Relationship Between E1A Binding to Cellular Proteins, C-Myc Activation and S-Phase Induction
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Oncogene (2007) 26, 781–787 & 2007 Nature Publishing Group All rights reserved 0950-9232/07 $30.00 www.nature.com/onc SHORT COMMUNICATION Relationship between E1A binding to cellular proteins, c-myc activation and S-phase induction S Baluchamy1,3,4, N Sankar1,3, A Navaraj1,5, E Moran2 and B Thimmapaya1 1Department of Microbiology–Immunology Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University, Chicago, IL, USA and 2Fels Institute for Cancer Research and Molecular Biology, Temple University School of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA, USA We recently showed that p300/CREB-binding protein Cell transformation by the adenoviral E1A oncoprotein (CBP) plays an important role in maintaining cells in G0/ is dependent on its binding to and inactivating several G1 phase by keeping c-myc in a repressed state. host proteins including p400, p300, pRb, and the two Consistent with this, adenovirus E1A oncoprotein induces Rb family proteins p130 and p107, PCAF, TRRAP and c-myc in a p300-dependent manner, and the c-myc GCN5 (reviewed in Moran, 1993; Barbeau et al., 1994; induction is linked to S-phase induction. The induction Frisch and Mymryk, 2002); for an extensive list of of S phase by E1A is dependent on its binding to and references on this topic please refer to the web site inactivating several host proteins including p300/CBP. To http://www.geocities.com/jmymryk.geo/. These host determine whether there is a correlation between the host proteins are found in distinct chromatin remodeling proteins binding to the N-terminal region of E1A, complexes that modulate gene expression either by activation of c-myc and induction of S phase, we assayed activating or repressing transcription. In most cases, the c-myc and S-phase induction in quiescent human cells specific transcriptional targets of these complexes in the by infecting them with Ad N-terminal E1A mutants with context of cell cycle and the mechanism by which E1A mutations that specifically affect binding to different interferes in their function are not known. pRb, p130 chromatin-associated proteins including pRb, p300, p400 and p107proteins in association with histone deacety- and p300/CBP-associated factor (PCAF). We show that lases repress E2F1 function that is critical for the the mutants that failed to bind to p300 or pRb were induction of S phase (Harbour, 2001). p400 is a severely defective for c-myc and S-phase induction. The component of the human TIP60/NuA4 complex con- induction of c-myc and S phase was only moderately taining histone acetyl transferase (HAT) activity that affected when E1A failed to bind to p400. Furthermore, modulates both transcriptional repression and activa- analysis of the E1A mutants that fail to bind to p300, and tion (Fuchs et al., 2001; Doyon et al., 2004). p300 and both p300 and PCAF suggests that PCAF may also play a CREB-binding protein (CBP) are two large highly role in c-myc repression, and that the two chromatin- homologous nuclear phosphoproteins containing associated proteins may repress c-myc independently. In HAT activity that function as transcriptional coactivators summary, these results suggest that c-myc deregulation by and link chromatin remodeling with transcription E1A through its interaction with these chromatin-asso- (Goodman and Smolik, 2000). TRRAP is found in ciated proteins is an important step in the E1A-mediated three distinct human HAT complexes including the cell cycle deregulation and possibly in cell transformation. TIP60 HAT complex and two other complexes that are Oncogene (2007) 26, 781–787. doi:10.1038/sj.onc.1209825; similar to yeast SAGA (Spt-Ada-Gcn5-acetyl transferase published online 24 July 2006 complex) containing either GCN5 or PCAF (reviewed in Sterner and Berger, 2000). Keywords: E1A; p300; c-myc repression; cell cycle Until recently, the significance of E1A binding to p300 in the E1A-mediated cell cycle deregulation and cell transformation was not known. We recently showed that in quiescent human cells, p300/CBP plays an important role in keeping c-myc in a repressed state. Depletion and induction of p300/CBP in serum-starved cells led to induction and repression, respectively, of Correspondence: Dr B Thimmapaya, Department of Microbiology— c-myc and DNA synthesis (Kolli et al., 2001; Baluchamy Immunology, Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University, et al., 2003; Rajabi et al., 2005). Consistent with this, we 303 East Chicago Avenue, Olson 8452, Chicago, IL 60611, USA. E-mail: [email protected] showed that in quiescent cells, E1A induced c-myc in a 3These two authors contributed equally to this work. p300-dependent manner indicating that E1A