL1 Protocol: v041610.2 (raw peaks) All 22846 peaks (IRF motif) GM12878, HAIB FOXM1 Protocol: v042211.1 (optimal IDR thresholded) Top 500 peaks (IRF motif) All 18140 peaks (SP motif) PFSK-1, HAIB Protocol: PCR2x (optimal IDR thresholded) Top 500 peaks (SP motif) FOXP2 All 14659 peaks (IRF motif) SK-N-MC, HAIB Protocol: PCR2x (optimal IDR thresholded) All 12314 peaks (SP motif) A549, HAIB Protocol: v042211.1 Treatment: 0.02% ethanol for 1 hour (optimal IDR thresholded) All 14322 peaks (SP motif) K562, HAIB Protocol: v041610.1 (optimal IDR thresholded) Top 8000 peaks (SP motif) HepG2, HAIB Protocol: PCR2x (optimal IDR thresholded) GABPA All 9548 peaks (SP motif) MCF7, HAIB, Replicate 1 Protocol: v042211.1 (raw peaks) All 4319 peaks (SP motif) SK-N-SH, HAIB, Replicate 1 Protocol: v042211.1 (raw peaks) All 6682 peaks (SP motif) SK-N-SH, HAIB, Replicate 2 Protocol: v042211.1 (raw peaks) All 24222 peaks (TEAD motif) HUVEC, USC GATA2 (SPP obtained from Factorbook) 24178 peaks (AP1 motif), after masking the TEAD motif Top 5000 peaks (FOXA motif) T47D, USC Protocol: v041610.2 GATA3 Treatment: 0.02% dimethyl sulfoxide for 1 hour Top 15000 peaks (FOXA motif) (optimal IDR thresholded) (optimal IDR thresholded) All 2918 peaks (SP motif) K562, HMS GTF2B (optimal IDR thresholded) All 11780 peaks (SP motif) K562, Stanford HDAC1 (optimal IDR thresholded) Top 5000 peaks (FOXA motif) HepG2, HA HDAC2 Protocol: v041610.1 (optimal IDR thresholded) All 14436 peaks (SP motif) K562, HMS HMGN3 (optimal IDR thresholded) Top 500 peaks (B-Box motif) HepG2, Stanford HSF1 Treatment: forskolin for 6 hours (optimal IDR thresholded) Top 500 peaks (YY motif) K562, Stanford ID3 Target: eGFP-ID3 (conservative IDR thresholded) Top 2500 peaks (YY
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Molecular Profile of Tumor-Specific CD8+ T Cell Hypofunction in a Transplantable Murine Cancer Model
    Downloaded from http://www.jimmunol.org/ by guest on September 25, 2021 T + is online at: average * The Journal of Immunology , 34 of which you can access for free at: 2016; 197:1477-1488; Prepublished online 1 July from submission to initial decision 4 weeks from acceptance to publication 2016; doi: 10.4049/jimmunol.1600589 http://www.jimmunol.org/content/197/4/1477 Molecular Profile of Tumor-Specific CD8 Cell Hypofunction in a Transplantable Murine Cancer Model Katherine A. Waugh, Sonia M. Leach, Brandon L. Moore, Tullia C. Bruno, Jonathan D. Buhrman and Jill E. Slansky J Immunol cites 95 articles Submit online. Every submission reviewed by practicing scientists ? is published twice each month by Receive free email-alerts when new articles cite this article. Sign up at: http://jimmunol.org/alerts http://jimmunol.org/subscription Submit copyright permission requests at: http://www.aai.org/About/Publications/JI/copyright.html http://www.jimmunol.org/content/suppl/2016/07/01/jimmunol.160058 9.DCSupplemental This article http://www.jimmunol.org/content/197/4/1477.full#ref-list-1 Information about subscribing to The JI No Triage! Fast Publication! Rapid Reviews! 30 days* Why • • • Material References Permissions Email Alerts Subscription Supplementary The Journal of Immunology The American Association of Immunologists, Inc., 1451 Rockville Pike, Suite 650, Rockville, MD 20852 Copyright © 2016 by The American Association of Immunologists, Inc. All rights reserved. Print ISSN: 0022-1767 Online ISSN: 1550-6606. This information is current as of September 25, 2021. The Journal of Immunology Molecular Profile of Tumor-Specific CD8+ T Cell Hypofunction in a Transplantable Murine Cancer Model Katherine A.
