H Si1, H Lu1,2, X Yang1, A Mattox1, M Jang1, Y Bian1, E Sano3, H Viadiu4, B Yan5, C Yau6, S Ng7, S K Lee1, R-A Romano8, S Davis9, R L Walker9, W Xiao10, H Sun11, L Wei12,13, S Sinha8, C C Benz6, J M Stuart7, P S Meltzer9, C Van Waes1, Z Chen1. 1. Tumor Biology Section, Head and Neck Surgery Branch, National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders, NIH, Bethesda, Maryland, USA. 2. Orthopaedic Center, Zhujiang Hospital Guangzhou, Guangdong, China. 3. Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry, University of California, San Diego, CA, USA. 4. Instituto de Química, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México (UNAM), Circuito Exterior, Ciudad Universitaria, Mexico City, MÉXICO. 5. LKS Faculty of Medicine and School of Biomedical Sciences, LKS Faculty of Medicine and Center of Genome Sciences, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China. 6. Buck Institute for Research on Aging, Novato, CA, USA. 7. Department of Biomolecular Engineering, Center for Biomolecular Sciences and Engineering, University of California, Santa Cruz, Santa Cruz, CA, USA. 8. Department of Biochemistry, State University of New York at Buffalo, Center for Excellence in Bioinformatics and Life Sciences, Buffalo, New York, USA. 9. Cancer Genetics Branch, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Maryland, USA. 10. Division of Bioinformatics and Biostatistics, National Center for Toxicological Research, U.S. Food and Drug Administration, Jefferson, AK, USA. 11. Biodata Mining and Discovery Section, National Institute of Arthritis, Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases, Bethesda, Maryland, USA. 12. Clinical Immunology Section, National Eye Institute, NIH, Bethesda, Maryland, USA. 13. State Key Laboratory of Ophthalmology, Zhongshan Ophthalmic Center, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, China.
Abstract
The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) network study of 12 cancer types (PanCancer 12) revealed frequent mutation of TP53, and amplification and expression of related TP63 isoform ΔNp63 in squamous cancers. Further, aberrant expression of inflammatory genes and TP53/p63/p73 targets were detected in the PanCancer 12 project, reminiscent of gene programs comodulated by cREL/ΔNp63/TAp73 transcription factors we uncovered in head and neck squamous cell carcinomas (HNSCCs). However, how inflammatory gene signatures and cREL/p63/p73 targets are comodulated genome wide is unclear. Here, we examined how the inflammatory factor tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF-α) broadly modulates redistribution of cREL with ΔNp63α/TAp73 complexes and signatures genome wide in the HNSCC model UM-SCC46 using chromatin immunoprecipitation sequencing (ChIP-seq). TNF-α enhanced genome-wide co-occupancy of cREL with ΔNp63α on TP53/p63 sites, while unexpectedly promoting redistribution of TAp73 from TP53 to activator protein-1 (AP-1) sites. cREL, ΔNp63α and TAp73 binding and oligomerization on NF-κB-, TP53- or AP-1-specific sequences were independently validated by ChIP-qPCR (quantitative PCR), oligonucleotide-binding assays and analytical ultracentrifugation. Function of the binding activity was confirmed using TP53-, AP-1- and NF-κB-specific REs or p21, SERPINE1 and IL-6 promoter luciferase reporter activities. Concurrently, TNF-α regulated a broad gene network with cobinding activities for cREL, ΔNp63α and TAp73 observed upon array profiling and reverse transcription-PCR. Overlapping target gene signatures were observed in squamous cancer subsets and in inflamed skin of transgenic mice overexpressing ΔNp63α. Furthermore, multiple target genes identified in this study were linked to TP63 and TP73 activity and increased gene expression in large squamous cancer samples from PanCancer 12 TCGA by CircleMap. PARADIGM inferred pathway analysis revealed the network connection of TP63 and NF-κB complexes through an AP-1 hub, further supporting our findings. Thus, inflammatory cytokine TNF-α mediates genome-wide redistribution of the cREL/p63/p73, and AP-1 interactome, to diminish TAp73 tumor suppressor function and reciprocally activate NF-κB and AP-1 gene programs implicated in malignancy.
The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) network study of 12 cancer types (PanCancer 12) revealed frequent mutation of TP53, and amplification and expression of related TP63 isoform ΔNp63 in squamous cancers. Further, aberrant expression of inflammatory genes and TP53/p63/p73 targets were detected in the PanCancer 12 project, reminiscent of gene programs comodulated by cREL/ΔNp63/TAp73 transcription factors we uncovered in head and neck squamous cell carcinomas (HNSCCs). However, how inflammatory gene signatures and cREL/p63/p73 targets are comodulated genome wide is unclear. Here, we examined how the inflammatory factor tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF-α) broadly modulates redistribution of cREL with ΔNp63α/TAp73 complexes and signatures genome wide in the HNSCC model UM-SCC46 using chromatin immunoprecipitation sequencing (ChIP-seq). TNF-α enhanced genome-wide co-occupancy of cREL with ΔNp63α on TP53/p63 sites, while unexpectedly promoting redistribution of TAp73 from TP53 to activator protein-1 (AP-1) sites. cREL, ΔNp63α and TAp73 binding and oligomerization on NF-κB-, TP53- or AP-1-specific sequences were independently validated by ChIP-qPCR (quantitative PCR), oligonucleotide-binding assays and analytical ultracentrifugation. Function of the binding activity was confirmed using TP53-, AP-1- and NF-κB-specific REs or p21, SERPINE1 and IL-6 promoter luciferase reporter activities. Concurrently, TNF-α regulated a broad gene network with cobinding activities for cREL, ΔNp63α and TAp73 observed upon array profiling and reverse transcription-PCR. Overlapping target gene signatures were observed in squamous cancer subsets and in inflamed skin of transgenic mice overexpressing ΔNp63α. Furthermore, multiple target genes identified in this study were linked to TP63 and TP73 activity and increased gene expression in large squamous cancer samples from PanCancer 12 TCGA by CircleMap. PARADIGM inferred pathway analysis revealed the network connection of TP63 and NF-κB complexes through an AP-1 hub, further supporting our findings. Thus, inflammatory cytokine TNF-α mediates genome-wide redistribution of the cREL/p63/p73, and AP-1 interactome, to diminish TAp73tumor suppressor function and reciprocally activate NF-κB and AP-1 gene programs implicated in malignancy.
