| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Previous Article | Next Article ![]()
Molecular and Cellular Biology, November 2006, p. 8572-8585, Vol. 26, No. 22
0270-7306/06/$08.00+0 doi:10.1128/MCB.00650-06
Copyright © 2006, American Society for Microbiology. All Rights Reserved.
Experimental Therapeutics Section, Medical Oncology Branch, Center for Cancer Research, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland 20892
Received 14 April 2006/ Returned for modification 2 June 2006/ Accepted 28 August 2006
| ABSTRACT |
|---|
|
|
|---|
| INTRODUCTION |
|---|
|
|
|---|
To date, little is known about the molecular mechanisms controlling ABCG2 expression. Characterization of the ABCG2 gene promoter revealed that it is a TATA-less promoter with several Sp1, AP1, and AP2 sites and a CCAAT box downstream from a putative CpG island. Both positive and negative cis-regulatory elements have been suggested in the ABCG2 promoter (4). Although the role of these cis-elements in ABCG2 transcription has not been assessed, recent studies have demonstrated functional hormone (16) and hypoxia (32) response elements in the ABCG2 promoter. Early observations in our laboratory revealed that ABCG2 expression in some renal clear cell carcinoma (RCC) cell lines could be upregulated by treatment with a DNA-demethylating agent, 5-aza-2'-deoxycytidine (5-aza-dC). This observation led to the hypothesis that DNA methylation might play a role in the epigenetic regulation of the ABCG2 gene.
DNA methylation at the 5-position carbon of cytosine within 5'-CpG-3' dinucleotides is the predominant epigenetic modification in the regulation of gene expression. While DNA methylation is essential for mammalian development (34), distortion of the genomewide DNA methylation profile in cancer cells results in aberrant methylation patterns and silencing of tumor suppressor genes (5, 17, 26). Methylation is initiated by the de novo DNA methyltransferases DNMT3a and DNMT3b, which transfer methyl groups from S-adenosylmethionine to C-5 of CpG base pairs. During DNA replication, the maintenance methyltransferase DNMT1 then methylates the newly synthesized strand complementary to the hemimethylated DNA.
Hypermethylation of CpG islands in gene promoters leads to suppression of transcriptional activity (6, 28). It has been reported that methylation levels of gene promoters are inversely proportional to transcriptional activity (30). The epigenetic silencing of genes is mediated through recruitment of a group of proteins, called methyl CpG binding proteins (MBDs), that act as docking sites for corepressor proteins such as Sin3a, histone deacetylases (HDACs), histone methyltransferases, and heterochromatin protein 1a (HP1a) (21, 22, 57). As a consequence, the chromatin becomes more condensed and not favorable for transcription (22, 27). Mammalian cells contain five MBDs with highly homologous methyl CpG-binding domains, MBD1, MBD2, MeCP2, MBD3, and MBD4. The mechanism of MBDs targeting to different regions of the genome is not known. Recent studies from lower eukaryotes and mammals have shown that DNA methylation and histone modifications, specifically hypoacetylation and H3K9 methylation, are interrelated (51, 52).
The present study was undertaken to explore the molecular mechanisms underlying the epigenetic regulation of ABCG2 gene expression. Since the expression of the VHL gene is known to be regulated by methylation of its 5' regulatory regions (23) and the gene methylation status was well characterized in the renal carcinoma cell lines (23, 58), analysis of VHL gene expression was performed together with ABCG2 gene expression to serve as a validation of the assays. Our results indicate that aberrant promoter methylation represses ABCG2 expression in RCC cells, associated with coordinated changes in histone methylation and deacetylation. Inhibition of methyltransferase can reactivate the expression. MBDs and the HDACs are recruited to the methylated promoter and appear to contribute to the repression of ABCG2.
| MATERIALS AND METHODS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
5-Aza-2'-deoxycytidine (5-Aza-dC) and depsipeptide treatment. Cell lines were treated for 4 days with 5-aza-2'-deoxycytidine (5-aza-dC) (Sigma, St. Louis, MO) at a concentration of 1 µM. Culture media (with 5-aza-dC) were replaced every 24 h. In parallel experiments, cells were treated with depsipeptide at 2 ng/ml plus verapamil at 5 µg/ml for 24 h. Stock solutions of 5-aza-dC, depsipeptide, and verapamil were dissolved, respectively, in 50% acetic acid, dimethyl sulfoxide, and water.
