Retrotransposition of human LINE-1 (L1) element, a major representative non-LTR retrotransposon in the human genome, is known to be a source of insertional mutagenesis. However, nothing is known about effects of L1 retrotransposition on cell growth and differentiation. To investigate the potential for such biological effects and the impact that human L1 retrotransposition has upon cancer cell growth, we examined a panel of human L1 transformed cell lines following a complete retrotransposition process. The results demonstrated that transposition of L1 leads to the activation of the p53-mediated apoptotic pathway in human cancer cells that possess a wild-type p53. In addition, we found that inactivation of p53 in cells, where L1 was undergoing retrotransposition, inhibited the induction of apoptosis. This suggests an association between active retrotransposition and a competent p53 response in which induction of apoptosis is a major outcome. These data are consistent with a model in which human retrotransposition is sensed by the cell as a "genetic damaging event" and that massive retrotransposition triggers signaling pathways resulting in apoptosis.
Retrotransposition of humanLINE-1 (L1) element, a major representative non-LTR retrotransposon in the human genome, is known to be a source of insertional mutagenesis. However, nothing is known about effects of L1 retrotransposition on cell growth and differentiation. To investigate the potential for such biological effects and the impact that human L1 retrotransposition has upon cancer cell growth, we examined a panel of human L1 transformed cell lines following a complete retrotransposition process. The results demonstrated that transposition of L1 leads to the activation of the p53-mediated apoptotic pathway in humancancer cells that possess a wild-type p53. In addition, we found that inactivation of p53 in cells, where L1 was undergoing retrotransposition, inhibited the induction of apoptosis. This suggests an association between active retrotransposition and a competent p53 response in which induction of apoptosis is a major outcome. These data are consistent with a model in which human retrotransposition is sensed by the cell as a "genetic damaging event" and that massive retrotransposition triggers signaling pathways resulting in apoptosis.
Retrotransposons are mobile retroelements that utilize
reverse transcriptase and RNA intermediate to relocate to new
locations within the cellular genome. Retrotransposons are
subdivided into two subclasses: LTR-(long terminal repeats) and non-LTR-retrotransposons
[1, 2].
Non-LTR-retrotransposons are typified by
the LINE-1 (long interspersed nuclear element 1), or L1, in
mammals [3,
4]. L1 is one of the repetitive sequences in the
genome, with 500 000 copies comprising about 17% of the genome
[5, 6,
7]. Most human L1s (> 99.8%) are unable to transpose
as a result of 5′ truncations, rearrangements, or nonsense
mutations [8, 9].
However, evidence exists that L1 transposition continues to occur.Several examples of de novo transposition events have
been identified largely as the result of germline and somatic
mutations caused by the insertion of new L1 elements into
functional genes [10, 11,
12, 13,
14, 15,
16, 17]. Constitutive
methylation of CpG sites in an L1 promoter is considered to be
one of the major mechanisms for repression of retrotransposition
[18, 19,
20]. In these cases, the CpG sites in an L1
promoter are normally heavily methylated [21] and
demethylation of core CpG sites in the promoter leads to
increased levels of L1 transcription [18]. Interestingly,
demethylation and subsequent activation of an L1 promoter have
been observed in bladder cancer cells [22], suggesting that
release of the methylation constraints and activation of L1 may
be a common cancer-associated event. Indeed, DNA methylation is
considered to be an important mechanism for silencing
retroelements in the mammalian genome, and it has been
demonstrated that loss of genomic methylation activates L1
elements and causes p53-dependent apoptosis [23].
Thus, there seem to be selective pressure for silencing of L1 in
“normal” cells and contrary activation of L1 in cancer cells.In this paper we show that L1 elements capable of high-frequency
retrotransposition in cultured human cells have a differential
impact upon cell growth depending on the cells p53
status. Humancancer cells that contained a functional
p53 underwent apoptosis following L1 retrotransposition,
while humancancer cells mutant for p53 did not. These
results imply that increased retrotransposition is recognized as
DNA damage and demonstrate that active retrotransposition by L1
induces p53-dependent cell killing.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Cell culture, antibodies, and plasmids
HCT-116, SW480, and DLD-1 were maintained in Dulbecco's modified
Eagle's medium (DMEM)/F-12 (Gibco-BRL, Calif) with 10% fetal bovine
serum (FBS), 1% L-Glutamine, and 1% penicillin-streptomycin, in
the presence of 5% CO2/95% air at 37°C.