    [Show full text]
  • A Flexible Microfluidic System for Single-Cell Transcriptome Profiling
    www.nature.com/scientificreports OPEN A fexible microfuidic system for single‑cell transcriptome profling elucidates phased transcriptional regulators of cell cycle Karen Davey1,7, Daniel Wong2,7, Filip Konopacki2, Eugene Kwa1, Tony Ly3, Heike Fiegler2 & Christopher R. Sibley 1,4,5,6* Single cell transcriptome profling has emerged as a breakthrough technology for the high‑resolution understanding of complex cellular systems. Here we report a fexible, cost‑efective and user‑ friendly droplet‑based microfuidics system, called the Nadia Instrument, that can allow 3′ mRNA capture of ~ 50,000 single cells or individual nuclei in a single run. The precise pressure‑based system demonstrates highly reproducible droplet size, low doublet rates and high mRNA capture efciencies that compare favorably in the feld. Moreover, when combined with the Nadia Innovate, the system can be transformed into an adaptable setup that enables use of diferent bufers and barcoded bead confgurations to facilitate diverse applications. Finally, by 3′ mRNA profling asynchronous human and mouse cells at diferent phases of the cell cycle, we demonstrate the system’s ability to readily distinguish distinct cell populations and infer underlying transcriptional regulatory networks. Notably this provided supportive evidence for multiple transcription factors that had little or no known link to the cell cycle (e.g. DRAP1, ZKSCAN1 and CEBPZ). In summary, the Nadia platform represents a promising and fexible technology for future transcriptomic studies, and other related applications, at cell resolution. Single cell transcriptome profling has recently emerged as a breakthrough technology for understanding how cellular heterogeneity contributes to complex biological systems. Indeed, cultured cells, microorganisms, biopsies, blood and other tissues can be rapidly profled for quantifcation of gene expression at cell resolution.
    [Show full text]
  • Distinct Roles of Jun : Fos and Jun : ATF Dimers in Oncogenesis
    Oncogene (2001) 20, 2453 ± 2464 ã 2001 Nature Publishing Group All rights reserved 0950 ± 9232/01 $15.00 www.nature.com/onc Distinct roles of Jun : Fos and Jun : ATF dimers in oncogenesis Hans van Dam*,1 and Marc Castellazzi2 1Department of Molecular Cell Biology, Leiden University Medical Center, Sylvius Laboratories, PO Box 9503, 2300 RA Leiden, The Netherlands; 2Unite de Virologie Humaine, Institut National de la Sante et de la Recherche MeÂdicale (INSERM-U412), Ecole Normale SupeÂrieure, 46 alleÂe d'Italie, 69364 Lyon Cedex 07, France Jun : Fos and Jun : ATF complexes represent two classes dimers with emphasis on their roles in oncogenic of AP-1 dimers that (1) preferentially bind to either transformation in avian model systems. Previous heptameric or octameric AP-1 binding sites, and (2) are reviews on AP-1 and cell transformation include dierently regulated by cellular signaling pathways and references: (Angel and Karin, 1991; Wisdom, 1999; oncogene products. To discriminate between the func- Vogt, 1994; Karin et al., 1997; van Dam and van der tions of Jun : Fos, Jun: ATF and Jun : Jun, mutants were Eb, 1994; Hagmeyer et al., 1995). developed that restrict the ability of Jun to dimerize either to itself, or to Fos(-like) or ATF(-like) partners. Introduction of these mutants in chicken embryo Jun : Fos and Jun : ATF transcription factors: dimeric ®broblasts shows that Jun : Fra2 and Jun : ATF2 dimers complexes with variable composition and activities play distinct, complementary roles in in vitro oncogenesis by inducing either anchorage independence or growth AP-1 sub-units: members of the bZip protein family factor independence, respectively.