Semiquantitative RT-PCR. Total RNA was isolated using the Trizol reagent (Invitrogen, Carlsbad, CA). RNA (1 µg) was reverse transcribed using PowerScript reverse transcriptase (Clontech, Mountain View, CA). Amplification of cDNA was done using primers specific for ABCG2, VHL, and ß-actin. Primers specific for ABCG2 cDNA amplification were 5'-CAATGGGATCATGAAACCTG-3' (forward) and 5'-GAGGCTGATGAATGGAGAA-3' (reverse). The primer pair specific for VHL cDNA was 5'-TCATCTTCTGCAATCGCAGTCC-3' (forward) and 5'-AATCTCCCATCCGTTGATGTGC-3' (reverse). The primers specific for ß-actin amplification were 5'-GCTCGTCGTCGACAACGGCTC-3' (forward) and 5'-CAAACATGATCTGGGTCATCTTCTC-3' (reverse). Amplification of ß-actin cDNA served as an internal control. PCR amplification for the ABCG2, VHL, and ß-actin mRNA was performed at an annealing temperature of 55°C to yield 584-, 420-, and 330-bp products, respectively. The PCR products were resolved on 2% agarose gel, stained with ethidium bromide, and quantitated.
Restriction enzyme digestion coupled with PCR to assess promoter methylation. A methylation-sensitive PCR assay was used to analyze the methylation status of the promoter region of ABCG2 and VHL (23). DNA was treated with methylation-sensitive restriction endonuclease followed by PCR amplification. Total genomic DNA (5 µg) was isolated using the genomic DNA isolation kit (Promega, Madison, WI) and digested with 100 U of either HpaII or MspI (New England Biolabs, Ipswich, MA) at 37°C overnight. HpaII is a methylation-sensitive restriction endonuclease that cleaves DNA at CCGG sequences when the internal cytosine residue is unmethylated on both strands. MspI cleaves DNA regardless of methylation status and serves as a control for digestion efficiency. Since the VHL gene is known to be unmethylated in placental DNA (Sigma), it was used as a control to confirm that the HpaII/MspI digestions were complete. Digested DNA was then amplified by PCR using primers designed for the evaluation of DNA methylation status of the ABCG2 and VHL genes (Table 1). PCRs contained 1.5 mM MgCl2, 200 µM deoxynucleoside triphosphates (dNTPs), 0.4 µM of each primer, 100 ng of digested DNA, and 2.5 U of Taq polymerase (Bioline, Randolph, MA). The PCR protocol was 1 cycle of 94°C for 3 min; 30 cycles of 94°C for 1 min, 55°C for 1 min, and 72°C for 1 min; and finally 1 cycle of 10 min at 72°C.
|
|
Whole ABCG2 reporter plasmids were methylated using SssI methylase (M.SssI; New England Biolabs), which methylates all cytosine residues within the double-stranded dinucleotide recognition sequence 5'-CG-3'. Ten micrograms of each plasmid was incubated with 30 U of M.SssI, and in a parallel control reaction, 10 µg of the same plasmid was mock methylated in the absence of S-adenosylmethionine (13). Methylated and mock-methylated plasmids were digested with SacI/HindIII and religated back to SacI/HindIII-restricted pGL3-Basic vector (Promega). The extent of methylation was determined by digestion with a mixture of methylation-sensitive restriction enzymes HpaII and HhaI.
Transient transfection and luciferase reporter assays. The unmethylated (mock methylated) or methylated ABCG2 promoter/firefly luciferase fusion genes (200 ng DNA) were transfected in UOK121 cells using Fugene 6 (Roche, Indianapolis, IN). In each experiment, the phRG-Basic plasmid (50 ng), encoding Renilla luciferase (Promega), was cotransfected for normalization proposes. Luminescence was measured 48 h after transfection using the dual-luciferase reporter assay system (Promega). The pGL3-Basic (promoterless) plasmid was used in each experiment to determine the basal levels. Reporter activity was normalized by calculating the ratio of firefly to Renilla values. Each construct was tested in three independent transfections.
Cytotoxicity assay. The cytotoxicity assays were performed using the sulforhodamine method described previously (47). Briefly, cells were plated in flat-bottom 96-well plates at a density of 2,000 cells per well and allowed to attach for 24 h at 37°C in 5% CO2. The cells were then treated with one of three ABCG2-substrate chemotherapeutic drugs (mitoxantrone, topotecan, or SN-38) at a range of concentrations with or without 5 µM fumitremorgin C (FTC) and allowed to incubate at 37°C in 5% CO2 for 96 h. Fumitremorgin C was synthesized by Thomas McCloud, Developmental Therapeutics Program, Natural Products Extraction Laboratory, National Institutes of Health (Bethesda, MD). Mitoxantrone and topotecan were purchased from Sigma. SN-38 was obtained from LKT Laboratory (St. Paul, MN). After incubation, the cells were fixed in 50% trichloroacetic acid and stained with sulforhodamine B solution (0.4% sulforhodamine B [wt/vol] in 1% acetic acid). Optical densities were read on a Bio-Rad plate reader at an absorbance of 570 nm. Each concentration was tested in quadruplicate, and controls were done in replicates of eight.