HT1080wt, HT1080mut, and MCF-7 were maintained in Iscove's
modified Dulbecco's medium (Gibco-BRL) with 10% FBS, 1%
L-Glutamine, and 1% penicillin-streptomycin. Normal human fibroblasts (NHF) were maintained
in Dulbecco's modified Eagle's medium (DMEM)/H-21 with 10% FBS,
1% L-Glutamine, and 1% penicillin-streptomycin.The antibodies anti-p53, anti-Bcl2,
anti-Bax, and anti-HRP-conjugated secondary antibody were
purchased from Santa Cruz Biotechnology, Calif. Anti-α-tubulin
was purchased from Sigma (Saint Louis, Mo). The plasmid pJM101
containing human L1 tagged with an antisense NEO cassette
was obtained from John V. Moran (University of Michigan Medical
School, Mich). The control plasmid, pBRV1 containing only NEO gene
under SV40 promoter, was a gift from Vladimir Larionov (NCI,
NIH) and has been previously described [24]. The plasmids
p1321 (E6), normal E6/E7 and a control E6/E7 deficient plasmid,
p1318 (ΔE6) were obtained from Peter M. Howley (Harvard
Medical School Mass). The HPV16 E6/E7 containing
construct used, p1321, has been described
previously [25]. To construct the plasmid, a
SalI/HindIII fragment containing the E6/E7 ORFs
of HPV16 was ligated to the HindIII/SalI site
in the p1318 vector, which contained a human β-actin
enhancer/promoter and a β-actin 3′ UTR polyadenylation
signal sequence. A control E6/E7-deficient plasmid p1318 was
produced by removing the SalI/HindIII fragment.
Cell transfection and L1 retrotransposition assay
5 × 105 cells were seeded in 60 mm dishes and grown
to 70% confluence. Transfections were carried out using
lipofectamine (Gibco-BRL). 2 μg of plasmid pJM101 DNA and
8 μL of lipofectamine reagent were used for each
transfection. pJM101 contains a complete human L1 and is marked
with two selectable genes, hygromycin and neomycin [26].
16 hours after transfection the medium was
changed, and 3 days later, HygR cells were selected
by growth in the medium containing 250 μg/mL hygromycin
for 14 days (Figure 1). HygR cells were trypsinized and plated
in growth medium containing 300–400 μg/mL G418. After 14
days the resistant cells (G418R) were either fixed
and stained to score the retrotransposition frequency or
collected for DNA and protein extractions.
Figure 1
Retrotransposition rationale. L1 plasmid is tagged with an antisense copy
of the indicator gene NEO, which is disrupted by an
intron, (I), in the sense orientation of L1. The NEO
gene is flanked by a heterologous promoter (P2) and a
polyadenylation signal (An). This ensures that
G418R cells will only appear when an L1 transcript
(P1: L1 promoter) is spliced (SD: splicing donor, SA: splicing
acceptor), reverse transcribed, and reintegrated into chromosomal
DNA, thus allowing expression of the uninterrupted NEO
gene (NEO active). L1 tagged construct is subcloned into pCEP4
expression vector, which contains hygromycin selectable marker gene.
Retrotransposition rationale. L1 plasmid is tagged with an antisense copy
of the indicator gene NEO, which is disrupted by an
intron, (I), in the sense orientation of L1. The NEO
gene is flanked by a heterologous promoter (P2) and a
polyadenylation signal (An). This ensures that
G418R cells will only appear when an L1 transcript
(P1: L1 promoter) is spliced (SD: splicing donor, SA: splicing
acceptor), reverse transcribed, and reintegrated into chromosomal
DNA, thus allowing expression of the uninterrupted NEO
gene (NEO active). L1 tagged construct is subcloned into pCEP4
expression vector, which contains hygromycin selectable marker gene.Human L1 retrotransposition in
different cancer cell lines. (a) Colony
forming ability of HCT-116 and SW480 cell lines. 103
cells either untransfected or transfected with L1
and selected for either hygromycin or G418 resistance
were plated in triplicate until colonies were
measurable, then stained and counted. Both cell lines
exhibit similar colony forming ability when mock-treated
or selected only for stable transformation with the
plasmid (HygR). However, a dramatic
difference in their survival ability was observed in G418-resistant
clones bearing a retrotransposition-competent
L1. (b) Confirmation of L1 retrotransposition by PCR in
HCT-116 and SW480 cell lines. Lane M: DNA marker
