| Literature DB >> 33171917 |
Jessica D Kindrick1, David R Mole1.
Abstract
Cellular responses to low oxygen (hypoxia) are fundamental to normal physiology and to the pathology of many common diseases. Hypoxia-inducible factor (HIF) is central to this by enhancing the transcriptional activity of many hundreds of genes. The cellular response to HIF is cell-type-specific and is largely governed by the pre-existing epigenetic landscape. Prior to activation, HIF-binding sites and the promoters of HIF-target genes are already accessible, in contact with each other through chromatin looping and display markers of activity. However, hypoxia also modulates the epigenetic environment, both in parallel to and as a consequence of HIF activation. This occurs through a combination of oxygen-sensitive changes in enzyme activity, transcriptional activation of epigenetic modifiers, and localized recruitment to chromatin by HIF and activated RNApol2. These hypoxic changes in the chromatin environment may both contribute to and occur as a consequence of transcriptional regulation. Nevertheless, they have the capacity to both modulate and extend the transcriptional response to hypoxia.Entities:
Keywords: 2-oxoglutarate-dependent dioxygenase; acetylation; chromatin; epigenetics; histone; hypoxia; hypoxia-inducible factor; methylation; transcription
Year: 2020 PMID: 33171917 PMCID: PMC7664190 DOI: 10.3390/ijms21218320
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Mol Sci ISSN: 1422-0067 Impact factor: 5.923
Figure 1Overview of the HIF transcription factor in normoxia and hypoxia. In normal oxygen conditions (normoxia), the oxygen-dependent prolyl hydroxylases (EGLN1-3) hydroxylate HIF-α. This hydroxylation allows the von Hippel-Lindau E3 ubiquitin ligase to bind HIF-α and to covalently add ubiquitin moieties that target it for proteasomal degradation. In low levels of oxygen (hypoxia), the activity of the EGLN enzymes is reduced and HIF-α is stabilized. It then forms a heterodimer with HIF-1β and translocates to the nucleus, where it binds to hypoxia response elements (HREs) to release promoter-paused RNApol2 and enhance gene transcription. Often, these HREs are in distant enhancer regions, which contact their target promoters through cohesin-mediated chromatin looping. In normoxia, before HIF is stabilized, HIF-binding sites and target promoters are generally accessible and display histone modifications associated with active enhancers and promoters. However, both HIF and activated RNApol2 recruit additional essential epigenetic modifying activities that further modify the chromatin as a result of HIF-mediated transactivation.
Figure 2Writers and erasers of histone H3 methyl lysine, and DNA CpG methylation.
Sensitivity of 2-oxoglutarate-dependent dioxygenases to oxygen. 2-OG dependent dioxygenases that have been shown to have histone and DNA modifying activities, the targets they modify, and their sensitivity to changes in oxygen concentration.
| Sensitivity of 2-OG-Dependent Dioxygenases to Oxygen | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Enzyme | Reference | Km for Oxygen (mM) | Target |
| PHD2 | Hirsila, 2003 [ | 250 | HIF |
| Ehrismann, 2007 [ | 250 | ||
| Dao, 2009 [ | 1746 ± 574 | ||
| Tarhonskaya, 2014 [ | > 450 | ||
| FIH | Ehrismann, 2007 [ | 90-237 | |
| C-P4H | Hirsila, 2003 [ | 40 | collagen |
| KDM3A | Qian, 2019 [ | 7.59% ± 0.80% | H3K9me1/2 |
| KDM4A | Cascella, 2012 [ | 57 ± 10 | H3K9me2/3, H3K36me2/3, H1.4K26me2/3 |
| Hancock, 2017 [ | 173 ± 23 | ||
| Chakraborty, 2019 [ | 60 ± 20 | ||
| KDM4B | Chakraborty, 2019 [ | 150 ± 40 | |
| KDM4C | Cascella, 2012 [ | 158 ± 13 | |
| KDM4E | Cascella, 2012 [ | 197 ± 16 | H3K9me2/3 |
| Sanchez-Fernandez, 2013 [ | > 93 | ||
| KDM5A | Chakraborty, 2019 [ | 90 ± 30 | H3K4me2/3 |
| KDM5B | Chakraborty, 2019 [ | 40 ± 10 | |
| KDM5C | Chakraborty, 2019 [ | 35 ± 10 | |
| KDM5D | Chakraborty, 2019 [ | 25 ±5 | |
| KDM6A | Chakraborty, 2019 [ | 200 ± 50 | H3K27me3 |
| KDM6B | Chakraborty, 2019 [ | 25 ± 5 | |
| TET1 | Laukka, 2016 [ | 30 | methylcytosine |
| Thienpont, 2016 [ | 0.31% | ||
| TET2 | Laukka, 2016 [ | 30 | |
| Thienpont, 2016 [ | 0.53% | ||
Chromatin modifying enzymes that are direct transcriptional targets of HIF. Histone and DNA modifying enzymes that are directly regulated by the HIF transcription factors and the specific modification they add or remove.