ChIP. Cells growing on 10-cm culture dishes were incubated in culture medium containing 1% formaldehyde for 10 min at 37°C to cross-link DNA to chromatin-associated proteins. The cross-linking was quenched by adding 0.125 M glycine and incubated at room temperature for 5 min. The cells were then rinsed in ice-cold phosphate-buffered saline containing 5 mM sodium butyrate (Sigma) and 1x protease inhibitor cocktail (Calbiochem, La Jolla, CA), scraped, and collected by centrifugation at 4°C. Chromatin immunoprecipitation (ChIP) was carried out according to the manufacturer's recommendations with the following antibodies: anti-acetyl-histone H3 (Lys 9), anti-trimethyl-histone H3 (Lys9), anti-HDAC1, and anti-MBD2 (Upstate); anti-MeCP2 (Abcam); and anti-DNMT1, anti-DNMT3a, anti-DNMT3b, or anti-mSin3A (Santa Cruz Biotechnology). The DNA-protein complexes were sonicated using a Misonix sonicator MX2020 under conditions that gave a range in DNA fragments from 200 to 600 bp, as determined by agarose gel electrophoresis.
Amplification of the immunoprecipitated DNA was achieved using Taq DNA polymerase (Bioline) and 1 µl of either immunoprecipitated DNA, a normal immunoglobulin G (IgG) control or a 1:10 dilution of input chromatin. Experimental reactions were performed to determine optimal PCR conditions so that the yield of PCR products was dependent on the amount of input DNA (data not shown). The conditions for all reactions were as follows: 94°C for 3 min, followed by 30 cycles at 94°C for 1 min, 55°C for 1 min, 72°C for 1 min, and 72°C for 7 min. Primers were designed to evaluate the distal region (distal) and proximal regions (P1, P2, P3, and P4) spanning the putative CpG island of the ABCG2 promoter (Table 1). PCR products were electrophoresed on 2% agarose gels and stained with ethidium bromide. Enrichment (fold) in each immunoprecipitation was determined by quantifying the intensities of the PCR products in immunoprecipitated DNA versus input DNA (total chromatin).
| RESULTS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
|
5-Aza-dC has been shown to be capable of transcriptionally activating genes with unmethylated promoters (50), inducing histone acetylation and H3 lysine 4 methylation (44), suggesting this drug can induce chromatin remodeling independently of its effects on cytosine methylation. Therefore, further experiments were set out to determine whether the upregulation of ABCG2 following 5-aza-dC treatment was mediated by demethylation.
Computational analysis of the CpG island in the ABCG2 gene. A simplified schematic overview of the region showing the location of CpG sites in the ABCG2 promoter is provided in Fig. 2A. A CpG island is located at bases 599 to +329 according to Gardiner-Garden/Frommer criteria as listed in the CpG Island Searcher on the Internet (54). As the ABCG2 promoter contains a region meeting the typical CpG island criteria of >60% C+G content and an observed CpG frequency of >0.6, we decided to analyze its methylation status.
|
Again, since the methylation pattern of VHL is well characterized in the RCC cell lines, primers VHLPF1 and VHLE1R were synthesized to amplify the promoter/exon 1 region of the VHL gene to validate the method (Table 1) (58). In this region, there is a large CpG island of 10 CCGG sequences (33). No PCR product was obtained with HpaII or MspI digestion prior to PCR amplification in UOK181 (Fig. 2C), which agrees with the fact that the region is undermethylated in this cell line (58). Since the VHL gene would be expected to be unmethylated in placental DNA (58), it was employed as a control to confirm that HpaII/MspI digestion was complete. As expected for the known methylated VHL promoter/exon 1 in the UOK121 and UOK143 lines, PCR products were obtained from both HpaII-digested and control uncut DNA (Fig. 2C).
Methylation status of individual CpG dinucleotides in the ABCG2 promoter as determined by bisulfite genomic sequencing. Bisulfite sequencing was employed to investigate the methylation profile of the ABCG2 CpG island in the three renal carcinoma cell lines. Genomic DNA was modified with sodium bisulfite, converting all unmethylated cytosines to uracils. Methylated cytosines were not converted to uracils. The core region of the ABCG2 CpG island (nucleotides [nt] 440 to +154) was then amplified with primer sets A, B, and C (Fig. 3 and Table 2). The specificity of the primers for bisulfite-converted templates was tested by their failure to PCR amplify non-bisulfite-treated human genomic DNA. PCR products were cloned into the pCR2.1-TOPO vector. The resulting plasmids were transformed using competent cells and plated to obtain colonies. Individual clones were then selected for sequencing. Each clone thus represents an individual methylation profile of the cell population. By examining the non-CpG cytosines, bisulfite conversion of unmethylated cytosines to uracils was virtually complete. In agreement with the methylation-sensitive restriction enzyme-coupled PCR above, the ABCG2 promoters of UOK121 and UOK143 were extensively methylated, whereas that of UOK181 was mostly unmethylated (Fig. 3). Interestingly, methyl groups were not distributed uniformly across the 66 CpG sites studied but instead were concentrated in the distal part of the CpG island studied (CpGs 1 to 52; nucleotides 388 to +114).
|
|
Comparison of results between the methylated and mock-methylated reporter plasmids indicated that methylation resulted in only residual reporter gene activity, in contrast to the cells transfected with mock-methylated constructs (Fig. 4C). However, for the reporter construct 1662/629 devoid of the putative CpG island, methylated and mock-methylated samples gave similar reporter activities, with an absolute signal just three- to fourfold above the pGL3-Basic background.