λ/HindIII; lane 1: HCT-116 mock-transfected cells;
lane 2: HCT-116 HygR
cells did not show the spliced form in either cell line;
lane 3: HCT-116 G418R cells showing the
correctly spliced form of NEO at 468 bp;
lane 4: SW480 mock-transfected cells; lane 5: SW480
HygR cells; lane 6: SW480G418R
cells; lane 7: no DNA; and lane 8: the DNA
plasmid alone with the unspliced form shown at 1361 bp.Analysis of apoptosis induction in the
presence of RC-L1. (a) Apoptosis was highly induced in
HCT-116 G418R cells with a wild-type p53
(G418R L1). No significant apoptosis induction was
detected in SW480 cells with a mutant p53. Both HCT-116
and SW480 transfected with the vector alone (G418R
NEO) did not show any apoptosis induction. Nuclease treatment was
used as positive control. (b) Specific induction of Bax
expression following L1 retrotransposition. HCT-116 cells
transfected with either the L1 plasmid (JM101) or the vector
alone (pBRV1). Bax induction was observed only in
G418R L1-transfected cells (lane 3). No Bax
expression was observed in mock-transfected cells (lane 1),
HygR cells transfected with L1 (Lane 2), or
G418R cells transfected with a plasmid containing a
NEO gene alone (lane 4). α-tubulin is shown as
loading control.p53 inactivation by human
papillomavirus E6 gene. HCT-116 cells transformed with L1
and selected for hygromycin resistance HygR were
either (a) subjected to G418 selection directly (L1) or (b)
exposed to either a deleted form of E6, ΔE6
(L1 + ΔE6), or (c) a complete form of E6
(L1 + E6). A histogram showing the effects of L1
retrotransposition on the number of clones in the presence and
absence of E6 is shown in (d).L1 retrotransposition in
isogenic HT1080 cells. (a) Confirmation of L1
retrotransposition in HT1080 wt and HT1080 mut cells: a
468 bp DNA fragment was generated by PCR in HT1080 wt and
HT1080 mut G418R clones demonstrating a
correct splicing of the NEO marker gene. (b)
Western blot analysis: whole cell extracts from HT1080 wt
and HT1080 mut cells showing an increase of Bax
expression following transfection with human L1 (1) and
selection for G418R clones (2) harboring
L1-retrotransposition elements predominantly in
HT1080 wt. (c) Densitometric analysis of Bax expression
levels in HT1080 wt and HT1080 mut before and after
generation of G418R clones. More pronounced
increase of Bax expression in HT1080 wt in comparison
with HT1080 mut. Shown are relative arbitrary numbers.
(d) Western blot analysis of HT10807thinsp;wt cells: Bcl2
expression before transfection (1) and after selection of
G418R clones following L1 retrotransposition
(2). (e) Western blot analysis of HT1080 mut cells:
Bcl2 expression before transfection (1) and
after selection of G418R (2).
α-tubulin is shown as loading control.Analysis of L1 retrotransposition
frequency in multiple cell lines. Cells with mutant
p53 exhibit high retrotransposition frequency,
while cell lines with wild-type p53 exhibit a
lower frequency.
Retrotransposition frequency and colony forming ability
Retrotransposition frequency was scored as the number of
G418R colonies per 106 HYGR cells
plated. 106 HygR cells were plated in triplicate
in the presence of G418 and maintained for 14 days under this
selection. Growing clones were fixed, stained with Giemsa
stain solution, and counted.For the colony forming ability, one thousand cells (103) from
HCT-116 and SW480 cell lines, either mock transfected or
transfected with L1 and selected for either hygromycin or G418
resistance, were plated in triplicate. Colony forming ability is
determined as the number of colonies generated from 103 plated
cells and given as a percentage.
Polymerase chain reaction
Genomic DNA was extracted using DNAzol reagent (Molecular Research
Center, Inc, Ohio). PCR was carried out in 50 μL reaction
volume. Each PCR reaction contained 4 mM MgCl2,
5 μL 10 X buffer, 0.2 mM dNTPs, 200 ng of
each primer, 10 U of Taq polymerase, and 200 ng of DNA
template. The reactions were carried out under the following
conditions: 94°C for 10 minutes, 30 cycles of
94°C for 1 minute, 64°C for 30 seconds,
and 72°C for 30 seconds, then 72°C for
10 minutes. One fifth of the reaction volume was loaded and
separated on 1% agarose gels containing ethidium bromide.
