Previous Article | Next Article ![]()
Mol Cell Biol, July 1998, p. 4118-4130, Vol. 18, No. 7
Cardiovascular Division, Department of
Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
19104,1 and
Center for Molecular Biology
of Oral Diseases, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago,
Illinois 606122
Received 20 October 1997/Returned for modification 15 December
1997/Accepted 6 April 1998
0270-7306/98/$04.00+0
Copyright © 1998, American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.
Tumor-Specific PAX3-FKHR Transcription Factor, but Not PAX3,
Activates the Platelet-Derived Growth Factor Alpha Receptor
SUMMARY
INTRODUCTION
MATERIALS AND METHODS
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
REFERENCES
SUMMARY
|
|
|---|
The t(2;13) chromosomal translocation occurs at a high frequency in
alveolar rhabdomyosarcoma, a common pediatric tumor of muscle. This
translocation results in the production of a chimeric fusion
protein derived from two developmentally regulated
transcription factors, PAX3 and FKHR. The two DNA binding modules, the
paired domain and the homeodomain, of PAX3 are fused in
frame to the transactivation domain of FKHR. Previously, tumor-specific
PAX3-FKHR has been shown to bind to DNA sequences normally
recognized by wild-type PAX3 and to exhibit relatively enhanced
transcriptional activity. The DNA binding sites used to demonstrate
that PAX3-FKHR is a more potent transcriptional activator than PAX3
have included recognition sequences for the paired domain of
PAX3. In this report, we demonstrate the ability of PAX3-FKHR to
activate the product of a growth control gene, platelet-derived growth
factor alpha receptor (PDGF
R), by recognizing a paired-type
homeodomain binding site located in the PDGF
R promoter.
PAX3 alone cannot mediate transcriptional activation of this promoter
under the conditions tested. This provides the first evidence that
chromosomal translocation results in altered target gene specificity of
PAX3-FKHR and suggests a transcriptional target that may play
a significant role in oncogenic activity and rhabdomyosarcoma
development.
INTRODUCTION
|
|
|---|
Rhabdomyosarcomas (RMS) are the most common soft tissue tumors in children and young adolescents (5, 42, 66). These tumors often display a wide morphological spectrum ranging from poorly differentiated cells to well-differentiated rhabdomyoblasts that exhibit organized sarcomeric components and cross striations characteristic of striated muscles. Based on their histopathology, RMS can be classified as embryonal (subtype botryoid), alveolar, pleomorphic, or (for a small number) having a miscellaneous phenotype. In general, the less differentiated the subtype, the poorer the patient prognosis. The most prevalent subtypes of RMS are embryonal RMS and alveolar RMS (ARMS) (16, 30, 39), with ARMS being the most malignant. Recent genetic analysis has revealed that both subtypes are characterized by specific genetic abnormalities.
A unique chromosomal translocation involving chromosomes 2 and 13 is detected in most ARMS (14, 55, 60). The ARMS-specific t(2;13)(q35;q14) chromosomal translocation generates a novel chimeric protein of two transcription factors, PAX3 (chromosome 2) and FKHR (chromosome 13). As the result of the translocation, the chimeric transcription factor, PAX3-FKHR, contains an intact N-terminal PAX3 DNA binding domain but with the COOH-terminal region replaced by a truncated FKHR DNA binding domain and FKHR transcriptional activation domain (1, 23, 47). A variant t(1;13) translocation has also been detected in a small population of ARMS. In these cases, a closely related fusion protein is observed, with the PAX3 portion replaced by PAX7 (13).
Both the PAX3 and PAX7 genes belong to the nine-member gene family known as the Pax gene family (50). Members of the Pax protein family have a common 128-amino-acid DNA binding motif termed the paired domain (PD). Some members of the Pax family, including PAX3 and PAX7, contain a second DNA binding region of the paired-type homeodomain (HD) class. A proline-rich acidic region at the COOH terminus is identified as the transactivation domain for Pax proteins (24). PAX3 and PAX7 genes have been implicated in the development of myogenic cell lineage (6, 12, 28, 35, 51, 52). During early embryogenesis, they are expressed in the condensing somites, and PAX3 expression becomes restricted to the lateral dermomyotome which gives rise to the limb musculature (21, 26, 27, 62). Further evidence that PAX3 is important in muscle development comes from studies with Splotch mice. These mice, which have a mutated PAX3 gene, fail to develop limb muscle (17, 25, 57). In humans, PAX3 mutations have been identified in patients with Waardenburg's syndrome, an autosomal dominant condition sometimes associated with limb muscle hypoplasia (53).
The FKHR gene is a member of the HNF-3/forkhead family of transcription factor genes (1, 23, 47). This protein family, like the Pax family, has also been implicated in developmental regulation. Family members share a conserved DNA binding motif referred to as the winged-helix (WH) motif (4, 31). Members of the HNF-3/forkhead family have been shown to function in regulating inflammatory responses of the liver and in the development of blood cell lineage (31, 61). Two members of this family, FKHR and qin, have been linked to the induction of neoplasia.
Although the ARMS translocation breakpoint has recently been defined and the resulting chimeric gene product has been identified, little information about the mechanism of PAX3-FKHR-induced oncogenesis is known. Since both DNA binding regions, the paired domain and the homeodomain, of the PAX3 protein are intact in the chimeric protein, it seems likely that PAX3-responsive genes would be targets for the transcriptional activation of PAX3-FKHR. Indeed, many PAX3-responsive sequences thus far identified also respond to PAX3-FKHR as determined by electrophoretic mobility shift assays (EMSA) and transient-transfection experiments. These experiments have suggested that PAX3-FKHR is a more potent transcriptional activator than the wild-type PAX3 (22). Therefore, one mechanism by which PAX3-FKHR is thought to function as an oncoprotein is by abnormally up regulating genes that are normally targets of PAX3. Although the chimeric protein also retains a portion of the FKHR-derived WH DNA binding domain, binding of PAX3-FKHR to WH-specific binding sequences has not been demonstrated and would seem unlikely, since the chimera lacks the first alpha helix of the WH domain, which is critical for the DNA binding activity of FKHR (4, 11).
In this report, we demonstrate for the first time that PAX3-FKHR can
directly activate the transcription of the platelet-derived growth
factor alpha receptor (PDGF
R) and that PAX3 cannot do so under
identical conditions. PDGF
R is one of the two known cell surface
transmembrane receptors specific for the mitogenic factor PDGF. We
suggest that PDGF
R could be a specific target in PAX3-FKHR
oncogenesis, providing a possible mechanism for PAX3-FKHR-mediated cell
transformation and uncontrolled cell growth associated with ARMS.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
|
|
|---|
DNA constructs.
pcDNA3 expression vector constructs
containing the wild-type and mutant mouse-human PAX3-FKHR hybrid cDNAs
(Un-1, Bu35, PD-NH2, and S268A) and the pCMV expression vector
containing the mouse PAX3 cDNA have been previously described (19,
22). The PD-HD and WH mutants were religated DNA products of an
EcoRI partial digest of the pcDNA3-PAX3-FKHR expression
vector, removing either the paired domain and homeodomain
or the bisected FKHR binding domain, respectively. PAX3-specific rabbit
polyclonal antibody was a kind gift from Frank Rauscher (Wistar
Institute, Philadelphia, Pa.) (22). Unless stated otherwise,
the reporter chloramphenicol acetyltransferase (CAT) gene constructs
under the control of mouse PDGF
R promoter sequences have been
previously described (58, 59).