Methylated cell lines were more sensitive to ABCG2 substrate drugs. To evaluate the therapeutic implication of the lower ABCG2 expression due to promoter methylation, we performed 4-day cytotoxicity assays on the three renal cancer cell lines in the presence of one of three ABCG2 substrate anticancer drugs, mitoxantrone, topotecan, or SN-38. A summary of results is shown in Table 3. For all three drugs, the methylated cell lines UOK121 and UOK143 were found to be more sensitive than the unmethylated cell line UOK181. The cytotoxicity assays were repeated with or without 5 µM FTC to assess the impact of ABCG2 inhibition on the cytotoxic effect of the drugs on the cells. FTC is a specific inhibitor of ABCG2 (46), and at 5 µM, FTC did not affect cell viability. In UOK121 and UOK143, 5 µM FTC had little effect on the cytotoxicity of the three ABCG2 substrates tested. In contrast, UOK181 cells were partially sensitized to the drugs in the presence of 5 µM FTC. The IC50s for all the three drugs were reduced to approximately one-third of that without FTC (Table 3).
|
|
|
Binding of methyl-CpG binding proteins to the ABCG2 promoter. Previous work demonstrated that members of the methyl-CpG binding (MBD) protein family, including MBD1, MBD2 (MeCP1), MBD3, and MeCP2, mediate methylation-dependent transcriptional repression and are present in distinct HDAC-containing complexes (28, 37, 41-43). Among these methyl-CpG binding proteins, MBD2 and MeCP2 are better understood and provide a link between the two global mechanisms of gene regulation, DNA methylation and histone acetylation. A number of publications demonstrate conclusively that they are involved in the suppression of aberrantly methylated tumor suppressor genes by binding to methylated regulatory regions (3, 19). To assess whether the MBD proteins were involved in ABCG2 silencing, the protein expression of MBD2 and MeCP2 was determined by immunoblot analysis and their association with the ABCG2 promoter was examined using the ChIP assay.
MBD2 was strongly expressed in all of the three UOK cell lines (Fig. 7A). MeCP2 was highly expressed in UOK121 and UOK181, but much lower in UOK143 (Fig. 7A). Treatment of the three cell lines with either 5-aza-dC or depsipeptide did not alter MBD2 and MeCP2 protein expression levels in the whole-cell lysates.
|
The association of MBD2 and MeCP2 with the ABCG2 promoter was also analyzed by the ChIP assay in the UOK cells after treatment with 5-aza-dC. As shown in Fig. 8, 5-aza-dC significantly decreased the association of both MBD2 and MeCP2 with the ABCG2 promoter in UOK121 and UOK143 cells (region P3), whereas it did not have any impact on the already low binding of MBDs to the ABCG2 promoter in UOK181 (region P3). Interestingly, depsipeptide did not appreciably affect the binding of MBDs with the ABCG2 promoter in any cell line (Fig. 8).
|
Decreased association of DNMT1 and DNMT3a with the ABCG2 promoter upon 5-aza-dC treatment. 5-Aza-dC leads to DNA methylation by inhibiting DNMTs. The renal carcinoma cell lines were treated with either 5-aza-dC or depsipeptide, and the whole-cell lysates were subjected to immunoblot analysis with specific antibodies against the DNMTs. After a 4-day treatment of 5-aza-dC, the levels of all three DNMTs decreased significantly (Fig. 9A). However, depsipeptide did not alter expression of the DNMTs.
|
| DISCUSSION |
|---|
|
|
|---|
In this study, the methylation-mediated transcriptional repression of ABCG2 was examined in RCC cell lines. Determination of the methylation pattern in the ABCG2 gene was made using simple HpaII digestion followed by PCR amplification of the promoter region flanking the putative CpG island. Methylation at specific CpG dinucleotides was confirmed by bisulfite genomic sequencing. The ABCG2 promoter in the UOK121 and UOK143 cells was found to be methylated, but UOK181 was not methylated, the pattern of which paralleled the well-characterized methylation status in the VHL gene (23, 58). This can be of therapeutic importance. UOK121 and UOK143, having a methylated ABCG2 promoter and expressing a lower level of ABCG2, were found to be more sensitive to ABCG2 substrate drugs than the unmethylated UOK181. Moreover, partial sensitization of cells to ABCG2 substrate drugs by FTC, an ABCG2-specific inhibitor, was only appreciable in the unmethylated UOK181.