Immunoblotting
Cells, either mock-transfected or transfected with pJM101 or
pBRV1 (as control), were lysed in the following buffer: 120 mM
NaCl, 25 mM Tris, pH 7.5, 1% Triton x-100, and protease
inhibitors cocktail (Complete Mini, Roche, Germany). The cells
were centrifuged and the proteins collected and quantified using
the Bio-Rad assay (Bio-Rad, Calif). The proteins were
electrophoresed through 12% SDS-polyacrylamide gels, and
transferred to nylon membranes (Immobilon-P). The membranes were
first incubated in 5% blocking solution (nonfat dry milk in 1
X PBS) for two hours at room temperature, then incubated in
blocking solution overnight at 4°C with a primary
antibody: anti-p53 (1 : 500 dilution),
anti-Bcl2 (1 : 500 dilution), anti-Bax (Santa Cruz
Biotechnology) (1 : 250 dilution), or anti-α-tubulin
(Sigma, Saint Louis, Mo) (1 : 1000 dilution) as a loading control.
The membranes were washed first for 15 minutes and then 4 times for
5 minutes each in PBST (PBS 1 X + 0.1% Tween 20). The
blots were incubated in blocking solution for 45 minutes at room
temperature with the secondary HRP-conjugated antibody (Santa
Cruz Biotechnology), and washed in PBST as described above.
The detection was performed using the Western Blotting Luminol Reagent
(Santa Cruz Biotechnology).
Apoptosis detection assay
Apoptosis was assayed using TiterTACS kit (Trevigen, Md) following the
manufacturer's recommendations on cells plated and
fixed in 96-well plates. Cells were either mock-transfected or
transfected with L1 plasmid (pJM101) or with NEO plasmid
(pBRV1) and selected for G418 resistance. As a control, cells were
treated with nuclease allowing complete degradation of DNA.
TiterTACS is a colorimetric assay to quantify
apoptosis by detecting DNA fragmentation in cells.
Inactivation of p53 by human papillomavirus E6/E7 genes
HCT116 cells were seeded in 6-well dishes (2 × 105
cells/well) and grown to 70% confluence in DMEM-complete media.
First, cells were transfected with pJM101 and selected for
hygromycin resistance as described earlier. After 14 days, the
HygR cells were trypsinized, pooled, and expanded in
DMEM-Hyg until 70% confluence. HygR cells were then
transfected with either no DNA (mock), 1 μg of
complete E6 (E6), or 1 μg of ΔE6 (E6-deleted form)
plasmid DNA and 8 μL of lipofectamine reagent. Three days
later, the cells were placed in DMEM-complete containing
300–400 μg/mL G418 (DMEM-G418). After 10–14 days, the
G418R cells were fixed and stained with 0.4% Giemsa
solution for visualization and counting. The number of
G418R colonies was scored and the retrotransposition
frequency was determined.
RESULTS
Human L1 retrotransposition in cancer cells
In order to investigate the impact of human L1 transposition on
cancer cell growth, we first established stable transformants
using a retrotransposition assay which employed a selectable
molecular marker in cultured cells (Figure 1). The
assay is based on the excision of an inverted intron from a
neomycin phosphotransferase (NEO) gene [26].
Before retrotransposition the intron prevents NEO expression.
During retrotransposition the intron is spliced out of the RNA
intermediate and allows NEO expression upon reinsertion
of the L1. We analyzed two colorectal cancer cell lines with
different p53 status: HCT-116
(p53wt) and SW480
(p53mut) for their ability to allow L1
retrotransposition by measuring their colony forming ability
before and after transfection with L1 plasmid
(Figure 2a). Both cell lines showed similar
survivability, and both seem to equally support transfection with
L1 and selection with hygromycin, as demonstrated in the
colony formation assay. Interestingly, we found a dramatic
difference between the two cell lines in the outcome of G418
selection, which allows for selection of cells harboring
retrotransposition events. Indeed, while we were able to recover-large
number of G418R clones from SW480 with mutant
p53, only a few clones were recovered from HCT-116 cell
line with wild-type p53 although the same number (106
cells) of HygR cells were plated for both cell lines
to carry out G418 selection (Figure 2a). We concluded
that it is the direct effect of retrotransposition in HCT-116
that results in reduced colony survival.