Cell cultures. All cell cultures were maintained in Dulbecco's modified Eagle's high-glucose medium supplemented with 200 U of penicillin per ml, 50 µg of streptomycin per ml, 1 mM glutamine, and 10% (vol/vol) calf serum. For P19 cells, monolayer cultures were maintained on tissue culture dishes that were pretreated with 0.3% gelatin.
Transient-transfection and CAT assay.
Cells were plated at a
density of 106 cells per 100-mm-diameter tissue culture
dish 24 h prior to transient transfection. Transient transfection
was carried out with a total of 20 µg of DNA that included 3 µg of
-galactosidase DNA (LacZ) driven by the
-actin promoter as an
internal standard for monitoring transfection efficiency. For P19
cells, the transfection was carried out by the calcium phosphate
method. P19 cells were exposed to DNA-CaPO4 precipitate for
17 h, rinsed, and refed with growth medium for an additional 48 h before harvest. For COS cells, transfection was carried out by the DEAE-dextran method. Cells were exposed to DEAE-dextran-DNA complex for 3 h followed by incubation with serum-free medium containing 100 µM chloroquin for an additional 3 h. Cells were then rinsed and refed with growth medium for an additional 48 h
before harvest. Cell lysates for LacZ and CAT assays were prepared as
described previously (59). Deacetylase activity in the
lysate was inactivated by heating the lysates to 60°C for 7 min
(37). A typical CAT assay reaction mixture consisted of 0.7 µg of acetyl-coenzyme A, 0.2 µCi of
[14C]chloramphenicol (1 Ci = 37 GBq), and cell
lysates in a final volume of 150 µl. The amount of cell lysate used
in each CAT reaction was standardized by its
-galactosidase
activity. Unless stated otherwise, the routine CAT assays were carried
out at 37°C for 1 to 3 h and terminated by extraction with 1 ml
of ice-cold ethyl acetate. Quantitative analysis of CAT activity was
carried out by measuring the radioactivity of each radioactive spot in
a beta-scintillation counter.
Preparation of labeled DNA probe for EMSA.
Most of the
synthetic versions of different PF
R regions and the e5 sequence were
made as complementary pairs of unphosphorylated, single-stranded
oligonucleotides with different but compatible restriction ends (a
BamHI site at the 5' end and a BglII site at the
3' end). These oligonucleotide duplexes were phosphorylated by T4
polynucleotide kinase before they were cloned into the
BamHI-linearized pKS+-Bluescript vector
(Strategene). Oligonucleotides that do not contain compatible
restriction ends were cloned into pKS+-Bluescript vector at
the SmaI site. For EMSA studies, DNA fragments containing
the oligonucleotide sequences were first released from the vectors by
EcoRI-XbaI double digestion and then labeled by nucleotide fill-in reaction with [
-32P]dATP or
[
-32P]dCTP by using Klenow polymerase. The sequences
of the synthetic oligonucleotides of the wild-type PDGF
R promoter
sequence (top strand shown) were 5'
gatccGCCTCACAATCCAGCCTTTCAAAAACCCATCATCTa 3'
(PF
R1), 5'
gatcCCATCTTCCTATTAGACTCCACAGTTTCCTAATCCCa (PF
R2), 5' gatcCATCCCATTAAAGGATTAGCAACTACACGGCACTTa 3'
(PF
R3), and 5' gatccCAGTTTCCTAATCCCATTAAAGGATTAGCAACTACa 3'
(PF
R4). The sequences of the synthetic mutant
oligonucleotides of PF
R4 (top strand shown) were
5' gatccCAGTTTCCGCCGCCCATTAAAGGATTAGCAACTACa 3'
(M2), 5'
gatccCAGTTTCCTAATCCCCGGCAAGGATTAGCAACTACa 3' (M3),
and 5' gatccGTTTCCTAATCCCATTAAAGGCGGCGCAACTACa 3'
(M4). The lowercase nucleotides represent the
restriction ends designed to facilitate the determination of the
orientations of the oligonucleotide duplexes after cloning into plasmid
vectors and to allow additional copies of oligonucleotide duplexes be added in sequential cloning steps.
EMSA. Nuclear extracts were prepared as previously described, with minor changes (46). In brief, cells were rinsed with ice-cold phosphate-buffered saline twice and allowed to swell in hypotonic buffer (10 mM HEPES [pH 7.9], 0.75 mM spermidine, 0.15 mM spermine, 10 mM KCl, 0.1 mM EGTA, 0.1 mM EDTA, 1 mM dithiothreitol [DTT], 0.5 mM phenylmethylsulfonyl fluoride [PMSF], 0.2 mM NaF, 0.2 mM sodium vanadate) before lysis with a Dounce homogenizer. After homogenization, the lysed cells were mixed with 0.1 volume of sucrose restore buffer (67.5% sucrose, 50 mM HEPES [pH 7.9], 0.75 mM spermidine, 0.15 mM spermine, 10 mM KCl, 0.2 mM EDTA, 1 mM DTT, 0.5 mM PMSF, 0.2 mM NaF, 0.2 mM sodium vanadate) and subjected to 30 s of centrifugation at 10,000 × g to pellet nuclei. The nuclei were then resuspended in nuclear resuspension buffer (20 mM HEPES [pH 7.9], 0.75 mM spermidine, 0.15 mM spermine, 0.2 mM EDTA, 2 mM EGTA, 2 mM DTT, 0.5 mM PMSF, 0.2 mM NaF, 0.2 mM sodium vanadate, 25% glycerol), from which proteins were extracted by the addition at 1/10 (vol/vol) of 4 M ammonium sulfate. The extraction was done at 4°C for 30 min with continuous rocking. The debris was sedimented by centrifugation at 100,000 × g for 1.5 h. The clarified supernatant was then collected and stored in aliquots in liquid nitrogen until use.
EMSA was performed by incubating nuclear extract or glutathione-S-transferase (GST) fusion proteins with nonspecific carrier DNA, such as poly(dI-dC) and poly(dA-dT) in binding buffer containing 20 mM HEPES (pH 7.9), 1 mM
-mercaptoethanol, 0.5 mM EDTA, 50 mM KCl, and 0.2% bovine serum albumin for 5 min on ice.