| Chromatin Modifying Enzymes Targeted by HIF | Target | |||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| KDM2A | ✔ | H3K36me1/2 | ||||||||||||||||
| KDM2B | ✔ | |||||||||||||||||
| KDM3A | ✔ | ✔ | ✔ | ✔ | ✔ | ✔ | H3K9me1/2 | |||||||||||
| KDM3B | ✔ | |||||||||||||||||
| KDM4B | ✔ | ✔ | ✔ | ✔ | ✔ | ✔ | H3K9me2/3, H3K36me2/3, H1.4K26me2/3 | |||||||||||
| KDM4C | ✔ | ✔ | ✔ | |||||||||||||||
| KDM5B | ✔ | ✔ | H3K4me2/3 | |||||||||||||||
| KDM5C | ✔ | |||||||||||||||||
| KDM6B | ✔ | H3K27me2/3 | ||||||||||||||||
| JMJD6 | ✔ | |||||||||||||||||
| PLU-1 | ✔ | |||||||||||||||||
| SMCX | ✔ | |||||||||||||||||
| RBP2 | ✔ | |||||||||||||||||
| KIAA1718 | ✔ | |||||||||||||||||
| TET1 | ✔ | ✔ | ✔ | ✔ | methylcytosine | |||||||||||||
| TET2 | ✔ | |||||||||||||||||
| TET3 | ✔ | ✔ | ||||||||||||||||
| DNMT1 | ✔ | ✔ | ✔ | cytosine | ||||||||||||||
| DNMT3A | ✔ | |||||||||||||||||
| DNMT3B | - | ✔ | ||||||||||||||||
| Pollard, 2008 [ | Beyer, 2008 [ | Wellman, 2009 [ | Xia, 2009 [ | Yang, 2009 [ | Krieg, 2010 [ | Fu, 2012 [ | Niu, 2012 [ | Lee, 2014 [ | Batie, 2017 [ | Liu, 2011 [ | Watson, 2014 [ | Xu, 2018 [ | Mariana, 2014 [ | Tsai, 2014 [ | Wu, 2015 [ | Lin, 2017 [ | ||
Global changes in histone modifications in hypoxia. Publications showing global changes in histone methylation and acetylation in hypoxia across various cell types, oxygen levels, and duration of hypoxia. Up arrows indicate global induction of specific PTMs, down arrows indicate global reduction, and dashes indicate no significant change. ac indicates acetylation at that specific histone subunit and lysine residue, while me1, me2, and me3 indicate mono-, di-, and tri- methylation, respectively.