Figure 2
Human L1 retrotransposition in
different cancer cell lines. (a) Colony
forming ability of HCT-116 and SW480 cell lines. 103
cells either untransfected or transfected with L1
and selected for either hygromycin or G418 resistance
were plated in triplicate until colonies were
measurable, then stained and counted. Both cell lines
exhibit similar colony forming ability when mock-treated
or selected only for stable transformation with the
plasmid (HygR). However, a dramatic
difference in their survival ability was observed in G418-resistant
clones bearing a retrotransposition-competent
L1. (b) Confirmation of L1 retrotransposition by PCR in
HCT-116 and SW480 cell lines. Lane M: DNA marker
λ/HindIII; lane 1: HCT-116 mock-transfected cells;
lane 2: HCT-116 HygR
cells did not show the spliced form in either cell line;
lane 3: HCT-116 G418R cells showing the
correctly spliced form of NEO at 468 bp;
lane 4: SW480 mock-transfected cells; lane 5: SW480
HygR cells; lane 6: SW480 G418R
cells; lane 7: no DNA; and lane 8: the DNA
plasmid alone with the unspliced form shown at 1361 bp.
To test whether the G418R clones generated after
transfection have acquired resistance because the tagged L1
elements have undergone retrotransposition, we performed a PCR
analysis of these clones using primers flanking the neomycin
cassette. The results show that the retrotransposition marker,
the neomycin phosphotransferase gene, is correctly spliced as
evidenced by the detection of a 468 bp DNA fragment
(Figure 2b). This was also shown for HCT-116 and SW480
(Figure 2b, lane 3). As controls, we used genomic
DNA from mock-transfected cells, no DNA, or the DNA plasmid alone.
HygR cells did not show the spliced form in either
cell line (lane 2). In most cases, only the spliced form
(468 bp) was visualized on agarose gels, which indicates that
only the spliced and active form of neomycin gene can be stably
maintained in cells. However, the longer unspliced form
(1368 bp) can also sometimes be seen as extrachromosomal
molecules in early passage.To test whether this association between low number of
G418R clones and the p53 status is
applicable to other cell lines, we decided to analyze a panel of
cell lines from different tissues having either a wild-type or
mutant p53. This group included two fibrosarcoma cell
lines, HT1080wt (p53 wild type) and its derivative
HT1080mut (p53 mutant); a breast adenocarcinoma cell
line, MCF-7 (p53wt); and an NHF
(p53wt). The retrotransposition frequency was scored as
described. As before, cell lines harboring wild-type p53
were poorly supportive of retrotransposition
(Table 1). In contrast, the cell line with mutant
p53 exhibited higher frequencies of retrotransposition.
At this stage, low-frequency retrotransposition can be explained
either by the inability of cells expressing p53wt to
allow high L1 retrotransposition, or the inability to detect
clones undergoing retrotransposition in cells because of their
immediate loss.
Table 1
Analysis of L1 retrotransposition
frequency in multiple cell lines. Cells with mutant
p53 exhibit high retrotransposition frequency,
while cell lines with wild-type p53 exhibit a
lower frequency.
Cell line
p53 status
Retrotransposition frequency (× 106)
HCT-116
wt
68
SW480
mut
1000
DLD-1
mut
760
MCF-7
wt
1.5
HT1080wt
wt
6
HT1080mut
mut
793
NHF
wt
< 0.1
L1 induction of apoptosis in p53 (wt) cell lines
Since induction of apoptosis is an early event in DNA
damage-mediated p53-dependent response and since
p53 wild-type cells exhibit a dramatic decrease in their
survivability after L1 retrotransposition, we examined the role
of apoptosis in the observed differences in retrotransposition
frequency. We assayed for apoptosis using a colorimetric assay
allowing quantification by detection of DNA fragmentation. A
dramatic increase in apoptosis was detected in G418RHCT-116 cells, while no induction of apoptosis was detected in
G418RSW480 cells (Figure 3a). A nuclease
treatment was used as a positive control. To confirm that drug
selection using G418 is not associated with the induction of
apoptosis, we transfected these cells with a plasmid containing
only the NEO gene (pBRV1) without the L1 element. No
apoptosis was induced in these cells. Thus, these data
demonstrate that the induction of apoptosis is associated with
the presence of retrotransposition-competent L1.
Figure 3
Analysis of apoptosis induction in the
presence of RC-L1. (a) Apoptosis was highly induced in
HCT-116 G418R cells with a wild-type p53
(G418R L1). No significant apoptosis induction was
detected in SW480 cells with a mutant p53. Both HCT-116
and SW480 transfected with the vector alone (G418R
NEO) did not show any apoptosis induction. Nuclease treatment was
used as positive control. (b) Specific induction of Bax
expression following L1 retrotransposition. HCT-116 cells
transfected with either the L1 plasmid (JM101) or the vector
alone (pBRV1). Bax induction was observed only in
G418R L1-transfected cells (lane 3). No Bax
expression was observed in mock-transfected cells (lane 1),
HygR cells transfected with L1 (Lane 2), or
G418R cells transfected with a plasmid containing a
NEO gene alone (lane 4). α-tubulin is shown as
loading control.