Routinely, 0.2 ng of a 32P-labeled DNA probe prepared by
Klenow labeling was added to the EMSA reaction mixture (final volume of
20 µl) and allowed to form DNA-protein complexes during a 20-min
incubation at room temperature. The complex was analyzed on a 5%
nondenaturing polyacrylamide gel. Electrophoresis was carried out in
0.5× Tris-borate-EDTA buffer at 200 V at 4°C until the bromophenol
blue dye reached the bottom, and the gel was dried and
autoradiographed. For antibody competition assays, 1 µl of a 1:3
dilution of the PAX3 antibody was first mixed with the extract after
the initial 5 min and allowed to incubate at room temperature for 10 min before further addition of the probe. The antibody specific for
PAX3 was generated against the region of the mouse PAX3 corresponding
to amino acids 280 to 479 as described previously (22).
The GST fusion protein constructs expressing the DNA binding domains of
the wild-type and mutant PAX3-FKHR proteins were constructed by
inserting the EcoRI-EcoRI fragment encompassing
the entire DNA binding domains into the EcoRI site of the
pGEX-2T vector (Pharmacia). The e5 sequence used in the CAT assay and
EMSA is TCGGGCAGCACCGACGATTAGCACCGTTCCGCTCAGGCTCGG.
This e5 sequence contains recognition sites for the paired domain
(GTTCC) and for the homeodomain (ATTA) of the PAX3 and
PAX3-FKHR proteins, and it has been shown to respond to transcriptional
activation by PAX3 and PAX3-FKHR in P19 cells (9, 10, 26,
54).
Footprinting analysis.
DNase I footprinting was performed as
described previously (18). Briefly, the
912
RCAT plasmid
was digested with BspE1, labeled with
[
-32P]dCTP by using Klenow polymerase, and digested
with EcoRI. A 240-bp fragment including the
PAX3-FKHR-responsive element (PFRE) was gel purified and incubated with
GST-PAX3 paired-domain plus homeodomain proteins
(19) in the presence of 50 µg of poly(dI) · (dC)
per ml. The DNA binding motifs of the GST-PAX3 paired-domain plus
homeodomain are the same as those found in mouse-human
PAX3-FKHR hybrid used in the present study. After brief digestion with
DNase I, samples were run on a 6% polyacrylamide-urea gel in parallel with a guanine reaction sequencing ladder prepared from the original end-labeled probe by the method of Maxam and Gilbert (36).
Site-directed mutagenesis.
To introduce mutant sequences
into the PDGF
R promoter, we used the Strategene site-directed
mutagenesis PCR kit under the conditions recommended by the
manufacturer. All of the constructs made by this method were verified
by restriction enzyme digestion and DNA sequence analysis. The
sequences of the oligonucleotide primers used to generate mutations in
the ATTA sites (only the top strand is shown) were 5'
GTTTCCTCCGCCCATTAAAGG 3' (
RM2), 5'
CTAATCCCCGGAAAGGAATTAGC 3' (
RM3), and 5'
CCATTAAAGGAGGCGCAACTAC 3' (
RM4).
RNase protection analysis.
Total RNA was prepared from
cultured cells by the guanidinium HCl-phenol extraction method (Trizol
reagent [GIBCO-BRL]) according to the manufacturer's
recommendations. For the RNase protection assay, 30 µg of total RNA
isolated from transfected cells was hybridized to a PAX3-, PAX3-FKHR-,
PDGF
R-, or cyclophillin-specific RNA probe overnight at 45°C
before the sample was further subjected to RNase A and T1
digestion. The protected RNA bands were size fractionated on a 6%
polyacrylamide-urea sequencing gel. After electrophoresis, the gel was
fixed in 10% acetic acid-10% methanol for 30 min, dried, and exposed
for autoradiography at
80°C.
Western blot analysis. To verify that PAX3-FKHR protein was synthesized by transfected COS cells or by bacterial GST fusion proteins, a COS cell nuclear extract or partially purified GST fusion extract was first size fractionated on sodium dodecyl sulfate-10% polyacrylamide gels. The proteins were transblotted onto nitrocellulose membranes by electrophoresis in transblot buffer (20 mM Tris [pH 8.0], 192 mM glycine, 10% methanol, 0.1% sodium dodecyl sulfate). Detection of PAX3-FKHR or derivative proteins was carried out by using the chemiluminescent-antibody detection kit (NEN) under the conditions recommended by the manufacturer. The primary rabbit polyclonal PAX3 antibody was used at a dilution of 1:500.
RESULTS
|
|
|---|
Sequence analysis identifies a putative PAX3 binding site.
The
overlapping expression patterns of several of the Pax gene family
members and PDGF
R in embryonic tissues, coupled with evidence of
altered PDGF signaling in oncogenesis, led us to examine the
possibility that Pax genes might directly regulate the expression of
the PDGF
R gene. We examined the proximal 6 kb of the PDGF
R promoter and identified a potential PAX3 paired-domain binding site,
GTCACGCCT, at position
812 (Fig.
1A). This sequence
conforms well to the optimal PAX3 paired-domain binding sequence
(GTCACGC/ATT) previously identified by in vitro binding site
selection (8, 20). In addition, this sequence is similar to
a functional PAX3 paired-domain binding site found in the c-Met
promoter that mediates PAX3-dependent gene induction during limb muscle
development (20).
|
The PDGF
R promoter is selectively activated by the
tumor-specific PAX3-FKHR fusion transcription factor.
To
determine if this sequence could respond to PAX3-induced transcription
activation, we cotransfected a pcDNA3 expression vector encoding either
PAX3 or PAX3-FKHR and the PDGF
R promoter-driven CAT reporter
gene construct
912- or
100
RCAT (Fig. 1A) into murine P19
teratocarcinoma cells. P19 cells have been shown to be capable of
hosting PAX3- and PAX3-FKHR-mediated transactivation (19). The
912
RCAT promoter contained the putative
paired-domain binding site, whereas the
100
RCAT promoter contained
the basal promoter sequence, as previously determined (58).
As a positive control for transactivation, we used the p6e5CAT
construct, which contains a basal promoter and six copies of an e5
sequence (see Materials and Methods). The e5 sequence was first
identified as part of a response element from the Drosophila
even skipped promoter for the Eve transcription factor (26).
The e5 sequence includes adjacent paired-domain (GTTCC) and
homeodomain (ATTA) binding sites that are recognizable by
PAX3 and PAX3-FKHR. The p6e5CAT construct has previously been shown to
respond to transcriptional activation by PAX3 and PAX3-FKHR.