The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) project aims to provide a comprehensive
catalog of the key genomic changes in major cancer types, in order to foster
effective diagnosis, treatment and prevention. The recently published TCGA HNSCC
(head and neck squamous cell carcinoma) project, including 279 patient tissues,
revealed that more than 84% of HPV negative HNSCC harbor genetic alterations in
tumor suppressor TP53, concurrent with amplification and expression of related
family member ΔNp63 in ~47% cases, and altered
TNF-α-NF-κB/REL, inflammation, and death pathways in ~60% cases
(1). In addition, the TCGA network
PanCancer 12 project performed integrative analyses on 3,527 specimens of 12 cancer
types, using five genome-wide high throughput platforms (2). The project revealed a unique convergence that classified
squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) of head and neck, lung and a subset of bladder cancers
into a common subtype, called “squamous-like” (2). This genomic classification suggests that those squamous
cancer types shared more molecular similarities than other tumor types from the same
tissue-of-origin. Consistent with findings in the HNSCC TCGA project, the hallmarks
of these squamous cancers include high rates of TP53 mutation, amplification and
over-expression of oncogenic isoform ΔNp63, and altered activation of
TP53/TP63/TP73 and immune pathway genes linked to NF-κB/REL transcription
factors. These newly identified SCC signatures raised several critical questions,
including how and to what extent do TP63/TP73 and NF-κB/REL family
transcription factors interact to regulate global gene programs in squamous
cancers?The TP53 family comprises TP53, TP63, and TP73 and their isoforms. TP53 is
the most frequently mutated tumor suppressor gene in cancer, especially in squamous
cancers, and is described as the “guardian of the genome.” Mutation or
inactivation of TP53 promotes genomic instability by disrupting cell cycle arrest,
DNA repair, senescence, apoptosis, and autophagy of irreversibly damaged cells
(3). Interestingly, however, the other
TP53 family members, TP63 and TP73, are infrequently mutated, and can potentially
compensate for disrupted TP53 (4, 5), but their shared and distinct functions
appear to be more complex than those of TP53 in tumorigenesis, as suggested by TCGA
findings. TP63 and TP73 isoforms share a core structural architecture, sequence
homology, and potential but usually weaker tumor suppressor function than TP53,
while they also exhibit distinct roles in development, adhesion, tumor promotion,
and inflammatory responses in normal and malignant epithelia (4, 6-8). The TA isoforms contain full-length N-terminal
transactivating domains that function as TP53 homologs, whereas ΔN isoforms
having a truncated N-terminus can serve as antagonists of TP53 and its TA
counterparts, as well as promote cancer gene programs (9, 10). However, the
genome-wide role and mechanisms whereby ΔNp63α/TAp73 promote
tumorigenesis and linked to inflammation in cancer are undefined.We recently revealed that inflammatory cytokine TNF-α stimulates
binding of NF-κB subunit cREL with ΔNp63 to form a protein complex and
displacement of TAp73 DNA binding, leading to the repression of growth arrest and
apoptotic genes CDKN1A (p21), NOXA, and PUMA
(6). Complexes between cREL, RELA and
ΔNp63 were also implicated in reciprocal activation of several NF-κB
regulated genes (8). Interestingly, the
NF-κB family proto-oncogene cREL is amplified and overexpressed in a subset
of HNSCC and other cancers (11), but its
functions are less well characterized (12).
These experimental data suggest the hypothesis that NF-κB and TP53 family
members could coordinate wider global and reciprocal cross-talk between cell death,
survival and inflammatory gene programs. Specifically, are these interactions
between cREL, ΔNp63α and TAp73 part of a novel mechanism that
reciprocally regulates a genome-wide oncogenic program? Do the reciprocal
interactions between cREL and ΔNp63α with TAp73 indicate their
capability to bind TP53, NF-κB or other DNA response elements (REs)? Finally,
what is the fate and functional significance of TAp73 displaced by the
cREL/ΔNp63α complexes?To answer these questions, we performed genome-wide chromatin
immunoprecipitation assays, followed by high-throughput sequencing (ChIP-seq), and
microarray profiling in HNSCC cell lines, to explore the genome-wide regulatory role
of cREL/ΔNp63α and TAp73 complexes. Furthermore, bioinformatic
analysis of in vivo data from TCGA, immunohistochemistry and tissue
array of HNSCC, and a ΔNp63α transgenicmouse model supports their
contribution in the regulation of the cancer gene program. These findings present a
new paradigm for how TNF-α and these TFs orchestrate gene programs implicated
in cancer-related inflammation, survival, and migration, and help explain the
mechanisms underpinning the dysregulated network of TP53/TP63 and inflammation
observed in the Pan-TCGA project.
Results
TNF-α promotes enrichment and co-localized binding of cREL,
TP63α and TAp73 in the regulatory regions and around transcription start
sites genome-wide
To investigate cREL, p63α and TAp73 binding activity genome-wide,
ChIP-seq was performed using UM-SCC46 cells, previously shown to exhibit higher
expression of mtTP53, TP63 and TP73 proteins, and TNF-α modulation of
their interactions in target gene regulation representative of HNSCC with mtTP53
(6). We confirmed that TNF-α
induced cREL and ΔNp63α, and partially decreased multiple TAp73
isoforms in nuclear extracts (Figure 1A),
where TAp73 is predominantly detected in UM-SCC46 and other HNSCC lines under
baseline conditions (Figure
S1A). TNF-α increased total genomic binding peak numbers and
peak associated genes by cREL and p63α, while partially decreasing TAp73
binding activity (Figure 1B, Table S1), and similar
patterns were seen on individual chromosomes (Figure S1B, S2). We observed that the
percentage of genome-wide bindings were disproportionately enriched near or
within genes (promoter, intragenic, transcriptional termination site region)
compared with much larger intergenic regions (Figure 1C, upper panels). Cumulatively, over half of the binding
peaks were within the promoter (~7-12%) and intragenic regions (35-41%).
These peri-genic region peak distributions were significantly enriched compared
with the whole genome background distribution, tested using the exact binomial
test (Figure S3). The
binding activities within the intragenic regions were enriched in the first
intron (Figure 1C, lower panels). After
TNF-α treatment, cREL and p63α binding were substantially induced
near the TSSs, while the basal TAp73 TSS binding peak did not appreciably change
in the presence of TNF-α (Figure
1D). The intersection sets of three TF binding peaks within 1 kb distance
were identified, showing that intersecting binding peaks under basal conditions
(215) were significantly increased after TNF-α treatment (1159) (Figure 1E, upper and lower left; Fisher's
exact test, p=2.2e-16). 793 TAp73 basal binding peaks intersected with
TNF-induced cREL and p63α binding (Figure
1E, lower right). After combination of all binding activities, 1,217
candidate binding peaks were observed, which aligned within the regulatory loci
of genes and generated 530 genes that displayed co-binding by the three TFs
(Figure S4).
Furthermore, the physical distance between the intersections of three TF binding
peaks was examined, defined as within 1kb distance on the same chromosome (Figure 1F). TNF-α increased
intersection binding peaks between cREL and p63α, or between p63α
and TAp73, around the TSS within <200 bp (Figure 1F, upper two panels), when compared with other intersections
(Figure 1F, lower panels). More
detailed results were included in the supplemental information. Together, these data show that
TNF-α modulated the co-localization of cREL, p63α, and TAp73
binding enriched around TSSs.
Figure 1
TNF-α promotes genome-wide cREL, p63α and TAp73 binding
activities in the regulatory regions
(A) UM-SCC46 cells were treated with TNF-α (20 ng/ml) for 1 h to induce
altered cREL, p63, and p73 protein expression in the nucleus. Oct-1 was used as
the loading control. (B) ChIP-seq was performed using antibodies against cREL,
p63α, and TAp73 for the UM-SCC46 cells treated (TNF) and untreated (NT)
with TNF-α. The pulled-down DNAs were sequenced by the high-throughput
sequencer GAIIx from Illumina. Total peak numbers (left) and peak-bound genes
(right) are presented in the bar graph. (C) Characterization of the modulation
of TF binding in the regulatory regions. The distribution of binding peaks in
different regions of the genome is presented in the pie charts, and peak numbers
are labeled at the top. The upper panel shows the percentages of the peaks
distributed among regulatory (promoter, TTS, intragenic) and intergenic regions.
The lower panel shows the percentages of the peaks distributed only among the
different intragenic regions. (D) The binding peak numbers of each TF were
plotted within 20 kb upstream (−) and downstream of the TSSs across the
whole genome. The blue line is the basal transcription factor binding without
TNF-α treatment; while the green line is after TNF-α treatment.