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix 2. Significantly Differentially Regulated Genes in Term Compared with Second Trimester Amniotic Fluid Supernatant
    Appendix 2. Significantly Differentially Regulated Genes in Term Compared With Second Trimester Amniotic Fluid Supernatant Fold Change in term vs second trimester Amniotic Affymetrix Duplicate Fluid Probe ID probes Symbol Entrez Gene Name 1019.9 217059_at D MUC7 mucin 7, secreted 424.5 211735_x_at D SFTPC surfactant protein C 416.2 206835_at STATH statherin 363.4 214387_x_at D SFTPC surfactant protein C 295.5 205982_x_at D SFTPC surfactant protein C 288.7 1553454_at RPTN repetin solute carrier family 34 (sodium 251.3 204124_at SLC34A2 phosphate), member 2 238.9 206786_at HTN3 histatin 3 161.5 220191_at GKN1 gastrokine 1 152.7 223678_s_at D SFTPA2 surfactant protein A2 130.9 207430_s_at D MSMB microseminoprotein, beta- 99.0 214199_at SFTPD surfactant protein D major histocompatibility complex, class II, 96.5 210982_s_at D HLA-DRA DR alpha 96.5 221133_s_at D CLDN18 claudin 18 94.4 238222_at GKN2 gastrokine 2 93.7 1557961_s_at D LOC100127983 uncharacterized LOC100127983 93.1 229584_at LRRK2 leucine-rich repeat kinase 2 HOXD cluster antisense RNA 1 (non- 88.6 242042_s_at D HOXD-AS1 protein coding) 86.0 205569_at LAMP3 lysosomal-associated membrane protein 3 85.4 232698_at BPIFB2 BPI fold containing family B, member 2 84.4 205979_at SCGB2A1 secretoglobin, family 2A, member 1 84.3 230469_at RTKN2 rhotekin 2 82.2 204130_at HSD11B2 hydroxysteroid (11-beta) dehydrogenase 2 81.9 222242_s_at KLK5 kallikrein-related peptidase 5 77.0 237281_at AKAP14 A kinase (PRKA) anchor protein 14 76.7 1553602_at MUCL1 mucin-like 1 76.3 216359_at D MUC7 mucin 7,
    [Show full text]
  • The EWS/ATF1 Fusion Protein Contains a Dispersed Activation Domain That Functions Directly
    Oncogene (1998) 16, 1625 ± 1631 1998 Stockton Press All rights reserved 0950 ± 9232/98 $12.00 The EWS/ATF1 fusion protein contains a dispersed activation domain that functions directly Shu Pan, Koh Yee Ming, Theresa A Dunn, Kim KC Li and Kevin AW Lee Department of Biology, Hong Kong University of Science & Technology, Clear Water Bay, Kowloon, Hong Kong, P.R.C. Naturally occurring chromosomal fusion of the Ewings 1994). For all of the above malignancies, the EWS Sarcoma Oncogene (EWS) to distinct cellular transcrip- fusion proteins function as potent transcriptional tion factors, produces aberrant transcriptional activators activators (May et al., 1993b; Ohno et al., 1993; that function as dominant oncogenes. In Malignant Bailly et al., 1994; Brown et al., 1995; Lessnick et al., Melanoma of Soft Parts the N-terminal region of 1995; Fujimura et al., 1996) in a manner that is EWS is fused to C-terminal region of the cAMP- dependent on the EWS N-terminal region, hereafter inducible transcription factor ATF1. The EWS/ATF1 referred to as the EWS Activation Domain (EAD). It is fusion protein binds to ATF sites present in cAMP- envisioned that distinct tumors arise via de-regulation responsive promoters via the ATF1 bZIP domain and of dierent genes, depending on the fusion partner for activates transcription constitutively in a manner that is EWS. In cases where it has been examined, agents that dependent on an activation domain (EAD) present in antagonise EWS-fusion proteins also inhibit cellular EWS. To further de®ne the requirements for trans- proliferation (Ouchida et al., 1995; Kovar et al., 1996; activation we have performed mutational analysis of Yi et al., 1997; Tanaka et al., 1997), indicating that EWS/ATF1 in mammalian cells and report several new EWS fusions can play a role in both tumor formation ®ndings.