R promoter was
transactivated only by PAX3-FKHR and not by PAX3. We conducted dose-response experiments using the
912
RCAT reporter plasmid and
either PAX3 or PAX3-FKHR (Fig. 1B, inset). No PAX3-dependent induction
of the PDGF
R promoter was detected despite a wide range of
PAX3/
912
RCAT reporter ratios being tested. We tested ratios up to 100-fold higher than that necessary to elicit unambiguous PAX3-FKHR-dependent activation and 10-fold higher than that
required to elicit maximal PAX3-FKHR-dependent activation. At even
higher doses, we began to see inhibition of the cotransfected
-galactosidase activity, perhaps secondary to squelching or to the
inhibitory effects of PAX3 that have previously been reported to be
independent of DNA binding (7). In contrast, when the
p6e5CAT reporter was used, we consistently saw an approximately twofold
transactivation potential of PAX3-FKHR compared to PAX3 (Fig. 1B
and data not shown). The selective response of the PDGF
R
reporter gene to the tumor-specific PAX3-FKHR suggests that (i) PAX3
was too weak a transactivator for the PDGF
R promoter, and
stimulation by the more potent transactivator PAX3-FKHR
could still be detected, or (ii) PAX3-FKHR might recognize a DNA
sequence in the promoter that was not capable of mediating functional
transactivation by PAX3. To differentiate between the two
possibilities, we examined whether deletion of the putative
paired-domain binding sequence would eliminate
PAX3-FKHR-dependent induction. Using both Erase-a-Base and
restriction enzyme methods, we generated several serial deletion constructs from the
912
RCAT reporter (Fig.
2A). Each of these constructs was
transfected into P19 cells in the presence and absence of PAX3-FKHR. As
shown in Fig. 2B, removal of the putative paired-domain binding
sequence in
799
RCAT did not prevent the promoter from responding
to PAX3-FKHR stimulation. This result suggests that a different DNA
target sequence is involved. Serial truncations and internal deletions
localized the sequence responsible for mediating PAX3-FKHR
activation to within the
646 to
559 region of the promoter. Since
deletion of other DNA sequences surrounding the
646 to
559
fragment of the promoter did not significantly impair the induction by
PAX3-FKHR, we believe that the PAX-FKHR-responsive element (PFRE) was
contained within this 87-bp fragment. PAX3 had no effect on this 87-bp
fragment in cotransfection assays (data not shown).
|
Induction of the endogenous PDGF
R gene by PAX3-FKHR.
To examine whether the promoter analysis reflected how the
endogenous PDGF
R gene responds to PAX3-FKHR stimulation at a
cellular level, we measured endogenous PDGF
R mRNA levels in P19
cells that were transfected with PAX3-FKHR (Fig.
3). We transiently transfected cells with
10 µg of the expression vector alone or with various amounts of the
vector expressing PAX3 or PAX3-FKHR. Total RNA was collected
24 h after transfection and analyzed for PDGF
R, PAX3, and
PAX3-FKHR expression. As shown in Fig. 3, we did not detect PDGF
R
mRNA in cells transfected with the expression vector alone or in cells
transfected with PAX3. In the panel indicating the PAX3 signal, the
band observed in the lane with vector alone represents residual
undigested PAX3 RNA probe, which is also observed above the
PAX3-specific signals in all of the PAX3-expressing lanes. In contrast,
the PDGF
R mRNA signal was clearly detectable in cells transfected
with PAX3-FKHR. An RNA probe specific for cyclophillin was used as an
internal control to normalize for the amount of RNA used in each
reaction mixture.
|
The activity of the PFRE is dependent on the
homeodomain, not the paired domain, of PAX3-FKHR.
Since there was not any notable similarity between the 87-bp PFRE and
the paired-domain consensus binding site for PAX3, we tested the
involvement of different DNA binding domains (i.e., the PAX3 paired
domain, homeodomain, and the FKHR bisected WH domain)
present in PAX3-FKHR by cotransfecting cells with PDGF
R promoter-CAT
constructs and expression vectors encoding mutant PAX3-FKHR proteins
(Fig. 4A). Both Un-1 and Bu35 encode
single-amino-acid replacement mutants with mutations in paired domain
of PAX3-FKHR that have been shown to abolish DNA binding activity.
PD-NH2 is a deletion mutant that is missing the 5' half of the
paired-domain sequence and is predicted to abolish DNA binding by the
paired domain. S268A, HD-C, and HD encode mutants with mutations in the homeodomain. S268A encodes a single amino acid replacement
of the serine residue by alanine. The serine residue is at position 9 of the third recognition helix of the homeodomain, which has been
shown to impair the ability of the paired-type homeodomains to form homodimers (19). HD-C encodes a protein missing the third alpha helix of the homeodomain, and HD encodes a protein missing the entire homeodomain. PD-HD encodes a deletion mutant that does not contain any of the PAX3 DNA binding domains. Presumably, the only possible DNA binding activity of the mutant would be mediated
by the bisected WH DNA binding domain of FKHR. The WH mutant of
PAX3-FKHR is missing the bisected WH DNA binding domain of FKHR but
retains intact PAX3 DNA binding domains and the FKHR transactivation
domain.
|
R promoter. On the other hand, mutations that disrupted the
homeodomain, such as those in HD and HD-C, totally
abolished the stimulatory ability of PAX3-FKHR. The S268A mutant, which
can bind to homeodomain consensus sequences but exhibits
altered dimerization potential, could still induce transactivation
activity of the PDGF
R promoter, although at a much-reduced level.
The WH mutant, which contains intact PAX3 DNA binding domains, had no
effect on PAX3-FKHR transactivation activity, supporting the notion
that the bisected WH domain does not have a direct role in DNA binding
and transactivation. Neither the wild-type nor the mutants were able to
transactivate a PDGF
R promoter construct (
549) that did not
contain the PFRE. In contrast to transactivation of the PFRE,
transactivation of reporter constructs containing the reiterated e5
sequence required both the paired domain and homeodomain,
consistent with previous reports (54) (Fig. 4C). These
results clearly demonstrate that an intact homeodomain is
the only DNA binding domain of PAX3-FKHR required for transactivation of the PDGF
R promoter constructs containing the PFRE.
The PFRE contains a paired-type homeodomain binding site. Many homeodomain-containing transcription factors recognize DNA sequences containing a core ATTA (or TAAT on the opposite strand) consensus (15). The finding that the homeodomain, rather than the paired domain, of PAX3-FKHR was responsible for the transactivation of the PFRE led us to identify four ATTA sequences (ATTA1, TAAT2, ATTA3, and ATTA4) within the 87-bp PFRE (see Fig. 6A). We tested the ability of the PAX3 homeodomain to bind to these ATTA sequences by performing DNase I footprinting and EMSA experiments. As shown in Fig. 5, the purified PAX3 homeodomain was able to protect a 22- to 24-bp fragment of DNA from DNase I digestion. This region correlated exactly with three of the ATTA sequences identified within the PFRE. The footprinted region included two adjacent ATTA sequences arranged as inverted repeats with a spacing of 3 bp (TAATCCCATTA). This motif is similar to a previously reported P3 site that is recognized by the Drosophila Prd homeodomain (63).
|
R P3 site as well as the other
single ATTAs in the PDGF
R promoter, we designed four overlapping oligonucleotides covering most of the 87-bp PFRE sequence (Fig. 6A). These oligonucleotides were designed
to contain (i) no ATTA sequence (PF
R1), (ii)
ATTA1 and TAAT2 (PF
R2), (iii)
ATTA3 and ATTA4 (PF
R3), or (iv)
TAAT2, ATTA3, and ATTA4
(PF
R4). Each of these four oligonucleotides was tested
for PAX3-FKHR protein binding (Fig. 6) and transactivation (see Fig.