| Global Changes to Histone Modifications in Hypoxia | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Reference | Cell Line(s) | % O2 | Time (h) | H2AK5 | H3K4 | H3K9 | H3K14 | H3K16 | H3K27 | H3K36 | H3K79 | H4 | H4K5 | H4K12 | H4R3 | |||||||||
| ac | ac | me1 | me2 | me3 | ac | me1 | me2 | me3 | ac | ac | ac | me2 | me3 | me2 | me3 | me2 | ac | ac | ac | me2 | ||||
| Costa, 2005 [ | A549 | 0.5 | 1.5–9 | ↓ | ↓ | ↑ | ↑ | ↓ | ||||||||||||||||
| Chen, 2006 [ | A549, HOS, HEK293, MES | 0.5 | 1.5–24 | ↓ | ↓ | ↑ | ↑ | |||||||||||||||||
| Islam, 2006 [ | Fetal lung type II | 2 | 24 | ↓ | ↑ | |||||||||||||||||||
| Johnson, 2008 [ | Hepa 1-6 | 0.2 | 48 | ↑ | ↑ | ↑ | ↓ | ↑ | ↑ | ↑ | ↑ | ↑ | ↑ | |||||||||||
| Xia, 2009 [ | HepG2 | 0.5–5 | 24 | ↑ | ↑ | ↑ | ↑ | |||||||||||||||||
| Zhou, 2010 [ | Beas-2B, A549 | 1 | 6–48 | ↑ | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Tausendschon, 2011 [ | RAW254.7 | 1–8 | 24 | ↑ | ↑ | ↑ | ||||||||||||||||||
| Wu, 2011 [ | FADU, MCF-7 | 1 | 18 | ↓ | ↓ | ↑ | ↑ | - | - | ↓ | ↓ | |||||||||||||
| Olcina, 2013 [ | RKO | <0.1, 2 | 6 to 18 | ↑ | ↑ | - | ||||||||||||||||||
| Watson, 2014 [ | PwR-1E | 10% × 7wks, 3% × 4wks, then 1% × 3wks | ↓ | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Osumek, 2014 [ | McA-RH777 | 1, 5 | 24 or 48 | ↑ | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Dmitriev, 2015 [ | PC12 | 0 & no glucose | 1 to 9 | ↓ | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Olcina, 2016 [ | RKO | <0.1, 2 | 6–48 | ↑ | ||||||||||||||||||||
| Prickaerts, 2016 [ | MCF-7 | <0.2 | 8 or 24 | ↑ | ↑ | |||||||||||||||||||
| Dobrynin, 2017 [ | RKO | 0.1, 2 | 24 | ↑ | ↑ | |||||||||||||||||||
| Hancock, 2017 [ | U2OS | 0.1–5 | 24 | - | ↑ | ↑ | ↑ | |||||||||||||||||
| Lee, 2017 [ | hADSC | <0.5, 1, 2 | 24 or 48 | ↑ | ↑ | ↑ | ||||||||||||||||||
| Batie, 2019 [ | HeLa, HFF | 1 | 0.5–24 | ↑ | ↑ | ↑ | ↑ | ↑ | ||||||||||||||||
| Chakraborty, 2019 [ | mHepa-1 c4 | 5 | 96 | ↑ | ↑ | |||||||||||||||||||
| Li, 2020 [ | CHP134,SMS- | 0.5 | 6 or 24 | ↓ | ↑ | ↓ | ↑ | |||||||||||||||||
Locus-specific changes in histone modifications in hypoxia. Publications showing locus-specific changes in histone methylation in hypoxia, as well as any associated change in expression of that gene, in a wide range of cell types, oxygen levels, and duration of hypoxia. Up arrows indicate induction specific PTMs, down arrows indicate global reduction, and dashes indicate no significant change. ac indicates acetylation at that specific histone subunit and lysine residue, while me1, me2, and me3 indicate mono-, di-, and tri- methylation, respectively.