    [Show full text]
  • The Role of Components of the Chromatin Modification Machinery in Carcinogenesis of Clear Cell Carcinoma of the Ovary (Review)
    ONCOLOGY LETTERS 2: 591-597, 2011 The role of components of the chromatin modification machinery in carcinogenesis of clear cell carcinoma of the ovary (Review) HIROSHI SHIGETOMI, AKIRA OONOGI, TAIHEI TSUNEMI, YASUHITO TANASE, YOSHIHIKO YAMADA, HIROTAKA KAJIHARA, YORIKO YOSHIZAWA, NAOTO FURUKAWA, SHOJI HARUTA, SHOZO YOSHIDA, TOSHIYUKI SADO, HIDEKAZU OI and HIROSHI KOBAYASHI Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Nara Medical University, Nara, Japan Received January 21, 2011; Accepted April 27, 2011 DOI: 10.3892/ol.2011.316 Abstract. Recent data have provided information regarding 6. A marked resemblance between CCC and ccRCC the profiles of clear cell carcinoma of the ovary (CCC) with 7. Conclusions adenine-thymine rich interactive domain 1A (ARID1A) muta- tions. The purpose of this review was to summarize current 1. Introduction knowledge regarding the molecular mechanisms involved in CCC tumorigenesis and to describe the central role played Epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) is the most lethal gyne- by the aberrant chromatin remodeling. The present article cologic malignancy worldwide. Epidemiology calculations reviews the English-language literature for biochemical of lifetime risk for EOC are that 1 in 55 women is likely to studies on the ARID1A mutation and chromatin remodeling develop EOC during their lifetime (1). Since EOC is more in CCC. ARID1A is responsible for directing the SWI/SNF likely to be advanced stage with unfavorable tumor biology, complex to target promoters and regulates the transcription of there are serious limitations to the surgical and oncological certain genes by altering the chromatin structure around those treatment available. Therefore, it is crucial to determine the genes. The mutation spectrum of ARID1A was enriched for earliest possible diagnosis.
    [Show full text]
  • Table of Contents (PDF)
    194 (3) J Immunol 2015; 194:845-1383; ; http://www.jimmunol.org/content/194/3 This information is current as of September 25, 2021. Downloaded from Why The JI? Submit online. • Rapid Reviews! 30 days* from submission to initial decision • No Triage! Every submission reviewed by practicing scientists http://www.jimmunol.org/ • Fast Publication! 4 weeks from acceptance to publication *average Subscription Information about subscribing to The Journal of Immunology is online at: http://jimmunol.org/subscription by guest on September 25, 2021 Permissions Submit copyright permission requests at: http://www.aai.org/About/Publications/JI/copyright.html Email Alerts Receive free email-alerts when new articles cite this article. Sign up at: http://jimmunol.org/alerts The Journal of Immunology is published twice each month by The American Association of Immunologists, Inc., 1451 Rockville Pike, Suite 650, Rockville, MD 20852 All rights reserved. Print ISSN: 0022-1767 Online ISSN: 1550-6606. Th eJournal of Table of Contents Immunology VOL. 194 | NO. 3 | February 1, 2015 | Pages 845–1386 IN THIS ISSUE 845 Driving CARs over the Threshold See article p. 911 Finding Friends for AIRE See article p. 921 Thymocyte Peer Pressure See article p. 1057 One More Reason To Take Your Vitamins See article p. 1090 The Skin-ny on Secondary Lymphoid Organs in Transplantation See article p. 1364 PILLARS OF IMMUNOLOGY 847 Laying Bare the Nude Mouse Gene Downloaded from Graham Anderson and Nicholas I. McCarthy 849 Pillars Article: New Member of the Winged-Helix Protein Family Disrupted In Mouse And Rat Nude Mutations. Nature. 1994. 372: 103–107 Michael Nehls, Dietmar Pfeifer, Michael Schorpp, Hans Hedrich, and Thomas Boehm http://www.jimmunol.org/ BRIEF REVIEWS 855 The Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome: From Mechanism to Translation SeungHye Han and Rama K.