7). As shown in Fig. 6C, the PF
R4 oligonucleotide was
bound far more efficiently than any of the other oligonucleotides by
COS cell-expressed wild-type PAX3-FKHR. Despite adequate HD-C protein
expression as determined by Western blot analysis (Fig. 6B), the
PF
R4 oligonucleotide was also bound by the paired-domain
mutant PD-NH2 but not by the homeodomain mutant HD-C (Fig.
6D). The control e5 sequence behaved as expected in that it interacted
only with the wild-type protein and not with either mutant protein. We
believe that the more rapidly migrating complex (indicated by the
arrowhead in Fig. 6D) represents the probe bound to degraded
PAX3-FKHR protein. The amount of this degradation product
gradually increases with increasing age and freeze-thaw cycles of
the nuclear extract preparation.
|
R4 oligonucleotide in the context of the pTKCAT
reporter construct (CAT gene under the control of the thymidine kinase
promoter) is the only one tested that could respond to PAX3-FKHR
activation (Fig. 7). The
PF
R4 oligonucleotide responded to the PAX3-FKHR mutants in the same fashion as the intact PDGF
R promoter; that is,
it could be transactivated by the PD-NH2 mutant but not by the HD-C
mutant. Collectively, these results implicate the P3 site as the
critical region within the 87-bp PFRE mediating transactivation by
PAX3-FKHR.
|
Mutation of the P3 site completely abolishes the activity of the
PFRE.
To further assess the role of the P3 site, we generated
several mutant PF
R4 oligonucleotides that contained
nucleotide substitutions within each of the three ATTA sequences
(TAAT2, ATTA3, and ATTA4) (Fig.
8A) and determined if any of these
mutations would disrupt the ability of PF
R4 to interact with
PAX3-FKHR in gel shift or transactivation assays.
|
R4 sequences (Fig. 8C). For verification of the binding specificity, we also included two PAX3-FKHR
mutants, PD-NH2 and HD-C, in parallel assays. All three GST fusion
proteins were adequately expressed as demonstrated by Western blot
analysis (Fig. 8B). As predicted, the e5 probe was efficiently bound by
the GST-PF but not by GST-PD-NH2 and GST-HD-C. The wild-type
PF
R4 was bound efficiently by the GST-PF and GST-PD-NH2
but not by GST-HD-C. The mutant oligonucleotides, however, showed
binding patterns that can be summarized as follows. Mutation of
TAAT2 (M2) significantly reduced the binding by
GST-PAX3-FKHR and severely affected the binding by GST-PD-NH2.
Mutation of ATTA3 (M3) completely disrupted the
ability of the GST-PF and GST-PD-NH2 to bind. On the other hand,
mutation of ATTA4 (M4) had little effect on the
binding by the GST-PF and GST-PD-NH2. Collectively, these results
indicate a critical role of TAAT2 and ATTA3 in
the binding specificity of the PFRE.
In transactivation assays, both M2 and M3
mutants that had reduced or lost binding activity also failed to
exhibit transcriptional activation upon PAX3-FKHR cotransfection (Fig.
9A). Similar findings were obtained when
we mutated each of the three ATTA sequences within the context of the
promoter (
912
RCAT construct). As shown in Fig. 9B, mutation of the
TAAT2 and ATTA3 sites completely abolished the
responsiveness of the native PDGF
R promoter to PAX3-FKHR stimulation, whereas mutation of the ATTA4 site had little
effect on the responsiveness.
|
DISCUSSION
|
|
|---|
Recent elucidation of the molecular structures of several tumor-related chromosomal translocations has revealed that many result in the production of novel tumor-specific chimeric transcription factors. In some cases, the DNA binding domain of one transcription factor is fused to the transactivation domain of a second transcription factor. The altered properties of these chimeric transcription factors lead to aberrant patterns of gene expression that are likely to play significant roles in oncogenesis. The PAX3-FKHR chimera has been shown to have more potent transactivation properties than PAX3, although the DNA binding specificity appears to be identical to that of PAX3. In this report, we describe a novel mechanism for oncogenesis by this chimeric protein. We show that PAX3-FKHR has acquired a unique target gene specificity that enables it to activate a gene that is not normally activated by PAX3.
The novel specificity observed in the transactivation of the PDGF
R
promoter by PAX3-FKHR is a consequence of a preferential selection for
the homeodomain-mediated protein-DNA contacts. Although the
PDGF
R promoter contains both a PAX3 paired-domain consensus sequence
(
812) and several homeodomain consensus sequences (
646 to
549), our data convincingly demonstrate that only the
homeodomain consensus sequences are required for
transcriptional activation by PAX3-FKHR. This region of the PDGF
R
promoter, designated the PFRE, contains a cluster of four ATTA core
sequences. Specifically, the second and third ATTA repeats, which
are inverted and separated by 3 bp, resemble a P3 paired-type
homeodomain binding site (TAAT PyNPu ATTA). The P3 sites
have been previously identified by random-site selection as sequences
frequently recognized by the isolated Drosophila Prd
homeodomain protein (63). Schafer et al. have
demonstrated that PAX3 can bind inverted ATTA repeats in vitro
(44), and recently, the crystal structure of the isolated
Prd homeodomain bound to the P3 site has also been solved
(64). However it is important to note that neither P3 nor
its related sequences have been shown to play a functional role in
PAX3-dependent gene regulation. The only known functional P3 site is
that identified in the rhodopsin 1 promoter which mediates
transactivation by the PAX6 homolog eyeless in Drosophila
(48). Our data presented here indicate for the first time
that this P3-like element in the PDGF
R promoter mediates both
PAX3-FKHR DNA binding and PAX-FKHR transactivation. Mutation of either
of the inverted ATTA sequences in the P3 site completely abolishes the
ability of the PDGF
R promoter to respond to PAX3-FKHR activation
(Fig. 9). Interestingly, although neither ATTA half site is by itself
sufficient for mediating the PFRE response, mutation of one half site
(ATTA3) appears to disrupts PAX3-FKHR binding more than
mutation of the other half site (TAAT2) (Fig. 8). Since the
configuration of the two ATTA half sites is palindromic, the binding
data suggest that perhaps sequences flanking the P3 site might also
affect binding affinity and/or stability.