(E) The transcription factor binding sites within 1 kb distance were identified,
and the number of overlapping sites are presented in the Venn diagrams. (F)
Distance relationships between two peak sets under different conditions in the
ChIP-seq experiments were analyzed. Intersected peaks were defined to be within
1kb distance on the same chromosome. Y axis shows the quantity of intersected
peaks at different intersection distance in bp (x axis). Blue, untreated; green,
TNF-α treated.
De novo motif search defines genome-wide binding on TP53 and AP-1 consensus
elements modulated by TNF-α
Next, the top motifs most frequently bound by the three TFs under
different treatment conditions were identified using Gibb's motif sampler and
summarized (Figure 2A-D, Figure S5). The basal
binding of TAp73 (Figure 2A, left), and
TNF-α induced p63α binding (Figure
2B, left), were enriched for a TP53/p63 consensus sequence.
Surprisingly, basal cREL (Figure 2C, left)
and TNF-α induced TAp73 bindings (D, left) were enriched for AP-1
consensus motifs. A narrow distribution of ~200 bp for the basal TAp73
(Figure 2A, right) and TNF-α
induced p63α binding to TP53 motifs (Figure
2B, right) were observed. However, broader distribution patterns
(~400 bp) were observed for the basal and TNF-α induced cREL
(Figure 2C, right and Figure S5), and
TNF-α induced TAp73 binding on AP-1 sites (Figure 2D, right). On TP53/p63 motifs, there was abundant
overlapping binding activity of basal TAp73 versus TNF-α induced
p63α, ranging within ~200-300 bp (Figure 2E, left). TNF-α also induced concurrent binding of
p63α on TP53 sites and TAp73 on AP-1 motifs, located in a broader range
of ~400 bp (Figure 2E, right).
Figure 2
De novo motif search identified TP53 and AP-1 consensus sequences
The motifs most frequently bound by p63, TAp73 and c-REL transcription factors
were identified by MEME-ChIP (55) or
Gibbs Motif Sampler (54). They are shown
as the sequence logos with known consensus (A-D left). (A, left) The predominant
TP53/p63 motifs consistent with the TP53.02 consensus sequences were identified
in basal binding of TAp73. (B, left) The predominant motif of TP63 was
identified by TP63α binding activities after TNF-α treatment. (C,
left) AP-1 motif was identified in basal cREL binding. (D, left) The AP-1 motif
was observed in TNF-α induced TAp73 binding. (A-D, right) Distance
relationships between different motifs detected by ChIP-Seq were examined.
Motifs are considered to be intersecting if they are located within 1 kb
distance. The corresponding motifs were mapped back to peak sequences. Motif
density (y axis) was plotted against the distance from the center of the binding
peak (x axis), showing the distribution pattern of specific motifs in peaks
(scales are labeled as ×102). (E) The relative interaction on
the TP53 motif (y axis) was plotted against the distance of basal TAp73 binding
vs. TP63α after TNF-α treatment. Under TNF treated condition, the
relative interaction (x axis) of TP63 binding on TP53 motifs and TAp73 binding
on AP-1 motif was plotted against the distance between the two binding motifs (x
axis, right). (F) Sedimentation coefficient distribution of purified cRel Rel
homology domain (RHD, left) and p73 DNA binding domain (DBD, right) binding to
fluorescein-labeled AP-1 (black), cREL (red) and TP53 (blue) response elements
(REs). Fluorescein absorbance was detected at 488 nm. The peaks corresponding to
the protein dimers and tetramers are indicated. No tetrameric binding of p73 DBD
was observed to the AP-1 and cREL REs. For clarity the peak at 2 S for the
unbound DNA species is not displayed.
Binding of purified cREL homology domain and TP73 DNA-binding domain to cREL,
TP53 and AP-1 response elements (REs)
Next, we purified recombinant cREL Rel homology domain (RHD) and TP73 DNA
binding domain (DBD) proteins and tested their ability to bind oligonucleotides
with minimal consensus sequences from cREL, TP53 and AP-1 response elements
(REs) (Figure 2F). Analytical
ultracentrifugation with fluorescein-labeled DNA allowed us to measure
sedimentation velocities of the protein-DNA complexes and classify their
oligomerization state. Remarkably, cREL exhibited binding activities for all
three REs, with a higher affinity for its own RE (Figure 2F, left). TP73 DBD exhibited dimeric DNA-protein complexes
for all three REs tested; however, the tetramer complex was only observed for
the TP53 RE (Figure 2F, right). Thus, our
binding experiments with purified proteins confirmed that both cREL RHD and p73
DBD are able to bind not only to their own consensus sequences, but also to the
other DNA REs, supporting the binding to motifs identified in the ChIP-seq
experiment.
Validation of co-localized binding on individual gene promoters by ChIP-qPCR
and oligo-based binding assays
Representative peak binding activities of four of the genes detected by
ChIP-seq are presented in Figure S6. We further validated the specific binding activities of
the three TFs on regulatory regions of eight representative genes detected by
ChIP-seq and confirmed the binding by ChIP-PCR (Figure 3A-C, Table S2). Treatment with TNF-α significantly increased cREL
and/or p63α binding (Figure 3A, B),
while TAp73 binding was partially decreased or not significantly changed (Figure 3C). Next, we performed a different
binding experiment using short ~50-70 bp synthetic oligonucleotides
containing 10-20bp sequences of individual or a combination of predicted
consensus motifs (Figure 3D, Table S3). We observed a
relatively stronger basal TAp73 binding activity when compared with p63α
binding, consistent with the ChIP-seq and ChIP-qPCR results. Interestingly, the
oligonucleotide containing a predicted AP-1 motif (p21-c) without the other
motifs also exhibited TAp73 binding. These binding activities detected by
ChIP-seq were validated by two different experimental methods. Thus our current
study provided evidence for the co-localization of cREL, ΔNp63 and TAp73
to multiple target promoters and response elements in response to TNF-α,
consistent with our previous publications (6, 8).
Figure 3
Validation of co-localized binding activities of cREL, p63α and
TAp73
Based on overlapped binding peaks in the regulatory regions, we predicted core
binding sequences containing potential p63/TP53 or NF-κB/cREL binding
motifs using a bioinformatics approach. PCR primer sequences were designed to
flank the regions containing the binding motifs (Table S2). In the genes
of interest, the overlapping binding peaks were located in promoter/enhancer
regions (SERPINE1, BCL3, CEBPA, HBEGF) or in first
(CDKN1A, FOSL1, TNFSF10) or other
(GADD45A) introns. Quantitative PCR was performed in
independent ChIP experiments, and isotype antibody served as the negative
control. (A-C) ChIP binding activity of cREL (A), p63α (B), and TAp73
(C). Blue, untreated; red, TNF-α treated. (D) The DNA sequences were
extracted from ChIP-seq peaks and the core p53, p63, AP-1, NF-κB, cREL
consensus motifs were predicted and depicted. Nuclear extracts were isolated
from UM-SCC46 cells and the binding assays were performed using a 96-well
colorimetric binding assay with 50-70mer oligos containing the 10-20bp motifs
synthesized and labeled with biotin (Table S3). Open bars, anti-p63α antibody; dashed
bars, anti-TAp73 antibody. Neg: negative control using p21 control oligo without
lysate. p21-P: positive control using a p21 oligo containing the known TP53/TP63
site. The data are presented as the mean ± SD calculated from three
replicates from one representative experiment.
cREL, ΔNp63α, and TAp73 modulate transcriptional regulation and
gene expression
Next, we performed functional validation using luciferase reporters
containing p53, AP1 and NF-κB/REL specific consensus REs after expression
of ΔNp63α, TAp73, cREL or empty control vectors (Figure 4A). Overexpressed TAp73 was a strong
inducer of classical TP53 RE reporter activity, which was down-modulated by
TNF-α (Figure 4A, upper left). Both
ΔNp63α and TAp73 also induced significant AP-1 RE inducing
activity, and TNF-α further enhanced it (upper middle). cREL induced
strong NF-κB reporter activity that was increased by TNF-α, while
ΔNp63α and TAp73 exhibited less pronounced effects (upper right).