Consistent with the role of DNA methylation in ABCG2 silencing, incubation of methylated cell lines UOK121 and UOK143 with 5-aza-dC, a specific inhibitor of DNA methyltransferase, resulted in upregulation of ABCG2 expression in a concentration-dependent manner. No effect was observed in the unmethylated UOK181 cells. Finally, in vitro methylation of a luciferase reporter gene construct confirmed the silencing effect of methylation on the ABCG2 promoter.
It has been suggested that DNA methyltransferases may act only on chromatin that is methylated at lysine 9 on histone H3 (H3K9) (31, 51). Indeed, H3K9 methylation is sufficient for initiating a gene repression pathway in vivo (49). Our results suggest that modifications (methylation and deacetylation) of histone H3 assembled at the ABCG2 promoter and DNA methylation of the CpG island coordinately cause silencing of the ABCG2 gene. The ABCG2 expression in the methylated cell lines (UOK121 and UOK143) can be restored by 5-aza-dC treatment, and the reactivation is associated with hyperacetylation of H3 at lysine 9. Thus, apart from demethylating the ABCG2 promoter, 5-aza-dC also resets the histone code, switching it from methylation to acetylation at H3K9.
MBD proteins mediate silencing of genes by facilitating the establishment of a repressive chromatin environment (7, 57). To date, five methyl-CpG binding proteins have been identified: MeCP2, MBD1, MBD2, MBD3, and MBD4 (41-43, 48). These proteins recruit chromatin remodeling enzymes such as histone deacetylases and mSin3 to the DNA with their transcriptional repression domains, creating an inactive chromatin configuration (28, 38, 41). We evaluated the binding of these various proteins to the ABCG2 promoter. ChIP assays demonstrated binding of MeCP2, MBD2, HDAC1, and mSin3A to the CpG island region in UOK121 and UOK143, but only minimally in UOK181. ChIP analyses also revealed that 5-aza-dC treatment in UOK121 and UOK143 cells facilitated an enrichment of acetyl-H3, a release of MBDs (i.e., MeCP2 and MBD2), and a decreased occupancy of HDAC1 and mSin3A on the ABCG2 promoter, consistent with a more open chromatin conformation that would allow transcriptional activation. However, no appreciable change in the binding of transcription factors, Sp1 and c-JUN, was detected after 5-aza-dC treatment in the renal cell lines (data not shown). Taken together, the data support the notion that DNA methylation-dependent formation of a repressor complex in the CpG island contributes to inactivation of the ABCG2 gene.
The binding of the MBDs to methylated DNA results in recruitment of HDACs to support transcriptional repression. In our experiments, the HDAC inhibitor depsipeptide could upregulate ABCG2 expression most effectively in the unmethylated UOK181, but to a lesser extent in the methylated UOK121 and UOK143. It has been proposed that DNA methylation is dominant over other epigenetic factors in the regulation of gene transcription (10). At a dose of depsipeptide (2 ng/ml) that induced significant acetylation of histone H3 in the whole-cell lysate of the methylated UOK121 and UOK143 cells, limited ABCG2 upregulation was observed despite the fact that increased accumulation of acetylated histone on the ABCG2 promoter was noted. This suggests that DNA demethylation is more critical than histone acetylation for the ABCG2 gene chromatin to switch from a transcriptionally nonpermissive to a permissive configuration. In this regard, the repressive histone code, MeH3K9, was found binding strongly to the proximal ABCG2 promoter in the methylated cell lines, which was not affected by depsipeptide treatment. In contrast, depsipeptide did reduce the association of MeH3K9 with the ABCG2 promoter in the unmethylated cell line. This may explain why depsipeptide has less effect on upregulation of ABCG2 in the methylated cell lines than in the unmethylated cell line. A similar finding has been reported for FMR1 transcriptional silencing in fragile X cells (11). Interestingly, inhibition of histone deacetylation by trichostatin A following partial demethylation by 5-aza-dC does lead to a robust activation of a variety of methylated genes, such as MLH1, TIMP3, INKN2A, INKN2B, and MDR1 (10, 53). However, there was no synergistic effect of depsipeptide and 5-aza-dC on ABCG2 expression, in contrast to what has been reported for those aforementioned genes silenced by promoter methylation (10, 11). It is likely that methylation-dependent transcriptional repression of ABCG2 involves corepressors other than depsipeptide-sensitive histone deacetylase(s).
Although methylation-mediated silencing of ABCG2 is proposed in this study, it is interesting to note that ABCG2 expression level in the unmethylated cell line UOK181 is only about twofold higher that that in the methylated cell line. Notably, ABCG2 can be upregulated by fivefold in UOK181 by treatment with depsipeptide. Thus, a DNA methylation-independent pathway may exist for the transcriptional repression of ABCG2 in UOK181. Investigation into this proposed regulatory mechanism is now under way.