Our data also clearly demonstrate that the paired domain of PAX3-FKHR
is dispensable for transactivating the PDGF
R promoter. While the
interaction between the paired domain and the homeodomain in the transcriptional activity of PAX3 and PAX3-FKHR remains undefined, the analysis of transcriptional activators that contain only
a paired domain (such as PAX1 and PAX9) or only a paired-type homeodomain (such as gsc and lune) supports the notion that
these two types of DNA binding motifs can function independently of each other. In our studies, we show that PAX3-FKHR mutations that are
known to abolish DNA binding by the paired domain (e.g., Un-1 and Bu35)
do not affect transactivation of the PDGF
R promoter. In fact,
deletion of the entire amino-terminal region of the paired domain
(PD-NH2) also has no effect. Likewise, deletion of the bisected FKHR WH
domain does not affect transactivation of the PDGF
R promoter. In
contrast, mutations that abolish the ability of the
homeodomain to bind to DNA (e.g., HD and HD-C) completely abrogate the transactivation. Hence, these results show that the homeodomain of PAX3-FKHR alone not only is required but
also is sufficient for the transcriptional activation of the PDGF
R
promoter. Interestingly, a mutation in the homeodomain
(S268A) that impairs the ability of the isolated PAX3
homeodomain to form homodimers (19)
significantly reduces the ability of PAX3-FKHR to activate the PDGF
R
promoter. This suggests that protein-protein interaction might be an
important step in the transactivation of the PDGF
R promoter by
PAX3-FKHR. Further analysis will be needed to determine whether
full-length PAX3-FKHR forms homo- or heterodimers when binding to the
PDGF
R promoter in vivo.
The discovery of a homeodomain-mediated PAX3-FKHR function
prompts an intriguing question; that is, if both PAX3 and PAX3-FKHR proteins contain the same DNA binding modules, why is PAX3-FKHR able to
transactivate the PFRE while PAX3 is not? This difference could result
from two possible mechanisms: a difference in their DNA binding
abilities or a difference in their abilities to transactivate once bound. We have preliminary evidence indicating that in
vitro-translated full-length wild-type PAX3 appears to be capable of
binding the PFRE (57a). If this was indeed the case, the
result would imply that DNA binding alone is not sufficient to induce
transactivation. Potentially, PAX3 and PAX3-FKHR bind to PFRE by
different mechanisms and by adopting critically different
conformations. This possibility may be relevant, since Underhill and
Gros (56) have recently demonstrated that the PAX3 paired
domain has an inhibitory effect on the homeodomain binding
to a P3 site. Deletion of the paired domain appears to abrogate this
negative effect, allowing efficient homeodomain binding to
the P3 site. It is therefore possible that in the case of PAX3-FKHR, a
conformational change is introduced during the fusion process that
allows an independent homeodomain binding to the PFRE
despite the presence of an intact paired domain. It is also possible
that the dimerization properties of PAX3-FKHR also differ from those of
PAX3. In addition, PAX3 might complex with an unknown cofactor(s) that
prevents it from activating transcription of PDGF
R, an interaction
that has been overcome by the PAX3-FKHR fusion. In support of the
notion that PAX3 does not regulate PDGF
R expression, we have been
unable to detect any difference in PDGF
R expression in wild-type
versus homozygous mutant Splotch mouse embryos lacking PAX3
as determined by in situ hybridization (17a).
Finally, the identification of the PDGF
R promoter as a target for
PAX3-FKHR action may provide new insights into processes of muscle cell
transformation and tumorogenesis. Developmentally regulated PDGF
R
expression is known to be involved in the development of several
mesenchymal cell lineages, including the dermomyotome (38, 40, 41,
43, 45). PDGF has been shown to affect muscle development by
activating proliferation of muscle precursor cells prior to their
differentiation to form muscle fibers (32-34, 65). PDGF
receptor expression is highest in proliferating muscle precursors and
declines gradually to undetectable levels in differentiated muscle
cells (32-34). Thus, down regulation of PDGF receptor
expression may be an important transition step leading to muscle cell
differentiation. Moreover, a knockout mouse that contains a disrupted
PDGF
R gene develops a deficiency in myotome formation, suggesting
that PDGF
R plays a critical role in muscle development
(49). Since PDGF is also synthesized in normal muscle cells
and muscle-supporting fibroblasts, constitutive activation of PDGF
receptors could potentially cause uncontrolled muscle cell growth,
leading to tumor formation by autocrine and/or paracrine regulatory
pathways. A similar mechanism, i.e., establishment of autocrine and
paracrine loops for PDGF, has been indicated in the pathogenesis of
glioblastoma (29). Our observation that PAX3-FKHR can induce
PDGF
R promoter activity leads us to speculate that aberrant PDGF
R
function could play an important role in the establishment and/or
maintenance of transformed RMS phenotypes. In the future, it will be of
interest to determine if the expression level of PDGF
R correlates
with the presence of PAX3-FKHR translocation and the phenotypes of RMS.
PAX3 and PAX3-FKHR have both been shown previously to be capable of
activating expression of another cell surface tyrosine kinase receptor,
c-Met. In that case, transcriptional activation is dependent on binding
of the PAX3 paired domain to the c-Met promoter, and this activation is
required for normal migration of limb muscle progenitor cells (2,
3). c-Met has also been shown to be up regulated in many, but not
all, cell lines derived from PAX3-FKHR-expressing RMS cell lines
(20). Since muscle also produces the ligand for c-Met, i.e.,
scatter factor/hepatocyte growth factor, inappropriate expression of
c-Met in RMS expressing PAX3-FKHR has been postulated to lead to an
autocrine loop enhancing tumorogenicity. The present results suggest
that there may be multiple pathways whereby PAX3-FKHR promotes tumor
formation, including at least two growth factor/receptor activation
cascades. It will be of interest to test whether PDGF
R is activated
in those cell lines in which c-Met is not overexpressed. It is also possible that these various pathways affect different stages of cancer
progression; for instance, inappropriate PDGF
R expression could lead
to uncontrolled cell proliferation, while c-Met activation could
enhance migration and metastasis formation.
In conclusion, the PAX3-FKHR chimera protein is thought to play a
crucial role in muscle cell transformation and the formation of RMS.
Presently, little is known about the molecular mechanism(s) underlying
this transformation process. We have presented several lines of
evidence to demonstrate that the tumor-specific PAX3-FKHR transcription
factor has the ability to activate the PDGF
R gene, which is not
normally regulated by PAX3 under the same testing conditions. This
finding provides new insights into the molecular basis for PAX3-FKHR
oncogenesis as well as new avenues for designing approaches to
specifically inactivate the PAX3-FKHR transforming activity
without affecting normal PAX3 function.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
|
|
|---|
We thank Reed Graves for his help in proofreading the manuscript. We also thank Haiying Li for her technical assistance.