Then the individual promoters of CDKN1A (p21) containing TP53,
p63 REs, SERPINE1 with AP-1 RE, and IL-6 with
AP-1 and NF-κB REs were tested for their activities (Figure 4A, lower panels). TAp73 was the strongest inducer of
CDKN1A (p21) and SERPINE1.
ΔNp63α was the strongest inducer of IL-6, while
mutation of either the NF-κB or the AP-1 RE significantly suppressed the
activity. Together, these data further confirm the overlapping capability of
these TFs to modulate p53, AP1 and NF-κB/REL transcriptional
activities.
Figure 4
cREL, ΔNp63α, and TAp73 modulate transcriptional regulation and
differential gene expression
(A) UM-SCC46 cells were transfected with luciferase reporter plasmids containing
specific TP53, AP-1, or NF-κB REs (upper panels), or the promoter
sequences of CDKN1A (p21) (TP53, TP63 REs),
SERPINE1 (AP-1 REs) or IL-6 (AP-1 and
NF-κB REs; lower panels). Overexpression of cREL, ΔNp63α,
or TAp73α was induced by TNF-α treatment (20 ng/ml) for 48 h.
IL-6 binding site-specific point mutant promoter constructs
included the deletion mutation of NF-κB or AP-1 binding sites without
TNF-α (bottom right panel). The relative reporter activity was normalized
to the corresponding β-gal activity and/or compared with the control
vectors. Blue, untreated; red, TNF-α treated, except in
IL-6 reporter assay (bottom right panel). In
IL-6 reporter assay without TNF-α treatment, blue:
reporter with full length IL-6 promoter; red:
IL-6 promoter with the NF-κB binding motif deleted;
green: IL-6 promoter with the AP-1 binding motif deleted. (B)
The newly identified target genes were validated by q-RT-PCR 48 h after cREL,
ΔNp63α, or TAp73α overexpression under TNF-α
treatment (20 ng/ml). Blue, untreated; red, TNF-α treated. The data are
presented as the mean ± SD of three replicates from one representative
experiment. Statistical significance was calculated using a two-tailed Student's
T-Test, p<0.05. * indicates the statistical significance when comparing
the conditions with overexpressed plasmids versus control plasmid. # indicates
the statistical significance when comparing untreated versus TNF-α
treated condition.
We examined how TNF-α and three TFs modulated expression of 6
candidate genes identified through ChIP-seq and confirmed by microarray (Figure 5 below and Figure S6, S7). ΔNp63α
and TAp73 strongly induced GADD45A, a known TP53 target (13), as well as AP-1 subunit
FOSL1 and SERPINE1 (Figure 4B, upper panels). CEBPA was
strongly repressed by ΔNp63α and TAp73 (Figure 4B, lower left panel). The modulation of
MAP4K4 and CFLAR (FLIP) by the three TFs
was distinct, in that cREL plus TNF-α, ΔNp63α alone, and
ΔNp63α plus TNF-α significantly induced gene expression.
Collectively, TNF-α-modulated cREL, ΔNp63α, and TAp73 can
differentially regulate a functionally diverse gene repertoire.
Figure 5
TNF-α modulates expression of a global gene repertoire bound by cREL,
p63α, and TAp73
RNA was isolated from cells treated with TNF-α for 1, 3, 6, 12, and 24 h
and the differential gene expression was examined by an Illumina bead-based
array. (A) Differential expression of up- and down-regulated genes in UM-SCC46
cells under basal level conditions when compared with normal human oral
keratinocyte cells, and (B) altered gene expression of UM-SCC46 cells upon
TNF-α treatment. The colored sections represent the percentages of
differentially expressed genes with binding activities for cREL, p63, or TAp73.
(C) Gene numbers with individual and intersecting binding activities among the
three TFs at the basal level, or (D) after TNF-α treatment. Top Venn
diagrams represent up-regulated genes, and bottom Venn diagrams represent
down-regulated genes. (E) Heat maps of hierarchical cluster analysis of 46
up-regulated (left) and 27 down-regulated (right) genes with overlapped TF
binding activities induced by TNF-α. Red, increased expression; blue,
decreased expression (compared with untreated controls). Color key, Z-score,
reflects the relationship of the value of gene expression in a specific sample
to the mean of the expression values of the same gene in all the samples.
Euclidean distance with complete linkage was used to constitute the gene
cluster.
TNF-α globally modulates expression of genes with co-localized binding
of TFs
Next we tested if TNF-α globally modulates expression of genes
exhibiting co-localized binding of cREL, p63α, and TAp73 (Figure 5). A total of 1,050 genes with
≥1.5 fold differential expression were identified during at least one
time point after TNF-α treatment. Without TNF-α, a quarter of
altered genes exhibited TF binding, while TNF-α significantly increased
up- and down-regulated genes bound by the TFs by ~10%, together
accounting for a third of differentially expressed genes (Figure 5A, B, colored sections). TNF-α treatment
significantly altered gene numbers with binding activities (Chi-square,
up-regulated genes, p=4.3E-07; down-regulated genes, p=5.5E-05). The numbers of
differentially expressed genes with individual or overlapping binding activities
for the three TFs are presented for basal activities (Figure 5C), or TNF-α modulated activities (Figure 5D). From these, we identified those
genes displaying co-binding of all three transcription factors that were up- or
down-regulated by TNF-α from Figure 5C,
D, and removed the redundant genes. Altogether, TNF-α
up-regulated 46 genes and down-regulated 27 genes with overlapping binding of
cREL, p63α, and TAp73, which were selected for hierarchical gene
clustering and displayed in heatmaps (Figure
5E). Supporting the potential for bidirectional gene modulation, the
expression of a selection of target genes up- and down-modulated by TNF-α
treatment was validated by qRT-PCR (Figure S7). Using a less stringent difference of 1.3 fold
change in gene expression by TNF-α treatment, we detected 84 up-regulated
genes and 61 down-regulated genes bound by all three transcription factors
(Table S4a and
4b). Using either
1.5 or 1.3-fold criteria, the TNF-α modulated genes bound by the TFs
include multiple molecules implicated in inflammation, oncogenesis, and
NF-κB and AP-1 mediated signaling.
cREL, ΔNp63, and TAp73 expression and altered gene and protein
signatures in HNSCC tissues and ΔNp63α transgenic mouse
skin
We examined the 46 TNFα-upregulated genes and 27 down-regulated
genes co-bound by all 3 TFs from Figure 5E
using the HNSCC mRNAseq expression dataset recently published for 279 primary
tumor and 16 mucosa specimens from The Cancer Genome Atlas (1). Using these data, we found 23/73 genes
(31.5%), including 13 of 46 activated genes, and 10 of 27 repressed genes,
showed significant concordance when comparing primary HNSCC tumor to mucosa
specimens (Figure 6A; fold change
≥1.5, p<0.05, student t-test with FDR correction <1% cut
off). An additional 23 genes (31.5%) were also expressed in the same direction
as in cell lines, but below the significance threshold (Table S6). Thus, overall
63% of genes showed consistent changes in direction of expression when comparing
primary tumors to mucosa between cell line data and TCGA human tissue data.