DNA methylation can confer a selective growth advantage to cells when it occurs in the promoter regions of genes repressing the expression of tumor suppressor genes, resulting in the development of cancer (26, 40). Since ABCG2 normally functions as an efflux transporter, the physiological significance of this methylation-dependent repression in cancer is not clear. Whether the repression of ABCG2 would provide an advantage to the cell, or merely be an epiphenomenon, is open to speculation. Folate deprivation has been reported to decrease ABCG2 expression (24), though the underlying mechanism is not known. Interestingly, down-regulation through hypermethylation of H-cadherin (25) and p16INK4A (45) has been reported in response to folate depletion. Since folates have been reported to be substrates for ABCG2, demethylation of its promoter could provide protection for the cell from folate deficiency. Regardless of whether ABCG2 repression could be of benefit to cancer cells, the identification of patients whose tumors have repressed ABCG2 could be important. Drugs that are substrates for ABCG2 would be expected to be more effective in such a patient population.
A more important role of ABCG2 methylation could be that in normal physiology. Gene methylation is believed to be the basic mechanism for the establishment and maintenance of genomic imprinting (12). Imprinted genes are marked in the male and female germ lines and retain the molecular memory of their parental origin, resulting in allelic expression differences. However, gene regulation at the promoter level during normal growth and development is not well understood. Abcg2 expression is increased in the murine lactating breast epithelium (29). Presumably, the levels decline during involution of the mammary gland by an unknown mechanism, and the involvement of methylation has not been excluded. Furthermore, ABCG2 is normally expressed in the placenta and in stem cells (9, 59). The possible role of promoter methylation in regulating ABCG2 expression in stem cells and their progeny has not been evaluated. Since it would require isolation of different populations of cells, including stem cells, progenitor cells, and terminally differentiated cells, this pursuit must await progress in the identification of specific markers for cells at different stages of development.
| ACKNOWLEDGMENTS |
|---|
We thank M. W. Linehan for providing the UOK121, -143, and -181 cells. We also thank Sara Kolla for her advice about the chromatin immunoprecipitation assay.
| FOOTNOTES |
|---|
Published ahead of print on 5 September 2006. ![]()
| REFERENCES |
|---|
|
|
|---|
2. Allikmets, R., L. M. Schriml, A. Hutchinson, V. Romano-Spica, and M. Dean. 1998. A human placenta-specific ATP-binding cassette gene (ABCP) on chromosome 4q22 that is involved in multidrug resistance. Cancer Res. 58:5337-5339.
3. Auriol, E., L. M. Billard, F. Magdinier, and R. Dante. 2005. Specific binding of the methyl binding domain protein 2 at the BRCA1-NBR2 locus. Nucleic Acids Res. 33:4243-4254.
4. Bailey-Dell, K. J., B. Hassel, L. A. Doyle, and D. D. Ross. 2001. Promoter characterization and genomic organization of the human breast cancer resistance protein (ATP-binding cassette transporter G2) gene. Biochim. Biophys. Acta 1520:234-241.[Medline]
5. Baylin, S., and T. H. Bestor. 2002. Altered methylation patterns in cancer cell genomes: cause or consequence? Cancer Cell 1:299-305.[CrossRef][Medline]
6. Baylin, S. B., and J. G. Herman. 2000. DNA hypermethylation in tumorigenesis: epigenetics joins genetics. Trends Genet. 16:168-174.[CrossRef][Medline]
7. Bird, A. P., and A. P. Wolffe. 1999. Methylation-induced repressionbelts, braces, and chromatin. Cell 99:451-454.[CrossRef][Medline]
8. Breedveld, P., N. Zelcer, D. Pluim, O. Sonmezer, M. M. Tibben, J. H. Beijnen, A. H. Schinkel, O. van Tellingen, P. Borst, and J. H. Schellens. 2004. Mechanism of the pharmacokinetic interaction between methrotrexate and benzimidazoles: potential role for breast cancer resistance protein in clinical drug-drug interactions. Cancer Res. 64:5804-5811.
9. Bunting, K. D. 2002. ABC transporters as phenotypic markers and functional regulators of stem cells. Stem Cells 20:11-20.