J.A.E. is the recepient of a Penn/Hughes Scientist Award (made possible by the Howard Hughes Medical Institute Award Resources Program for Medical Schools). The present work is supported by grants to J.A.E. (from NIH K08 [HL03267-01], AHA [96008010], and the McCabe Foundation) and to C.W. (from AICR [96A015], NIH [CA-74907], and NIH [NS-36366]).
J.A.E. and B.S. contributed equally to this work.
FOOTNOTES
* Corresponding author. Mailing address: Center for Molecular Biology of Oral Diseases, University of Illinois at Chicago, 801 South Paulina St., Chicago, IL 60612. Phone: (312) 996-4530. Fax: (312) 413-1604. E-mail: U30080{at}uicvm.cc.uic.edu.
REFERENCES
|
|
|---|
| 1. | Barr, F. G., N. Galili, J. M. Holick, J. A. Biegel, G. Rovera, and B. S. Emanuel. 1993. Rearrangement of the PAX3 paired box gene in the pediatric solid tumor alveolar rhabdomyosarcoma. Nat. Genet. 3:113-117[Medline]. |
| 2. | Bladt, F., D. Riethmacher, S. Isenmann, A. Aguzzi, and C. Birchmeier. 1995. Essential role for the c-met receptor in migration of myogenic precursor cells into the limb bud. Nature 376:768-771[Medline]. |
| 3. | Brand-Saberi, B., T. S. Muller, J. Wilting, B. Christ, and C. Birchmeier. 1996. Scatter factor/hepatocyte growth factor (SF/HGF) induces emigration of myogenic cells at interlimb level in vivo. Dev. Biol. 179:303-308[Medline]. |
| 4. | Brennan, R. G. 1993. The winged helix DNA-binding motif: another helix turn helix takeoff. Cell 74:773-776[Medline]. |
| 5. | Breslow, N. E., and B. Langholz. 1983. Childhood cancer incidence: geographical and temporal variations. Int. J. Cancer 32:703-716[Medline]. |
| 6. | Chalepakis, G., A. Stoykova, J. Wijnholds, P. Tremblay, and P. Gruss. 1993. Pax: gene regulators in the developing nervous system. J. Neurobiol. 24:1367-1384[Medline]. |
| 7. |
Chalepakis, G.,
F. S. Jones,
G. M. Edelman, and P. Gruss.
1994.
PAX-3 contains domains for transcription activation and transcription inhibition.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
91:12745-12749 |
| 8. | Chalepakis, G., and P. Gruss. 1995. Identification of DNA recognition sequences for the PAX3 paired domain. Gene 162:267-270[Medline]. |
| 9. |
Chalepakis, G.,
J. Wijnholds, and P. Gruss.
1994.
PAX3 DNA interaction: flexibility in the DNA binding and induction of DNA conformation changes by paired domains.
Nucleic Acids Res.
22:3131-3137 |
| 10. | Chalepakis, G., R. Fritsch, H. Fickenscher, U. Deutsch, M. Goulding, and P. Gruss. 1991. The molecular basis of undulated/Pax1 mutation. Cell 66:873-884[Medline]. |
| 11. | Clark, K. L., E. D. Halay, E. Lai, and S. K. Burley. 1993. Co-crystal structure of the HNF-3/forkhead DNA recognition motif resembles histone H5. Nature 264:412-420. |
| 12. | Daston, G., E. Lamar, M. Olivier, and M. Goulding. 1996. Pax-3 is necessary for migration but not differentiation of limb muscle precursors in the mouse. Development 122:1017-1027[Abstract]. |
| 13. |
Davis, R. J.,
C. M. D'Cruz,
M. A. Lovell,
J. A. Biegel, and F. G. Barr.
1994.
Fusion of PAX7 and FKHR by the variant t(1;13)(p36;q14) translocation in alveolar rhabdomyosarcoma.
Cancer Res.
54:2869-2872 |
| 14. | Douglass, E. C., M. Valentine, E. Etcubanas, D. Parham, B. L. Webber, P. J. Houghton, and A. A. Green. 1987. A specific abnormality in rhabdomyosarcoma. Cytogenet. Cell Genet. 45:148-155[Medline]. |
| 15. | Ekker, S. C., K. E. Young, D. P. von Kessler, and P. A. Beachy. 1991. Optimal DNA sequence recognition by the Ultrabithorax homeodomain of Drosophila. EMBO J. 10:1179-1186[Medline]. |
| 16. | Enzinger, F. M., and S. Weiss. 1983. In Soft tissue sarcomas, p. 363-370. C. V. Mosby Co., St. Louis, Mo. |
| 17. | Epstein, D. J., M. Vekemans, and P. Gros. 1991. Splotch (Sp 2H), a mutation affecting development of the mouse neural tube, shows a deletion within the paired homeodomain of PAX3. Cell 67:767-774[Medline]. |
| 17a. | Epstein, J. Unpublished results. |
| 18. |
Epstein, J. A.,
T. Glaser,
J. Cai,
L. Jepeal,
D. S. Walton, and R. L. Maas.
1994.
Two independent and interactive DNA binding subdomains of the PAX6 paired domain are regulated by alternative splicing.
Genes Dev.
8:2022-2034 |
| 19. |
Epstein, J. A.,
P. Lam,
L. Jepeal,
R. L. Maas, and D. N. Shapiro.
1995.
PAX3 inhibits myogenic differentiation of cultured myoblast cells.
J. Biol. Chem.
270:11719-11722 |
| 20. |
Epstein, J. A.,
D. N. Shapiro,
J. Cheng,
P. Y. P. Lam, and R. L. Maas.
1996.