Consistent with this, an unsupervised cluster analysis and heatmap of the TCGA
data for all 73 genes confirms that many of the TNFα inducible and
down-regulated genes in cell lines co-cluster among 4 major tumor subsets (Figure S8, clusters a-d).
Among the TNF-α inducible genes, several of the most significantly
upregulated genes co-cluster predominantly in major clusters a and/or b
(SERPINE1, MET, SPOCK1, CRISPLD2, TINAGL1, LEPREL1, TNS3, PARP14,
CDH3), which have previously been reported in PubMed to be
deregulated in cancer and/or metastasis. MET and
SERPINE1 are implicated in cell migration, invasion and
metastasis, and SERPINE1 is also a downstream target of
MET signaling (14-17).
Figure 6
cREL, ΔNp63, and TAp73 nuclear and cytoplasmic localization and target
gene expression in human HNSCC tissues and skin of ΔNp63α
transgenic mice
(A) 46 up-regulated and 27 down-regulated genes from Figure 5D were queried using the mRNA expression dataset
from TCGA HNSCC project, which includes 279 tumor and 16 mucosa specimens.
Significant up-regulation of 13/46 activated genes (red), and down-regulation of
10/27 repressed genes (blue) are detected in TCGA tumors compared to normal
samples (fold change ≥1.5, student t-Test with FDR < 1%
multivariate comparison correction cut off). (B) Three publicly available
datasets of gene profiling microarrays were investigated, which included a total
of 125 (67 metastatic and 58 non-metastatic) HNSCC tissues. Pearson correlation
coefficients of gene expression between p63 and potential target genes were
calculated, and genes exhibiting statistically significant correlation are
presented. The line indicates p<0.05. (C) RNA was isolated from the skins
of ΔNp63α transgenic mice (red). qRT-PCR was performed to quantify
gene expression levels with a statistically significant increase compared with
their age-matched non-transgenic littermates (blue, p<0.05). The data
were calculated from triplicates of one representative experiment and presented
as the mean ± SD. (D) Human HNSCC and normal mucosa frozen sections were
stained for cREL, ΔNp63, and TAp73, and intensities within nuclei or
cytoplasm in three 200X fields per slide were acquired and quantified using an
Aperio Scanscope and Cell Quantification Software (Vista, CA, USA), and
presented as mean histoscores ± SD for 8-13 samples. * p<0.05,
HNSCC vs normal mucosa by t-tests. (E) Immunohistochemistry comparing
transcription factors JUNB and FOSL1 nuclear staining in human HNSCC tissue
array. Images were acquired using an Aperio Scanscope at 200X magnification, and
staining intensity was quantified using Aperio Cell Quantification Software.
Tumor protein expression of evaluable specimens for JUNB and FOSL1 (n=66) and
mucosa (n=11) samples. Student t-test, p<0.05 (F) Associations in
expression levels between the transcription factors nuclear cREL with targets
nuclear JUNB and IKKε (stage III tumors), nuclear cREL with nuclear FOSL1
(in all tumor stages), and nuclear TP63 with nuclear SERPINE1/PAI1 (metastatic
tumors). A non-directional test for the significance of the Pearson
Product-Moment Correlation Coefficient with the computed histoscores for each
protein was used.
As additional TP63 bound and modulated genes identified in our dataset
are implicated in cancer, inflammation and metastasis, we also examined 48 TP63
targets, including 31 curated from the literature, and 17 from our prior (8) or present study of TNF-α
modulated genes (Figure
S7), as described in supplemental Methods. An expression-based method was used
to cluster a group of genes with common profiling patterns and TP63
transcription factor motifs, to computationally infer co-expressed networks,
using three independent publicly available microarray data sets containing 125
HNSCC samples that include 58 non-metastatic and 67 metastatic HNSCC tissues
(18-20). Among these genes, a statistically significant correlation was
established between expression of TP63 and 35 genes (71.4%, Pearson correlation
coefficient p<0.05, Figure 6B). This
analysis provided evidence for differential expression of multiple TP63-linked
genes that are implicated cancer cell phenotype (e.g. JUNB/FOSL1,
CDKN1A, JAG2/NOTCH2), invasion and metastasis (e.g.,
SERPINE1, MET, SNAI2, MMP10), and inflammation (e.g.
IL1A, IL8, RELB). Several of these TP63 target genes also
co-modulated by TNF-α co-cluster together in major subsets of TCGA HNSCC
tumors (Figure S8,
e.g., FOSL1, CDKN1A (p21), SERPINE1, MET, TNFAIP8).We further compared ΔNp63 bound and up-regulated genes in a
conditional K5-ΔNp63α transgenicmouse model, where increased
tnf-α expression and a similar nuclear redistribution of
cREL/ΔNp63 and TAp73 was observed (21, 22). Array profiling
detected increased expression of a panel of up-regulated genes, which were
validated by qRT-PCR. These genes included AP-1 subunits Fosl1
and Junb, NF-κB pathway related genes
Traf1, Ikkε and
Relb, and their downstream genes, Il-6,
and Serpine1 (Figure
6C).We next validated if proteins of TNF-α co-modulated TFs and four
target genes identified in multiple platforms above, display corresponding
alterations in humanHNSCC tumor and tissue arrays. The nuclear-cytoplasmic
distribution of cREL, ΔNp63, and TAp73 in human specimens was quantified
by immunohistochemistry score. We observed increased cREL and ΔNp63, and
decreased TAp73 nuclear distribution, with a reciprocal decrease in cytoplasmic
cREL and increased TAp73 cytoplasmic staining in HNSCC (Figure 6D, S9), consistent with TNF-α modulated nuclear
redistribution and DNA binding of these TFs in HNSCC in vitro
in Figure 1A, B, and prior studies (6) (8). Next, we examined the protein expression of target genes in human
HNSCC tissue array, which contains 61 primary tumors of stage I-IV at different
anatomic locations, 8 lymph node metastatic tumors and 11 normal mucosa tissues
(Supplemental
Methods). Notably, key AP-1 family transcription factor targets
JUNB and FOSL1, showed significantly
elevated nuclear staining in HNSCC tumors relative to mucosa (Figure 6E), consistent with altered AP-1
promoter binding and expression of JUNB and
FOSL1 observed above (Figures
3-5). Further, the nuclear
staining of JUNB and FOSL1 was significantly
correlated when compared with cREL (Figure
6F). Increase in staining for two additional targets, IKKε and
SERPINE1, were also significantly correlated with cREL and p63 staining,
respectively. Together, these data from human and mouse tissues support our
hypothesis for the altered cellular distribution and functional co-modulation of
cREL, ΔNp63α, TAp73, with AP-1 subunits
JUNB/FOSL1, and a subset of other target genes detected in
different in vitro and in vivo systems.