| Locus-Specific Changes to Histone Modifications in Hypoxia | ||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Reference | Cell Line(s) | % O2 | Time (h) | Gene Locus | H3K4 | H3K9 | H3K27 | Expression | ||||||
| ac | me1 | me2 | me3 | ac | me2 | me3 | ac | me3 | ||||||
| Islam, 2006 [ | Human fetal | 2 | 24 | SP-A | ↑ | ↑ | ||||||||
| Chen, 2006 [ | A549 | 0.5 | 6 | Dhfr, Mlh1 | ↑ | ↓ | ||||||||
| Cap43 | - | |||||||||||||
| Johnson, 2008 [ | Hepa 1-6 | 0.2 | 48 | AFP, ALB | ↑ | ↓ | ↑ | ↓ | ↓ | |||||
| EGR1, VEGF | ↑ | ↑ | ↓ | ↓ | ↑ | |||||||||
| Brn3-b | - | ↑ | ↓ | |||||||||||
| Lu, 2011 [ | MCF-7 or RKO | 0.01 | 12–72 | RAD51, BRCA1 | ↓ | ↓ | ↓ | ↑ | ↓ | |||||
| VEGF | ↑ | ↑ | ↑ | ↑ | ↑ | |||||||||
| Wu, 2011 [ | FADU | 1 | 18 | CDH2, VIM | ↓ | ↑ | ↓ | ↑ | ||||||
| CDH1 | ↓ | ↑ | ↑ | ↑ | ↑ | ↓ | ||||||||
| JUP | ↓ | ↑ | ↑ | ↓ | ||||||||||
| MCF-7 | 1 | 18 | CDH1 | ↑ | ↑ | ↓ | ||||||||
| Tausendschon, 2011 [ | RAW254.7 | 1 | 24 | Ccl2, Ccr1, Ccr5 | ↑ | ↑ | ↓ | |||||||
| ADM | - | - | ↑ | |||||||||||
| Choudhry, 2014 [ | MCF-7 | 1 | 24 | ALDOA, ADM | ↑ | ↑ | ||||||||
| Lu, 2014 [ | MCF-7 | 0.01 | 12–72 | MLH1 | ↓ | ↓ | ↓ | ↑ | ↓ | |||||
| Schorg, 2015 [ | MCF-7 | 0.5 | 16 | PAG1 | ↑ | - | ↑ | ↑ | ||||||
| EGLN3 | ↑ | |||||||||||||
| 786-0 | 0.5 | 16 | PAG1 | ↑ | ↑ | ↑ | - | |||||||
| EGLN3 | ↑ | |||||||||||||
| Adriaens, 2016 & Prickaerts, 2016 [ | MCF-7 | <0.2 | 8 or 24 | CCNA2, DPM1, NOL11, ATP2A3, FOXF1, IGFBP4 | ↑ | |||||||||
| ATF3, LPO, APLN, CYP1B1, SLC9A5 | ↑ | |||||||||||||
| GPRC5B, OPRL1 | ↑ | ↑ | ||||||||||||
| LOX | ↑ | ↓ | ||||||||||||
| Olcina, 2016 [ | RKO | <0.1 | 6 | APAK | ↑ | ↓ | ||||||||
| Dobrynin, 2017 [ | RKO | <0.1 | 24 | HIF-1A | ↑ | ↓ | ||||||||
| Lee, 2017 [ | hADSC | <0.5 | 48 | SLC22A15, PFKP, MEF2D, RUSC2 | ↑ | ↑ | ||||||||
| PDE4C, PFKFB4, MT3, STC1 | ↑ | ↑ | ||||||||||||
| SEC22B, BZW2, HNRNPA3, LUM | ↑ | ↓ | ||||||||||||
| CC2D2A, HSD17B4 | ↓ | ↓ | ||||||||||||
| Suzuki, 2018 [ | SK-N-BE(2)c | 1 | 4 or 24 | CA9, PGK1 | ↑ | ↑ | ||||||||
| Batie, 2019 [ | HeLa | 1 | 1–24 | BNIP3L, KLF10, LOX, ENO1, STAG2, CA9 | ↑ | ↑ | ||||||||
| BAP1, KDM2B | - | - | ||||||||||||
| ACTB | ↑ | |||||||||||||
| Chakraborty, 2019 [ | C2C12 | 2 | 96 | Actc1, Myl1, Myog, Myh1, Myom3, Igfn1, Mb | ↑ | |||||||||
| Adora1, Gjd2 | - | |||||||||||||
Figure 3Histone and DNA modifying enzymes that affect HIF levels. Removal of the repressive H3K9me3 mark by KDM4A at the HIF1A locus activates transcription of HIF-1α. Conversely, CpG methylation at the EPAS locus suppresses transcription of the HIF-2α isoform. Reversible acetylation of multiple residues on HIF-1α has variable effects on HIF-1α stability. Similarly, methylation of the molecule by G9a or SET7/9 also affects its stability. Methylation of the EGLN3 promoter suppresses transcription of this negative regulator of HIF.
Figure 4Regulation of chromatin structure by hypoxia on a global and locus-specific level. Independent of the HIF transcriptional pathway, hypoxia globally inhibits the activity of many 2-OG dependent dioxygenases that control histone and DNA modifications. The HIF transcription factor complex, activated by hypoxia, also works to control histone and DNA modifications on a global level by transcriptional induction of these same readers and writers. To cause locus-specific effects, HIF recruits these enzymes to chromatin and activates the RNApol2 complex.