To further test whether the induction of apoptosis is directly
associated with the presence of L1, proteins extracted from
HCT-116 transfected either with the L1 plasmid or with a neomycin
plasmid (vector alone) were analyzed by immunoblotting
(Figure 3b). The induction of Bax expression
was detected only in G418R cells derived from cells
transfected with L1 plasmid (lane 3). No induction of Bax
expression was observed in mock-transfected cells (lane 1),
HygR cells transfected with L1 (lane 2), or
G418R cells transfected with a plasmid containing
only NEO gene (vector alone) (lane 4).
Suppression of p53 by expression of E6 ablates L1-dependent apoptosis
The E6 protein encoded by the oncogenic human papillomaviruses
(HPVs) targets p53 for ubiquitin-dependent
proteolysis [27]. To address the role of a competent
p53 in the induction of apoptosis, we examined the
effects of L1 activity in cells in which p53 is
functionally inactivated by HPV E6 expression. We used the
ability of the HPV E6 gene to inactivate p53 in
order to examine the dependence of L1-mediated apoptosis on a
functional p53 protein. When HCT-116 cells are
transformed with L1 they undergo apoptosis and inhibition of cell
growth. When these same cells were transfected to express a
normal E6 gene (L1 + E6), the effect of L1 on cell growth
is reduced and the number of G418 resistant colonies increased
(Figure 4). When a parallel population of HCT-116
cells were transfected to express L1 and a deleted form of E6
(L1 + ΔE6), the L1 retrotransposition frequency
was reduced and colony formation was similar to L1 alone. These results are consistent
with the notion that L1-induced apoptosis requires a functional
p53.
Figure 4
p53 inactivation by human
papillomavirus E6 gene. HCT-116 cells transformed with L1
and selected for hygromycin resistance HygR were
either (a) subjected to G418 selection directly (L1) or (b)
exposed to either a deleted form of E6, ΔE6
(L1 + ΔE6), or (c) a complete form of E6
(L1 + E6). A histogram showing the effects of L1
retrotransposition on the number of clones in the presence and
absence of E6 is shown in (d).
L1 retrotransposition in isogenic HT1080 cells
We have conducted most of our comparative studies in two
colorectal cancer cell lines HCT-116 and SW480. These cells
differ not only by their p53 status, but also
by the status of some DNA repair genes, mainly mismatch repair
genes hMLH1 and hMH6. Therefore, we cannot rule
out the implication of other genes in the observed differences in
these cells ability to undergo apoptosis after the addition of
retrotransposition-competent L1 elements. Therefore, we further
studied the association between L1 retrotransposition and
p53 status in the isogenic cells HT1080wt, with wild-type
p53, and its derivative HT1080mut, with mutant
p53. HT1080 mutant cells (HT1080TG) have two independent
mutations in each of the p53 alleles and can
make p53 [28]. We showed that
G418R clones have indeed undergone the
retrotransposition for the marked L1 elements, using PCR
analysis. The spliced form of 468 bp was detected in both
HT1080wt and HT1080mut after transfection and selection for G418
resistance (Figure 5a). We analyzed protein
expression levels in HT1080wt and its derivative HT1080mut by
immunoblotting before and after transformation with human L1
(Figure 5b). We found that p53 is
overexpressed after transfection and selection for
G418R clones harboring retrotransposition-competent
L1 elements in both HT1080wt and HT1080mut. We also found
that Bax is overexpressed in HT1080wt in a much more pronounced
manner in comparison with HT1080mut. We quantified the
differences in Bax expression between HT1080wt and HT1080mut by
densitometric analysis (Figure 5c). While we found
that Bax expression was induced relatively about 8 times in
HT1080wt, the difference was less than double in HT1080mut
cells. In addition, we observed a decrease in Bcl2
expression level following L1 retrotransposition in HT1080wt
cells (Figure 5d) and to a slightly lower extent in
HT1080mut cells (Figure 5e). This is in agreement
with p53 being involved in the induction of
apoptosis following L1 retrotransposition, and in agreement with
our finding in other cell lines where we have observed a more
pronounced induction of apoptosis in cells with wild-type
p53.