CircleMap and Pearson correlation analyses support TP53/p63/p73 modulated
gene signatures in squamous cancers
We next examined how our current findings may relate to large datasets
and analyses from the recently published TCGA PanCancer 12 project, which
identified inflammatory as well as a “TP53-like” compensatory gene
expression activity pattern associated with increased ΔNp63 and TP73
activities, and frequent genomic inactivation of TP53 in the squamous-like
tumors (2). These squamous cancers
included 293 HNSCC, 156 lung SCC and 24 bladder SCC, which were analyzed for
TP53/63/73 status and expression and function of 8 genes identified among their
known and new targets in the present study. Figure
7A shows CircleMaps, which enable a multi-dimensional comparison of
the genomic alterations, expression, and inferred pathway activities for TP53,
ΔNp63, TP73, and these target genes, using the annotated PARADIGM
bioinformatics analytic platform (23,
24). The TP53 CircleMap shows that
the majority of SCC tissues contain TP53 mutations (second circle), and/or copy
number loss (third circle) with corresponding decrease in TP53 expression
(fourth circle). However, they retain weak inferred PARADIGM activity for TP53
(the outer circle), which cannot be explained by inactivated TP53, but could be
compensated by overlapping function of other family members. Consistent with
this, the TP63 CircleMap exhibited high copy number gain, expression, and
PARADIGM gene signatures, supporting a role for copy number gain and expression
in TP63 PARADIGM gene activity. Similarly, TP73 overexpression and PARADIGM
activity are also congruent. We further analyzed eight targets identified in
this study, including genes involved in cell cycle (CDKN1A (p21),
GADD45), signal receptor and kinase (MET, MAP4K4),
transcription factors (AP-1/FOSL1, CEBPA), and secreted factors
(SERPINE1, IL6). The expression and PARADIGM activity of
ΔNp63, TP73, and these target genes are higher across SCC tumors compared
with other cancer types. By Pearson correlation analysis (Figure 7B), ΔNp63 exhibited significant positive
correlation with 5 genes bound and inducible by TNF-α, including
MAP4K4, FOSL1, CDKN1A (p21), and GADD45,
whose activation ΔNp63 and TNF-α promotes, and a negative
correlation with CEBPA, repressed by ΔNp63 and
TNF-α (Figures 4B, 5E). TP73 exhibited a negative association
with IL6, which TAp73 suppresses, and a positive correlation
with CDKN1A (p21), which it activates (Figure 4A). SERPINE1 showed only a weak
negative association with TP73, which was observed with TNF-α treatment
by reporter but not RT-PCR (Figure 4A,
B).
Figure 7
Squamous cancer signatures by CircleMaps and PARADIGM SuperPathway
analyses
(A) CircleMap of PARADIGM-Shift differences associated with SCC tissue origins
and TP53 mutation status were created for TP53, TP63, TP73 and target genes
identified in this study. Samples were ordered first by tissue origin of SCC
(innermost ring), then by TP53 mutation status (second ring), GISTIC score
(indicating CNV), mRNA expression level, and finally by PARADIGM activities
(outer ring). The Red-blue color intensity reflects magnitude of CNV, expression
and PARADIGM activities (red: high, blue: low). TP53 mutation is highlighted
(black: truncation, gray: missense). Samples were restricted to the
C2-Squamous-like cluster-of-cluster-assignments (COCA), including 156 lung SSC,
293 HNSCC, and 24 bladder SCC samples. Each plot illustrates multiple data types
across many samples for a given gene. (B) The PARADIGM activity of ΔNp63
or TP73, and expression of eight target genes are higher across SCC tumors
compared with other cancer types as shown in (A). Pearson correlation
coefficients between ΔNp63 or TP73 PARADIGM activity and eight target
genes presented in (A) were calculated, and the significance of p value was
presented in y axis. The PARADIGM activity of ΔNp63 exhibited significant
positive correlations with expression of five target genes bound and inducible
by TNF-α, and a negative correlation with CEBPA
expression. The PARADIGM activity of TP73 exhibited negative associations with
with IL-6 and SERPINE1, and a positive
association with CDKN1A (p21). (C) PARADIGM SuperPathway
subnetwork defining C2-Squamous-like Pan-Cancer 12 integrative subtype. Zoom-in
view of network neighborhood surrounding the ΔNp63α tetramer,
TAp63γ tetramer, RelA/p50 and Jun/Fos complexes. Color of the nodes
reflects activation (red) or repression (blue) within the squamous subtype when
compared with the mean of other tumor types. Edge color denotes interaction
type: inhibitory (green) and activating (yellow). Node shape reflects feature
type: protein (circle), complex (diamond), family or miRNA or RNA (square),
abstract concepts (arrowhead). The target genes with cRel, p63 and TAp73 binding
identified in this study are highlighted with different colored outer rings as
showing in supplemental Figure
S10.
PARADIGM SuperPathway analyses connect p63, NF-κB, and AP-1
subnetworks in squamous cancers
Our current and prior experimental data indicate that ΔNp63 and
REL NF-κB family members bind and modulate inflammation and survival
genes (Figures 3-5) (6, 8, 25). Analyses of TCGA PanCancer 12 datasets also revealed a strong TP63
gene signature associated with altered immune and inflammatory gene signatures
in squamous cancers (2). However, the
network(s) linking TP63 and NF-κB family members and target genes has not
been well elucidated. We thus searched within the interconnected network of
differentially activated PARADIGM pathways, linked through regulatory hubs with
>15 downstream targets, derived from a larger interconnected network
displaying differentially activated proteins inferred between the
C2-Squamous-like subtype and other tumors, as detailed in Supplemental Methods,
Table S5, Figure S10 (26). Interestingly, we observed increased
activation of the network neighborhood surrounding TP63, connected with
NF-κB complex (RELA/p50) through AP-1 (JUN/FOS) complexes within the
squamous cancers (Figure 7C). The
activation of these networks and targets are consistent with our evidence that
TNF-α orchestrates cREL/ΔNp63 binding and induction of AP-1
subunits, reprograming of cREL/p73 binding via AP-1 binding consensus sites, and
their related gene signatures in vitro and in
vivo (Figure 2-6). Several genes shown on the network
identified in this study have been independently validated previously, such as
TP63 regulated CDKN1A, GADD45A, IL1A, CHUK, YAP1, IGFBP3,
KRT14; as well as NF-κB and AP-1 related genes IL-6 and
IL-8, and MAPK1/ERK/JUN/FOSand pathways. Most of these related
genes in squamous cancers are activated (red) when compared with other cancer
types. Furthermore, a more extended network connecting ΔNp63α,
TP53 and AP-1 transcription complexes (among other regulatory hubs), links a
larger number of target genes identified in this study by existing experimental
data (Figure S10A).
Although not all target genes identified from our current study are linked by
this expanded network (Figure
S10A-B), they are significantly enriched among the 4213
differentially activated PARADIGM proteins inferred between squamous and other
cancers (hypergeometric test p = 6E-9 for basal targets, and p = 1.22E-10 for
TNF-α responsive targets) Table S5.
Discussion
Here we provide evidence for a novel and dynamic genome-wide TF binding
paradigm, whereby the inflammatory cytokine TNF-α modulated binding
activities of cREL, ΔNp63α, and TAp73 genome-wide, intersecting a
diverse repertoire of genes implicated in the malignant phenotype. This modulation
was linked to attenuated expression of specific TP53tumor suppressor targets and
promotion of REL/NF-κB and AP-1 oncogenic and inflammatory gene programs
(Figure 8). Our study provides a link
between global TP63/TP73, AP-1 and NF-κB mediated survival and inflammatory
gene programs, which helps explain the finding of unique TP63/TP73 gene signatures
compensating for mutant TP53 identified recently in squamous cancers from TCGA HNSCC
and PanCancer projects (1, 2). Furthermore, our current data are consistent
with previous mechanistic studies demonstrating how TNF-α induced changes
alter the DNA binding of c-REL, ΔNp63 and TAp73 family members (6, 8). Our
studies showed that these transcription factors regulate genes involved in several
aspects of cell fate including cell proliferation, stemness, survival/apoptosis, and
migration, as well as, epithelial cell growth, inflammation and immune responses in
murine keratinocyte and ΔNp63 transgenicmouse models (27, 28).