10. Cameron, E. E., K. E. Bachman, S. Myohanen, J. G. Herman, and S. B. Baylin. 1999. Synergy of demethylation and histone deacetylase inhibition in the re-expression of genes silenced in cancer. Nat. Genet. 21:103-107.[CrossRef][Medline]
11. Coffee, B., F. Zhang, S. T. Warren, and D. Reines. 1999. Acetylated histones are associated with FMR1 in normal but not fragile X-syndrome cells. Nat. Genet. 22:98-101.[CrossRef][Medline]
12. Delaval K., and R. Feil. 2004. Epigenetic regulation of mammalian genomic imprinting. Curr. Opin. Genet. Dev. 14:188-195.[CrossRef][Medline]
13. Dell, G., M. Charalambous, and A. Ward. 2001. In vitro methylation of specific regions in recombinant DNA constructs by excision and religation. Methods Mol. Biol. 181:251-258.[Medline]
14. Doyle, L. A., and D. D. Ross. 2003. Multidrug resistance mediated by the breast cancer resistance protein BCRP (ABCG2). Oncogene 22:7340-7358.[CrossRef][Medline]
15. Doyle, L. A., W. Yang, L. V. Abruzzo, T. Krogmann, Y. Gao, A. K. Rishi, and D. D. Ross. 1998. A multidrug resistance transporter from human MCF-7 breast cancer cells. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 95:15665-15670.
16. Ee, P. L., S. Kamalakaran, D. Tonetti, X. He, D. D. Ross, and W. T. Beck. 2004. Identification of a novel estrogen response element in the breast cancer resistance protein (ABCG2) gene. Cancer Res. 64:1247-1251.
17. Egger, G., G. Liang, A. Aparicio, and P. A. Jones. 2004. Epigenetics in human disease and prospects for epigenetics therapy. Nature 429:457-463.[CrossRef][Medline]
18. Feinberg, A. P., S. Rainier, and M. R. DeBaun. 1995. Genomic imprinting, DNA methylation, and cancer. J. Natl. Cancer Inst. Monogr. 1995:21-26.
19. Fujita, N., S. Takebayashi, K. Okumura, S. Kudo, T. Chiba, H. Saya, and M. Nakao. 1999. Methylation-mediated transcriptional silencing in euchromatin by methyl-CpG binding protein MBD1 isoforms. Mol. Cell. Biol. 19:6415-6426.
20. Fuks, F. 2005. DNA methylation and histone modifications: teaming up to silence genes. Curr. Opin. Genet. Dev. 15:490-495.[CrossRef][Medline]
21. Fuks, F., P. J. Hurd, D. Wolf, X. Nan, A. P. Bird, and T. Kouzarides. 2003. The methyl-CpG-binding protein MeCP2 links DNA methylation to histone methylation. J. Biol. Chem. 278:4035-4040.
22. Geiman, T. M., U. T. Sankpal, A. K. Robertson, Y. Chen, M. Mazumdar, J. T. Heale, J. A. Schmiesing, W. Kim, K. Yokomori, Y. Zhao, and K. D. Robertson. 2004. Isolation and characterization of a novel DNA methyltransferase complex linking DNMT3B with components of the mitotic chromosome condensation machinery. Nucleic Acids Res. 32:2716-2729.
23. Herman, J. G., F. Latif, Y. Weng, M. I. Lerman, B. Zbar, S. Liu, D. Samid, D. S. Duan, J. R. Gnarra, and W. M. Linehan. 1994. Silencing of the VHL tumor-suppressor gene by DNA methylation in renal carcinoma. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 91:9700-9704.
24. Ifergan, I., A. Shafran, G. Jansen, J. H. Hooijberg, G. L. Scheffer, and Y. G. Assaraf. 2004. Folate deprivation results in the loss of breast cancer resistance protein (BCRP/ABCG2) expression. J. Biol. Chem. 279:25527-25534.
25. Jhaveri, M. S., C. Wagner, and J. B. Trepel. 2001. Impact of extracellular folate levels on global gene expression. Mol. Pharmacol. 60:1288-1295.
26. Jones, P. A., and S. B. Baylin. 2002. The fundamental role of epigenetic events in cancer. Nat. Rev. Genet. 3:415-428.[Medline]
27. Jones, P. A., and P. W. Laird. 1999. Cancer epigenetics comes of age. Nat. Genet. 21:163-167.[CrossRef][Medline]
28. Jones, P. L., G. J. Veenstra, P. A. Wade, D. Vermaak, S. U. Kass, and N. Landsberger. 1998. Methylated DNA and MeCP2 recruit histone deacetylase to repress transcription. Nat. Genet. 19:187-191.[CrossRef][Medline]
29. Jonker, J. W., J. W. Smit, R. F. Brinkhuis, M. Maliepaard, J. H. Beijnen, J. H. Schellens, and A. H. Schinkel. 2000. Role of breast cancer resistance protein in the bioavailability and fetal penetration of topotecan. J. Natl. Cancer Inst. 92:1651-1656.
30. Kass, S. U., D. Pruss, and A. P. Wolffe. 1997. How does DNA methylation repress transcription? Trends Genet. 13:444-449.[CrossRef][Medline]
31. Kouzarides, T. 2002. Histone methylation in transcriptional control. Curr. Opin. Genet. Dev. 12:198-209.[CrossRef][Medline]
32. Krishnamurthy, P., D. D. Ross, T. Nakanishi, K. Bailey-Dell, S. Zhou, K. E. Mercer, B. Sarkadi, B. P. Sorrentino, and J. D. Schuetz. 2004. The stem cell marker Bcrp/ABCG2 enhances hypoxic cell survival through interactions with heme. J. Biol. Chem. 279:24218-24225.