    [Show full text]
  • Development and Validation of a Protein-Based Risk Score for Cardiovascular Outcomes Among Patients with Stable Coronary Heart Disease
    Supplementary Online Content Ganz P, Heidecker B, Hveem K, et al. Development and validation of a protein-based risk score for cardiovascular outcomes among patients with stable coronary heart disease. JAMA. doi: 10.1001/jama.2016.5951 eTable 1. List of 1130 Proteins Measured by Somalogic’s Modified Aptamer-Based Proteomic Assay eTable 2. Coefficients for Weibull Recalibration Model Applied to 9-Protein Model eFigure 1. Median Protein Levels in Derivation and Validation Cohort eTable 3. Coefficients for the Recalibration Model Applied to Refit Framingham eFigure 2. Calibration Plots for the Refit Framingham Model eTable 4. List of 200 Proteins Associated With the Risk of MI, Stroke, Heart Failure, and Death eFigure 3. Hazard Ratios of Lasso Selected Proteins for Primary End Point of MI, Stroke, Heart Failure, and Death eFigure 4. 9-Protein Prognostic Model Hazard Ratios Adjusted for Framingham Variables eFigure 5. 9-Protein Risk Scores by Event Type This supplementary material has been provided by the authors to give readers additional information about their work. Downloaded From: https://jamanetwork.com/ on 10/02/2021 Supplemental Material Table of Contents 1 Study Design and Data Processing ......................................................................................................... 3 2 Table of 1130 Proteins Measured .......................................................................................................... 4 3 Variable Selection and Statistical Modeling ........................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Human Induced Pluripotent Stem Cell–Derived Podocytes Mature Into Vascularized Glomeruli Upon Experimental Transplantation
    BASIC RESEARCH www.jasn.org Human Induced Pluripotent Stem Cell–Derived Podocytes Mature into Vascularized Glomeruli upon Experimental Transplantation † Sazia Sharmin,* Atsuhiro Taguchi,* Yusuke Kaku,* Yasuhiro Yoshimura,* Tomoko Ohmori,* ‡ † ‡ Tetsushi Sakuma, Masashi Mukoyama, Takashi Yamamoto, Hidetake Kurihara,§ and | Ryuichi Nishinakamura* *Department of Kidney Development, Institute of Molecular Embryology and Genetics, and †Department of Nephrology, Faculty of Life Sciences, Kumamoto University, Kumamoto, Japan; ‡Department of Mathematical and Life Sciences, Graduate School of Science, Hiroshima University, Hiroshima, Japan; §Division of Anatomy, Juntendo University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan; and |Japan Science and Technology Agency, CREST, Kumamoto, Japan ABSTRACT Glomerular podocytes express proteins, such as nephrin, that constitute the slit diaphragm, thereby contributing to the filtration process in the kidney. Glomerular development has been analyzed mainly in mice, whereas analysis of human kidney development has been minimal because of limited access to embryonic kidneys. We previously reported the induction of three-dimensional primordial glomeruli from human induced pluripotent stem (iPS) cells. Here, using transcription activator–like effector nuclease-mediated homologous recombination, we generated human iPS cell lines that express green fluorescent protein (GFP) in the NPHS1 locus, which encodes nephrin, and we show that GFP expression facilitated accurate visualization of nephrin-positive podocyte formation in
    [Show full text]
  • Arid1a Is Essential for Intestinal Stem Cells Through Sox9 Regulation
    Arid1a is essential for intestinal stem cells through Sox9 regulation Yukiko Hiramatsua, Akihisa Fukudaa,1, Satoshi Ogawaa, Norihiro Gotoa, Kozo Ikutaa, Motoyuki Tsudaa, Yoshihide Matsumotoa, Yoshito Kimuraa, Takuto Yoshiokaa, Yutaka Takadaa, Takahisa Marunoa, Yuta Hanyua, Tatsuaki Tsuruyamab, Zhong Wangc, Haruhiko Akiyamad, Shigeo Takaishie, Hiroyuki Miyoshif, Makoto Mark Taketof, Tsutomu Chibag, and Hiroshi Senoa aDepartment of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Kyoto University Graduate School of Medicine, 606-8507 Kyoto, Japan; bClinical Bioresource Center, Kyoto University Hospital, 606-8507 Kyoto, Japan; cDepartment of Cardiac Surgery, Cardiovascular Research Center, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI 48109; dDepartment of Orthopaedics, Gifu University, 501-1194 Gifu, Japan; eLaboratory for Malignancy Control Research (DSK project), Medical Innovation Center, Kyoto University Graduate School of Medicine, 606-8507 Kyoto, Japan; fDivision of Experimental Therapeutics, Kyoto University Graduate School of Medicine, Yoshida-Konoe-cho, Sakyo-ku, 606-8506 Kyoto, Japan; and gKansai Electric Power Hospital, 553-0003 Osaka, Japan Edited by Hans Clevers, Hubrecht Institute, Utrecht, The Netherlands, and approved December 13, 2018 (received for review March 21, 2018) Inactivating mutations of Arid1a, a subunit of the Switch/sucrose tion (6, 7). In addition, a recent study showed that deletion of nonfermentable chromatin remodeling complex, have been Arid1a in the intestines induces colon cancer in mice (8). How- reported in multiple human cancers. Intestinal deletion of Arid1a ever, the functional role of Arid1a in intestinal homeostasis and has been reported to induce colorectal cancer in mice; however, its its underlying molecular mechanisms remain unknown. functional role in intestinal homeostasis remains unclear. We in- Recently, studies with transgenic and knockout mice have vestigated the functional role of Arid1a in intestinal homeostasis elucidated the molecular mechanisms underlying the develop- in mice.