Figure 8
Mechanistic model illustrating effects of TNF-α modulation of cREL,
ΔNp63α and TAp73 chromatin occupancy and reprogramming of TAp73
from TP53 to AP-1 sites to promote inflammatory and cancer gene programs
Most head and neck and solid cancers have high frequencies of TP53 mutation,
where TAp73 can serve as a potential tumor suppressor. In this model, without
TNF-α, TAp73 predominantly occupies TP53 or p63 binding sites, while
NF-κB family member cREL either resides in the cytoplasm or in the
nucleus with binding on AP-1 sites, and ΔNp63α is found in the
nucleus unbound to DNA (upper left). TNF-α, a major inflammatory cytokine
produced in the tumor microenvironment, can promote cREL nuclear translocation,
and complexes with ΔNp63α, to occupy TP53/p63 binding sites.
TNF-α also induces nuclear displacement or reprogramming of TAp73 to bind
neighboring AP-1 sites (upper and bottom right). These dynamic alterations
diminish TAp73 tumor suppressor activity, while enhancing
cREL/ΔNp63α and TAp73 mediated inflammatory and cancer gene
programs (lower left). This model helps explains how TNF-α modulates
NF-κB and AP-1 signaling while altering tumor suppressor activity, to
promote gene programs implicated in inflammation, survival, and metastasis.
After cross comparison of 12 different cancer types, TCGA PanCancer 12
project uncovered several unique signatures that differentiate squamous cancers from
other cancer types, such as high rates of TP53 mutation and TP63 amplification
(2). In depth genetic analyses of the gene
signatures of squamous cancers, revealed attenuated TP53 and increased expression of
compensatory TP63/TP73 gene signatures. These were not strictly linked with the
relatively infrequent loss of heterozygosity (LOH) or TP53-truncating
loss-of-function mutations, but with TP63 amplification and TP63/73 gene expression
by PARADIGM-SHIFT analysis (23).Interestingly, our previous experimental results supported a relationship
between attenuated TP53 target gene expression and partial compensatory function of
TP53 family members TP63 and/or TP73 in SCC (6, 8). HNSCC with mtTP53 displayed
higher ΔNp63 and TAp73, and intermediate “compensatory” basal
expression of several TP53/TP63/TP73-regulated apoptotic genes. Expression of these
genes was further attenuated by TNF-α, DNA binding interaction of cREL with
ΔNp63, and displacement of TAp73 (6).
In the present study, ChIPseq, ChIP PCR, and binding analyses provide evidence for
genome-wide reprogramming of TAp73 binding to AP-1RE containing promoters, and
varying regulation of target genes of TP53 as well as AP-1 and REL/NF-κB.
Such TP63/TP73 compensatory TP53 function has been associated with higher
sensitivity to cisplatin chemotherapy in both HNSCC (29, 30) and in BRCA1-related
triple-negative breast cancer (31), but
together with promotion of opposing inflammatory and oncogenic gene programs, is
apparently insufficient to prevent development of these cancers.TP53 is highly mutated in HNSCC, ~80-90% in HPV negative tumors, as
evident by recent TCGA data (1). As we
previously reported in the manuscript by Lu et al (6), the increased expression of TAp73 is predominantly observed in
mtTP53 cell lines, and reduced TAp73 occupancy is associated with replacement by
cREL, not mtTP53 in response to TNF-α. The mtTP53 does not co-IP with the
cREL/ΔNp63 complex, and is not recruited to CDKN1A (p21),
NOXA or PUMA promoters by ChIP assay following
TNF-α treatment. In addition, dependence on cREL and ΔNp63 for TAp73
binding to p21 promoter was shown, whereby cREL inversely modulated TAp73 binding.
Similar results for TNF-α treatment or cREL modulation of TAp73 were obtained
in three UM-SCC lines (6). Furthermore, our
prior data are also consistent with other's evidence for a strong protein
interaction is between p63 and p73, but not with TP53, because TP53 is lacking the
SAM domain at the C-terminal, which mediates heterotetramerization between these
family members (32, 33).Our prior and current findings help further clarify the apparent function of
TP63/TP73 in compensating for TP53 and promoting oncogene expression. First, such
compensatory activity is associated with enhanced expression of typical TP53 target
genes, such as CDKN1A (p21) and GADDA45, which
control cell cycle (9, 30), as observed in our cell line model (Figure 3-5), broader
microarray studies of HNSCC tissues (Figure
6B), and PanCancer 12 TCGA project (Figure
7). However, TNF-α, cREL, ΔNp63 modulate TAp73, attenuating
its TP53 compensatory function, while also enhancing a much broader oncogene program
implicated in cancer promotion (6, 8). This includes growth factor mediated
signaling, inflammatory cytokines, prosurvival transcription factors such as AP-1
and RELs, and anti-apoptotic genes (e.g. CFLAR) (Figure 4-6),
which can potentially counter and limit compensatory TP53tumor suppressor function.
Secondly, as shown by our and other laboratories, as well as in PanCancer 12
project, ΔNp63α is the dominant isoform expressed in squamous cancers
(2). We and others have shown the strong
oncogenic activity of ΔNp63α in squamous cancers, including promoting
tumor cell proliferation, migration, colony formation, and inflammatory responses
(8). Thirdly, as our and other
laboratories previously showed and supported by HNSCC and Pancancer 12 TCGA project,
a subset of squamous cancers exhibited inflammatory signatures concurrent with
TP63/TP73 compensatory activity (2). Such
inflammatory signaling mediated by TNF-α could reprogram TP73tumor
suppressor to oncogenic activity, through binding to AP-1 sites, as supported by
ChIP seq, ChIP RT-PCR, and binding assays (Figure
1-4) in this study. This novel
finding is also supported by the PanCancer 12 data indicating that inflammatory gene
signatures linked by cytokine TNF-α and NF-κB transcription factors
are connected to TP63 gene signatures through JUN/FOS mediated pathway and network
(Figure 7C and Figure S10).The novel finding from this study of physical interaction among these TFs
with genomic DNA is supported, among other evidence, by a narrow binding peak within
~200 bp surrounding TP53/p63 consensus sites, and a broader peak of
~400-500 bp within which nearby AP-1 motifs are distributed. Interestingly, a
~500 bp distance between p73 binding and AP-1 sites was independently
identified in ChIP-seq experiments in osteosarcoma cells, where anti-TAp73α
and c-Jun antibodies detected co-binding by ChIP-re-ChIP assay (34). In addition, Pietenpol and colleagues
identified overlapping AP-1 and p73 binding sites in ChIP-seq experiments, and
confirmed c-Jun binding within 500 bp of p73 binding sites in rhabdomyosarcoma cells
(35). Furthermore, we identified
palindromic binding sequences for TP53/p63 and AP-1 (Figure 2), which are similar to the sequences of TP53/TP63/TP73 and
nearby AP-1 binding motifs observed in previous studies (34-39). Our study
reveals that in the absence of TNF-α, TAp73 was mainly bound to TP53/TP63
consensus motifs, consistent with that found for growth arrest and pro-apoptotic
genes in multiple HNSCC lines including UM-SCC46 (6), where TAp73 exhibited a partial compensatory function for mutated
TP53 (9). However, previous studies have not
observed how TNF-α induced dynamic alterations of these TF binding
activities. After TNF-α treatment, ΔNp63α bound at TP53/TP63
sites previously occupied by TAp73, while TAp73 bound to AP-1 sites (Figure 2B and D). These dynamic alterations of
binding activities reversed TAp73tumor suppressor activity, while increased
cREL/ΔNp63α and TAp73 modulated expression of an inflammatory and
cancer related gene program.Our previous study demonstrated that TNF-α modulates reciprocal and
mutually exclusive protein-protein interactions between endogenous nuclear
ΔNp63α/TAp73 and cREL/ΔNp63α complexes (6, 8). Our
prior ChIP studies did not resolve if cREL or TAp73 can individually bind the same
minimal TP53RE, or if TP73 can bind to AP-1 REs independent of ΔNp63α
or other cofactors. Our sedimentation velocity centrifugation experiments revealed
that both cREL and TP73 bind these DNA REs and can form dimers and/or tetramers upon
DNA binding. These results provide biophysical support to the model of co-localized
binding of cREL and TP73 suggested by the ChIP-seq and bioinformatics analyses.