Figure 5
L1 retrotransposition in
isogenic HT1080 cells. (a) Confirmation of L1
retrotransposition in HT1080 wt and HT1080 mut cells: a
468 bp DNA fragment was generated by PCR in HT1080 wt and
HT1080 mut G418R clones demonstrating a
correct splicing of the NEO marker gene. (b)
Western blot analysis: whole cell extracts from HT1080 wt
and HT1080 mut cells showing an increase of Bax
expression following transfection with human L1 (1) and
selection for G418R clones (2) harboring
L1-retrotransposition elements predominantly in
HT1080 wt. (c) Densitometric analysis of Bax expression
levels in HT1080 wt and HT1080 mut before and after
generation of G418R clones. More pronounced
increase of Bax expression in HT1080 wt in comparison
with HT1080 mut. Shown are relative arbitrary numbers.
(d) Western blot analysis of HT10807thinsp;wt cells: Bcl2
expression before transfection (1) and after selection of
G418R clones following L1 retrotransposition
(2). (e) Western blot analysis of HT1080 mut cells:
Bcl2 expression before transfection (1) and
after selection of G418R (2).
α-tubulin is shown as loading control.
DISCUSSION
Our understanding of the biology of L1 element, its
retrotransposition mechanism, and its ability to retrotranspose in
human cultured cells has increased over the last several years
[29, 30].
However, the cellular consequences of the presence
of L1 sequences and the support of L1 retrotransposition on the
stability of the genome are still poorly understood. Indeed, it
is becoming increasingly apparent that human L1
retrotransposition impacts the stability of the human genome and
evidence is mounting that human L1 is more than just an
insertional mutagen [31,
32, 33].
Interestingly, Morrish et al reported that L1 is capable of mediating DNA repair.
Specifically, the authors showed that the L1 element is capable
of retrotransposition using a pathway independent of endonuclease
but dependent on reverse transcriptase, suggesting that L1 can
integrate into preexisting DNA lesions resulting in
retrotransposition-mediated DNA repair [33].
Conversely, it has also been shown that human L1
retrotransposition induces genetic instability in vivo through
numerous L1 element inversions, extra nucleotide insertions, exon
deletions, chromosomal inversion, and 5′ transduction [30].
Thus, L1 has been associated with both stabilizing and
destabilizing molecular activities. The vast majority of these
studies have not addressed the consequences of L1 transposition
on genetic instability and cell growth.In this study we analyzed the impact of L1 retrotransposition on
humancancer cell growth and showed that L1 retrotransposition can
elicit a DNA damage response leading to apoptosis in p53
competent cells. Thus, the overriding cellular consequences of L1
retrotransposition would appear to derive from genome
destabilizing activities. We suggest two possible mechanisms
through which L1 elements might induce apoptosis. First,
since L1 creates DNA strand breaks using its own endonuclease
to create nicks in the insertion sites, these events might be
recognized by the cell as unrepaired DNA damage. This would be
especially true if the transposition were massively induced thus
triggering pathways for apoptosis. Despite the fact that the
proteins encoded by L1 elements work preferentially in
cis, members of the Alu class of retroelements are
believed to misappropriate L1 proteins in order to proliferate
[6, 34,
35]. Therefore, the introduction of exogenous
retrotransposition-competent L1 elements into cells by
transfection may activate not only endogenous L1 but probably
also Alu sequences by providing in trans encoded
proteins such as reverse transcriptase, thus contributing to a
burst of transposition. Pertinent to this discussion it was
recently reported that L1 reverse transcriptase can transactivate
other endogenous L1 sequences and even other L1-unrelated
sequences [36, 37,
38]. Thus, the delivery of
retrotransposition-competent L1 elements into cancer cells can
transactivate other endogenous repressed or “dormant” L1 and Alu
sequences leading to a release of “jumping” L1s and Alus, that
are ultimately sensed by the DNA repair machinery as a stress
signal. A second possible mechanism is that a class of
ribonucleoprotein particles (RNPs), consisting of transposition
complexes that contain L1 RNA and the L1-encoded proteins, might
separately elicit apoptosis. The heteronuclear ribonucleoproteins
(hnRNPs) C1 and C2 are targets of destruction within the cell
that has been induced to undergo apoptosis by a variety of
stimuli [39]. L1-RNPs might be inducers in addition to
targets of apoptosis. While we have yet to uncover the detailed
mechanism through which human L1 is capable of inducing apoptosis
in cancer cells with wild-type p53, our findings
demonstrate an interplay between L1 retrotransposition and
p53-mediated-induction of apoptosis in cells harboring
retrotransposition-competent L1s.Our finding supports a hypothesis in which the Bax gene plays a
role in the L1-induced apoptosis in p53 wild-type cells. In addition to Bax gene, there is still a growing
list of genes stimulated by p53 which are associated with
apoptosis induction, such as Fas, CD95,
DR5/killer, p85, IGF-BP3,
PAG608, and so forth. It should be noted that several of these
proapoptotic genes, as is also the case with Bax,
appear to be cell-type-specific and signal-dependent. In our
study, the induction of Bax expression and repression of
Bcl2 expression following L1 retrotransposition in both HCT-116
and HT1080 cells indicate that induction of apoptosis by L1
involves activation via pathway regulated by the Bax gene.The apoptotic gene Fas which is a cell surface “death receptor”
mediates apoptosis upon engagement by its ligand, FasL. Many
studies of transformed colon cell lines, such as these used in
this study as well as freshly isolated tumor cells of diverse
origin have revealed that the majority of cancer cells are
resistant to Fas-mediated apoptosis [40,
41, 42,
43].