PAX3 modulates expression of the c-Met receptor during limb muscle development.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
93:4213-4218 |
| 21. | Franz, T. 1993. The splotch (Sp 1H) and splotch-delayed (Sp d) alleles: differential phenotypic effects on neural crest and limb musculature. Anatomic Embryol. 187:153-160. |
| 22. | Fredericks, W. J., N. Galili, S. Mukhopadhyay, G. Rovera, J. Bennicelli, F. G. Barr, and F. J. Rauscher, III. 1995. The PAX3-FKHR fusion protein created by the t(2;13) translocation in alveolar rhabdomyosarcomas is a more potent transcriptional activator than PAX3. Mol. Cell. Biol. 15:1522-1535[Abstract]. |
| 23. | Galili, N., R. J. Davis, W. J. Fredericks, S. Mukhopadhyay, F. J. Rauscher III, B. S. Emanuel, G. Rovera, and F. G. Barr. 1993. Fusion of a forkhead domain gene to PAX3 in the solid tumor alveolar rhabdomyosarcoma. Nat. Genet. 5:230-235[Medline]. |
| 24. | Glaser, T., L. Jepeal, J. G. Edwards, S. R. Young, J. Favor, and R. L. Maas. 1994. PAX6 gene dosage effect in a family with congenital cataracts, aniridia, anophthalmia and central nervous system defects. Nat. Genet. 7:463-471[Medline]. |
| 25. | Goulding, M., S. Sterrer, J. Fleming, R. Balling, J. Nadeau, K. Moore, S. D. Brown, K. J. Steel, and P. Gruss. 1993. Analysis of the PAX-3 gene in the mouse mutant splotch. Genomics 17:355-363[Medline]. |
| 26. | Goulding, M. D., G. Chalepakis, U. Deutsch, J. R. Erselius, and P. Gruss. 1991. PAX3, a novel murine DNA binding protein expressed during early neurogenesis. EMBO J. 10:1135-1147[Medline]. |
| 27. | Goulding, M. D., A. Lumsden, and P. Gruss. 1993. Signals from the notochord and floor plate regulate the region-specific expression of two PAX genes in the spinal cord. Development 117:1001-1107[Abstract]. |
| 28. | Gruss, P., and C. Walther. 1992. Pax in development. Cell 69:719-722[Medline]. |
| 29. |
Hermanson, M.,
K. Funa,
M. Hartman,
L. Claesson-Welsh,
C.-H. Heldin,
B. Westermark, and M. Nister.
1992.
Platelet-derived growth factor and its receptors in human glioma tissue: expression of messenger RNA and protein suggests the presence of autocrine and paracrine loops.
Cancer Res.
52:3213-3219 |
| 30. | Horn, R. C., Jr., and H. T. Enterline. 1958. Rhabdomyosarcoma: a clinicopathological study and classification of 39 cases. Cancer 11:181-191[Medline]. |
| 31. | Hromas, R., and R. Costa. 1995. The hepatocyte nuclear factor-3/forkhead transcription regulatory family in development, inflammation, and neoplasia. Crit. Rev. Oncol. Hematol. 20:129-140[Medline]. |
| 32. |
Jin, P.,
T. Sejersen, and N. R. Ringertz.
1991.
Recombinant platelet-derived growth factor BB stimulates growth and inhibits differentiation of rat L6 myoblasts.
J. Biol. Chem.
266:1245-1249 |
| 33. |
Jin, P.,
M. Rahm,
L. Claesson-Welsh,
C.-H. Heldin, and T. Sejersen.
1990.
Expression of PDGF A-chain and -receptor genes during rat myoblast differentiation.
J. Cell Biol.
110:1665-1672 |
| 34. | Jin, P., K. Farmer, N. R. Ringertz, and T. Sejersen. 1993. Proliferation and differentiation of human fetal myoblasts is regulated by PDGF-BB. Differentiation 54:47-54[Medline]. |
| 35. | Maroto, M., R. Reshef, A. E. Munsterberg, S. Koester, M. Goulding, and A. Lassar. 1997. Ectopic PAX3 activates MyoD and myf-5 expression in embryonic mesoderm and neural tissue. Cell 89:139-148[Medline]. |
| 36. | Maxam, A. M., and W. Gilbert. 1980. Sequencing end-labeled DNA with base-specific chemical cleavages. Methods Enzymol. 65:499-560[Medline]. |
| 37. |
Mercola, M.,
J. Goverman,
C. Mirell, and K. Calame.
1985.
Immunoglobulin heavy-chain enhancer requires one or more tissue specific factors.
Science
227:266-270 |
| 38. | Morrison-Graham, K., G. C. Schaterman, T. Bork, D. F. Bowen-Pope, and J. A. Weston. 1992. A PDGF receptor mutation in the mouse (Patch) perturbs the development of a non-neuronal subsets of neural crest-derived cells. Development 115:133-142[Abstract]. |
| 39. | Newton, W. A., E. H. Soule, A. B. Hammond, H. M. Reiman, H. Shimada, M. Beltangaty, and H. Mauren. 1988. Histopathology of childhood sarcomas. Intergroup rhabdomyosarcoma studies I and II: clinicopathological correlation. J. Clin. Oncol. 6:67-75[Abstract]. |
| 40. |
Orr-Urtreger, A.,
M. E. Bedford,
M.-S. Do,
L. Eisenbach, and P. Lonai.
1992.
Developmental expression of the receptor for platelet-derived growth factor, which is deleted in the embryonic lethal Patch mutation.
Development
115:289-303[Abstract].
|
| 41. | Orr-Urtreger, A., and P. Lonai. 1992. Platelet-derived growth factor-A and its receptor are expressed in separate but adjacent cell layers of the mouse embryo. Development 115:1045-1058[Abstract]. |
| 42. | Raney, R. B., D. M. Hays, and M. Trfft. 1993. Rhabdomyosarcoma and the undifferentiated sarcomas, p. 769-794. In P. A. Pizzo, and D. G. Poplack (ed.), Principles and practice of pediatric oncology. Lippincott, Philadelphia, Pa. |
| 43. |
Reinertsen, K. K.,
R. T. Bronson,
C. D. Stiles, and C. Wang.
1997.
Temporal and spatial specificity of PDGF receptor promoter in transgenic mice.
Gene Exp.
6:301-314.
|
| 44. |
Schafer, B. W.,
T. Czerny,
M. Bernasconi,
M. Genini, and M. Busslinger.
1994.
Molecular cloning and characterization of a human PAX7 cDNA expressed in normal and neoplastic myocytes.
Nucleic Acids Res.
22:4574-4582 |
| 45. |
Schatteman, G. C.,
K. Morrison-Graham,
A. van Koppen,
J. A. Weston, and D. F. Bowen-Pope.
1992.
Regulation and role of PDGF receptor -subunit expression during embryogenesis.
Development
115:123-131[Abstract].
|
| 46. | Shapiro, D. J., P. A. Sharp, W. W. Wahle, and M. J. Keller. 1988. A high efficiency HeLa cell nuclear transcription extract. DNA 7:47-55[Medline]. |
| 47. |
Shapiro, D. N.,
J. E. Sublett,
B. Li,
J. R. Downing, and C. W. Naeve.
1993.
Fusion of PAX3 to a member of the Forkhead family of transcription factors in human alveolar rhabdomyosarcoma.
Cancer Res.
53:5108-5112 |
| 48. |
Sheng, G.,
E. Thouvenot,
D. Schmucker,
D. S. Wilson, and C. Desplan.
1997.
Direct regulation of rhodopsin 1 by Pax-6/eyeless in Drosophila: evidence for a conserved function in photoreceptors.
Genes Dev.
11:1122-1131 |
| 49. | Soriano, P. 1997. The PDGF a receptor is required for neural crest cell development and for normal patterning of the somites. Development 124:2691-2700[Abstract]. |
| 50. | Strachan, R., and A. P. Read. 1994. PAX genes. Curr. Opin. Genet. Dev. 4:427-438 |