Collectively, the different experimental approaches provide mechanistic details of
how TFs can occupy binding sites at the same as well as very close promoter
sequences.Our reporter assays provide evidence for functional overlap in
transcriptional activities in addition to binding, which demonstrate differing
effects of the TFs and TNF-α on modulation of transcription (Figure 4A). The reporters contained TP53, AP-1 or
NF-κB REs. ΔNp63α exhibited minimal effects on TP53, decreased
CDKN1A (p21), and significantly induced IL-6
expression. This induction was significantly reduced by mutation of the NF-κB
and AP-1 REs, which is consistent with our and others’ publications (8, 40).
Significantly, TAp73α strongly induced CDKN1A (p21) and
SERPINE1 reporter activity, consistent with its compensatory
function for mutant TP53 (9, 31, 35,
41, 42), as well as induced specific AP-1 promoter activity (43, 44).
In addition, reporters with specific TP53 or AP-1 REs demonstrated the ability of
TNF-α to repress TAp73-induced TP53 RE, or enhance TAp73-mediated AP-1 RE
transactivation, supporting a reciprocal role for TNF-α in modulating these
response elements.TNF-α, an inflammatory cytokine produced in the tumor
microenvironment of many cancers, was previously shown to activate both NF-κB
and AP-1 (45, 46), the latter through MEK/ERK signaling. These findings are also
consistent with the Pan-TCGA data, where the Squamous-like cancer type exhibited
elevated activity of MAPK signaling pathways (2). Here we propose an expanded model, wherein TNF-α modulated
TAp73 also appears capable of reprogrammed binding of AP1-containing REs, while
inducing co-expression of AP-1 family member FOSL1/Fra1 and
reporters containing AP-1 REs. In addition, FOSL1 and
JUNB expression were significantly associated with p63 and p73
expression in human HNSCC cells and ΔNp63α transgenic mice. This is
consistent with our finding that FOSL/Fra1, cJUN and JUNB are the major AP-1 protein
family members expressed and bound to AP-1 sites, and which mediate cell
proliferation and migration in HNSCC cell lines (47, 48). Our data are supported
by others’ observations that p73 and AP-1 family members can enhance each
other's binding and transcription activities (35, 43, 44). Our present study adds new evidence that TNF-α is a
key factor that induces binding of TAp73 to AP-1 sites and increases AP-1 family
member transcription, and suggests a new model whereby TNF-α can co-modulate
AP-1 and reprogram TAp73 to cooperatively activate AP-1 target genes.Thus, our and others’ studies help explain why when TP53 is mutated
or defective in function, the TAp73 compensatory function for TP53 is repressed.
First, overexpressed ΔNp63α is able to form a complex with TAp73 to
block its tumor suppressor function (6, 8, 31).
Secondly, TNF-α promotes displacement of TAp73 from pro-apoptotic genes and
reprograms its binding and activation of AP-1 sites (Figure 2A, 2D, 2E, 3C). Thirdly,
nuclear TAp73 binding is displaced from TP53/p63 sites by the
cREL/ΔNp63α complex as supported by experimental validations (Figure 2, 3)
(6). Instead, TAp73 function is converted
to potentiate AP-1 activity and promote survival and inflammatory gene expression
(Figure 5), as supported by other studies
(34, 43). Furthermore, in an independent study of a group of genes predicted
to be controlled by cJUN/NF-κB (49),
20% of genes overlapped with the genes differentially regulated by TAp73 (34).Together, our current and recent studies (6, 8, 48) reveal a complex, genome-wide transcriptional regulatory
mechanism whereby TP53, NF-κB and AP-1 family members interact to promote a
broad signaling network favoring tumor survival and inflammation. Our current study
helps explain the global mechanisms underlying the newly discovered deregulated
TP53/p63 network and inflammation, presented recently by TCGA pan-cancer project
(2), and a study in neuroblastoma (50).
The transcriptional regulatory mechanisms mediated by TP53, NF-κB and AP-1
family members genome-wide are far more complex and nuanced than originally
anticipated, and understanding the mechanisms will shed light on more effective
means for targeting of cancer therapeutics.
Materials and Methods
ChIP and next-generation sequencing (ChIP-seq)
DNA fragments bound by antibodies were prepared following the ChIP
protocol using sheared DNA (~100-400 bp). The DNA samples were sequenced
using a next-generation GAIIx sequencer from Illumina following the
manufacturer's protocol (San Diego, CA). Sequence reads were mapped to the UCSC
human genome Hg18 assembly using the Eland algorithm (Illumina), permitting up
to 2 mismatches and no gaps. Only unique mapped reads were used in the binding
peak calling analysis. To identify binding peaks, we employed MACS (51), in which a dynamic Poisson
distribution model was used to detect the statistically significant binding
peaks in ChIP samples compared to DNA input controls. MACS is a widely used
algorithm for detection of protein-DNA binding sites when analyzing ChIP-seq
data. This method is specifically designed to detect the promoter transcription
factor binding sites, which are typically located within a few hundred DNA base
pairs. In our study, the default setting was selected, which is commonly
utilized and suitable to our datasets. Detected peak regions were visualized
mainly by using the CisGenome browser (52) together with gene structure, DNA sequences and conservation scores.
We compared the fraction of peaks residing in various genomic features with the
corresponding genome background using the CEAS program (53). A binomial test was used in this method to obtain the
p value of each comparison. Gibbs Sampler (54) was used for the de novo motif search for
binding site sequences and MEME-ChIP suit (55) was used to process the found motifs and compare the results to
known motifs in database. Peak location, distance to transcriptional start sites
(TSSs), peak intersection, motif location and intersection analysis were
performed using customized python/R scripts. ChIP-seq experiments were repeated
in UM-SCC46 cell lines, and a representative experiment was analyzed and
presented in Supplemental
Table S1. Minimal background peaks were observed in the samples of
input DNA or DNA from isotype control antibodies. This study utilized the
high-performance computational capabilities of the Biowulf Linux cluster at the
National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD (http://biowulf.nih.gov).
Authors: Rebekah K O'Donnell; Michael Kupferman; S Jack Wei; Sunil Singhal; Randal Weber; Bert O'Malley; Yi Cheng; Mary Putt; Michael Feldman; Barry Ziober; Ruth J Muschel Journal: Oncogene Date: 2005-02-10 Impact factor: 9.867
Authors: Alexandra Ruth Glathar; Akinsola Oyelakin; Christian Gluck; Jonathan Bard; Satrajit Sinha Journal: Front Oncol Date: 2022-05-31 Impact factor: 5.738
Authors: Stephen P Higgins; Yi Tang; Craig E Higgins; Badar Mian; Wenzheng Zhang; Ralf-Peter Czekay; Rohan Samarakoon; David J Conti; Paul J Higgins Journal: Cell Signal Date: 2017-11-28 Impact factor: 4.315