For these reasons we did not analyze Fas and
FasL-mediated apoptosis in the colon cancer cell lines
after L1 transposition.In any case, the induction of retrotransposition would facilitate
the apoptotic response in p53+/+ cells and the molecular
events involved in sensing L1-induced stress need to be confirmed
in order to shed some light on an important mechanism of inducing
apoptosis in p53 competent cancer cells.
Human L1 as a potential novel cancer therapeutic strategy based on
the induction of apoptosis: perspectives
Both chemotherapeutic agents and irradiation can induce tumor
cell death primarily by causing DNA damage. However, it has been
very difficult to limit damage to normal tissue to an acceptable
level using these therapies. Although a number of methods to
induce target cells to undergo apoptosis exist and are being
evaluated, any approach which can be selectively targeted to the
cancer cell offers an advantage to existing methods. The
activation of L1 retrotransposition induces genomic
instability, thereby triggering a DNA damage response, which
results in the delay of cell cycle progression and/or induction
of apoptosis. Using an endogenous component of the genome for a
preferential induction of apoptosis within tumor cells could
provide a novel mode of attack for cancer therapeutics. The
employment of sophisticated cell-specific vectors as gene therapy
tools will enable targeting of L1 only to tumor cells.
Authors: Tammy A Morrish; Nicolas Gilbert; Jeremy S Myers; Bethaney J Vincent; Thomas D Stamato; Guillermo E Taccioli; Mark A Batzer; John V Moran Journal: Nat Genet Date: 2002-05-13 Impact factor: 38.330
Authors: D M Sassaman; B A Dombroski; J V Moran; M L Kimberland; T P Naas; R J DeBerardinis; A Gabriel; G D Swergold; H H Kazazian Journal: Nat Genet Date: 1997-05 Impact factor: 38.330
Authors: N Narita; H Nishio; Y Kitoh; Y Ishikawa; Y Ishikawa; R Minami; H Nakamura; M Matsuo Journal: J Clin Invest Date: 1993-05 Impact factor: 14.808
Authors: Y Miki; I Nishisho; A Horii; Y Miyoshi; J Utsunomiya; K W Kinzler; B Vogelstein; Y Nakamura Journal: Cancer Res Date: 1992-02-01 Impact factor: 12.701
Authors: Arnold J Levine; Anna M Puzio-Kuter; Chang S Chan; Pierre Hainaut Journal: Cold Spring Harb Perspect Med Date: 2016-09-01 Impact factor: 6.915
Authors: Nemanja Rodić; Reema Sharma; Rajni Sharma; John Zampella; Lixin Dai; Martin S Taylor; Ralph H Hruban; Christine A Iacobuzio-Donahue; Anirban Maitra; Michael S Torbenson; Michael Goggins; Ie-Ming Shih; Amy S Duffield; Elizabeth A Montgomery; Edward Gabrielson; George J Netto; Tamara L Lotan; Angelo M De Marzo; William Westra; Zev A Binder; Brent A Orr; Gary L Gallia; Charles G Eberhart; Jef D Boeke; Chris R Harris; Kathleen H Burns Journal: Am J Pathol Date: 2014-03-06 Impact factor: 4.307
Authors: Nicole G Coufal; Josè Luis Garcia-Perez; Grace E Peng; Maria C N Marchetto; Alysson R Muotri; Yangling Mu; Christian T Carson; Angela Macia; John V Moran; Fred H Gage Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2011-12-09 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Nicholas A Wallace; Stephen L Gasior; Zachary J Faber; Heather L Howie; Prescott L Deininger; Denise A Galloway Journal: Virology Date: 2013-05-23 Impact factor: 3.616