    [Show full text]
  • Supplement. Transcriptional Factors (TF), Protein Name and Their Description Or Function
    Supplement. Transcriptional factors (TF), protein name and their description or function. TF Protein name TF description/function ARID3A AT rich interactive domain 3A (BRIGHT-like) This gene encodes a member of the ARID (AT-rich interaction domain) family of DNA binding proteins. ATF4 Activating Transcription Factor 4 Transcriptional activator. Binds the cAMP response element (CRE) (consensus: 5-GTGACGT[AC][AG]-3), a sequence present in many viral and cellular promoters. CTCF CCCTC-Binding Factor Chromatin binding factor that binds to DNA sequence specific sites. Involved in transcriptional regulation by binding to chromatin insulators and preventing interaction between promoter and nearby enhancers and silencers. The protein can bind a histone acetyltransferase (HAT)-containing complex and function as a transcriptional activator or bind a histone deacetylase (HDAC)-containing complex and function as a transcriptional repressor. E2F1-6 E2F transcription factors 1-6 The protein encoded by this gene is a member of the E2F family of transcription factors. The E2F family plays a crucial role in the control of cell cycle and action of tumor suppressor proteins and is also a target of the transforming proteins of small DNA tumor viruses. The E2F proteins contain several evolutionally conserved domains found in most members of the family. These domains include a DNA binding domain, a dimerization domain which determines interaction with the differentiation regulated transcription factor proteins (DP), a transactivation domain enriched in acidic amino acids, and a tumor suppressor protein association domain which is embedded within the transactivation domain. EBF1 Transcription factor COE1 EBF1 has been shown to interact with ZNF423 and CREB binding proteins.
    [Show full text]
  • Computational Discovery of Transcription Factors Associated with Drug Response
    OPEN The Pharmacogenomics Journal (2016) 16, 573–582 www.nature.com/tpj ORIGINAL ARTICLE Computational discovery of transcription factors associated with drug response C Hanson1, J Cairns2, L Wang2 and S Sinha3 This study integrates gene expression, genotype and drug response data in lymphoblastoid cell lines with transcription factor (TF)-binding sites from ENCODE (Encyclopedia of Genomic Elements) in a novel methodology that elucidates regulatory contexts associated with cytotoxicity. The method, GENMi (Gene Expression iN the Middle), postulates that single-nucleotide polymorphisms within TF-binding sites putatively modulate its regulatory activity, and the resulting variation in gene expression leads to variation in drug response. Analysis of 161 TFs and 24 treatments revealed 334 significantly associated TF–treatment pairs. Investigation of 20 selected pairs yielded literature support for 13 of these associations, often from studies where perturbation of the TF expression changes drug response. Experimental validation of significant GENMi associations in taxanes and anthracyclines across two triple-negative breast cancer cell lines corroborates our findings. The method is shown to be more sensitive than an alternative, genome-wide association study-based approach that does not use gene expression. These results demonstrate the utility of GENMi in identifying TFs that influence drug response and provide a number of candidates for further testing. The Pharmacogenomics Journal (2016) 16, 573–582; doi:10.1038/tpj.2015.74; published online 27 October 2015 INTRODUCTION regulatory activities are associated with cellular response to The field of pharmacogenetics aims to understand the relationship cytotoxic treatments (Figure 1a), with the expectation that in the between individual variation at the genetic level and variation in future the response may be manipulated by intervening with the cellular or physiological response to a drug.
    [Show full text]