interferes 4Current address: Department of Genetics and Biochemistry, Uni- with p300/CBP repression of c-myc (Kolli et al., 2001). versity of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA. To determine whether or not there is a correlation 5Current address: Department of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA, USA. between E1A binding to host proteins, and induction of Received 28 September 2005; revised 9 June 2006; accepted 11 June 2006; c-myc and S phase, we have studied a series of previously published online 24 July 2006 characterized E1A mutants for their capacity to induce c-myc activation by adenovirus E1A S Baluchamy et al 782 c-myc and to enter S phase. Our results show that the either of the mutations alone; Wang et al., 1995), it was E1A mutants that do not bind to p300 or Rb do not as defective as 928 in inducing c-myc, suggesting that the induce c-myc and S phase, whereas a mutant that does effects of RG2 mutation were further reduced by 928 not bind to p400 induces both c-myc and cell cycle mutation suggesting that WT E1A may recruit both efficiently. In addition, our studies suggest that E1A p300 and Rb simultaneously as suggested earlier (Wang binding to PCAF may also independently contribute to et al., 1995). In contrast, mutant dl2–36 (aa 2–36 c-myc induction. deleted) that binds to neither p300 nor p400 showed a Figure 1 shows a schematic of the E1A mutants dramatic decrease in c-myc RNA levels that was analysed in this study that were characterized exten- comparable to that of control samples. All of the E1A sively by several laboratories with respect to their mutants used in these studies expressed their respective capacity to bind to different host proteins in vivo, proteins, at reasonable levels as shown by a Western induce DNA synthesis and transform rodent cells in blot in Figure 2d. culture in the presence of activated ras (references cited Comparison of the c-myc induction and the protein above; also see Egan et al., 1988; Fuchs et al., 2001; binding properties of the mutant dl26–35, RG2 and dl2– Lang and Hearing, 2003). To determine the capacity of 36 suggested that host proteins other than Rb and p300 these mutants to induce c-myc and DNA synthesis in might also repress c-myc. For example, mutant dl26–35 human cells, we used MCF10A cells (an immortalized induces c-myc to near-normal levels (Figure 2a), and it non-transformed human breast epithelial cell line; Soule does not bind to p400, and also TRRAP and GCN5; its et al., 1990) that can be growth arrested by serum p300 and PCAF binding capacity is not affected (Lang starvation and show normal serum-stimulated induction and Hearing, 2003). RG2, which retains about 40% of of c-myc and cell cycle (Kolli et al., 2001). its Myc-inducing capacity, binds to p400 at normal To determine the levels of c-myc induced by the E1A levels, whereas it does not bind to p300 (TRRAP and mutants, serum-starved MCF10A cells were infected GCN5 binding is not tested). In contrast, dl2–36 that is with Ad mutants described above for 12 h, and the RNA inactive in inducing c-myc does not bind to both p400 samples were analysed using a quantitative real-time and p300. As dl2–36 also contains dl26–35 deletion, it is PCR assay as described in the legend to Figure 2. An Ad not expected to bind to TRRAP and GCN5 as well. vector expressing beta-galactosidase (Adb-gal) was used Thus, it seemed possible that the total loss of c-myc as a control, and the fold-increase in c-myc induction by induction by dl2–36 may be owing to its inability to bind the E1A mutants was compared to that of Adb-gal- to p300 and another protein such as PCAF as PCAF infected cells. As shown in Figure 2a, there was about and p300 binding regions on E1A overlap (Lang and sixfold induction of c-myc in WT-infected cells. In Hearing, 2003). To test this possibility, MCF10A cells contrast, in cells infected with RG2 (arginine-2 changed were infected for 16 h with WT, RG2 and dl2–36 along to glycine) that does not bind to p300, c-myc induction with an Ad vector expressing FLAG epitope-tagged was only about 2.5-fold. Similarly, the mutant 928 PCAF from the cytomegalovirus (CMV) promoter (cysteine-128 changed to glycine) that does not bind to (AdPCAF). The cell lysates were immunoprecipitated Rb also was severely defective for c-myc induction with with an anti-FLAG antibody followed by Western a 1.7-fold increase of c-myc RNA levels, suggesting a immunoblotting with an anti-E1A antibody. As shown role for pRb in c-myc repression. E1A mutant that does in Figure 2e, both WT and RG2 E1A proteins bound to not bind to p400 (dl1102, deletion of aa 26–35; referred PCAF at comparable levels. Reverse experiment (Im- to here as dl26–35) induced near-normal levels of c-myc munoprecipitation with anti-E1A and Western with RNA (5.5-fold).