33. Latif, F., K. Tory, J. Gnarra, M. Yao, F. M. Duh, M. L. Orcutt, T. Stackhouse, I. Kuzmin, W. Modi, and L. Geil. 1993. Identification of the von Hippel Lindau disease tumor suppressor gene. Science 260:1317-1320.
34. Li, E. 2002. Chromatin modification and epigenetic reprogramming in mammalian development. Nat. Rev. Genet. 3:662-673.[CrossRef][Medline]
35. Li, L.-C., and R. Dahiya. 2002. MethPrimer: designing primers for methylation PCRs. Bioinformatics 18:1427-1431.
36. Maliepaard, M., G. L. Scheffer, I. F. Faneyte, M. A. van Gastelen, A. C. Pijnenborg, A. H. Schinkel, M. J. van De Vijverqq, R. J. Scheper, and J. H. Schellens. 2001. Subcellular localization and distribution of the breast cancer resistance protein transporter in normal human tissues. Cancer Res. 61:3458-3464.
37. Meehan, R. R., J. D. Lewis, and A. P. Bird. 1992. Characterization of MeCP2, a vertebate DNA binding protein with affinity for methylated DNA. Nucleic Acids Res. 20:5085-5092.
38. Meehan, R. R., J. D. Lewis, S. McKay, E. L. Kleiner, and A. P. Bird. 1989. Identification of a mammalian protein that binds specifically to DNA containing methylated CpGs. Cell 58:499-507.[CrossRef][Medline]
39. Miyake, K., L. Mickley, T. Litman, Z. Zhan, R. Robey, B. Cristensen, M. Brangi, L. Greenberger, M. Dean, T. Fojo, and S. E. Bates. 1999. Molecular cloning of cDNAs which are highly overexpressed in mitoxantrone-resistance cells: demonstration of homology to ABC transport genes. Cancer Res. 59:8-13.
40. Momparler, R. L. 2003. Cancer epigenetics. Oncogene 22:6479-6483.[CrossRef][Medline]
41. Nan, X., H. H. Ng, C. A. Johnson, C. D. Laherty, B. M. Turner, R. N. Eisenman, and A. Bird. 1998. Transcriptional repression by the methyl CpG binding protein MeCP2 involves a histone deacetylase complex. Nature 393:386-389.[CrossRef][Medline]
42. Ng, H. H., P. Jeppesen, and A. Bird. 2000. Active repression of methylated genes by the chromosomal protein MBD1. Mol. Cell. Biol. 20:1394-1406.
43. Ng, H. H., Y. Zhang, B. Hendrich, C. A. Johnson, B. M. Turner, and H. Erdjument-Bromage. 1999. MBD2 is a transcriptional repressor belonging to the MeCP1 histone deacetylase complex. Nat. Genet. 23:58-61.[Medline]
44. Nguyen, C. T., D. J. Weisenberger, M. Velicescu, F. A. Gonzales, J. C. Lin, G. Liang, and P. A. Jones. 2002. Histone H3-lysine 9 methylation is associated with aberrant gene silencing in cancer cells and is rapidly reversed by 5-aza-2'-deoxycytidine. Cancer Res. 62:6456-6461.
45. Pogribny, I. P., and S. J. James. 2002. De novo methylation of the p16INK4A gene in early preneoplastic liver and tumors induced by folate/methyl deficiency in rats. Cancer Lett. 187:69-75.[CrossRef][Medline]
46. Robey, R. W., Y. Honjo, A. van de Laar, K. Miyake, J. T. Regis, T. Litman, and S. E. Bates. 2001. A functional assay for detection of the mitoxantrone resistance protein, MXR (ABCG2). Biochim. Biophys. Acta 1512:171-182.[Medline]
47. Skehan, P., R. Stornet, D. Scudiero, A. Monks, J. McMahon, D. Vistica, J. Warren, H. Bokbosch, S. Kenny, and M. Boyd. 1990. New colorimetric cytotoxicity assay for anticancer-drug screening. J. Natl. Cancer Inst. 82:1107-1112.
48. Snape, A. 2000. MBDs mediate methylation, deacetylation and transcriptional repression. Trends Genet. 16:20.[Medline]
49. Snowden, A. W., P. D. Gregory, C. C. Case, and C. O. Pabo. 2002. Gene-specific targeting of H3K9 methylation is sufficient for initiating repression in vivo. Curr. Biol. 12:2159-2166.[CrossRef][Medline]
50. Soengas, M. S., P. Capodieci, D. Polsky, J. Mora, M. Esteller, X. Opitz-Araya, R. McCombie, J. G. Herman, W. L. Gerald, and Y. A. Lazebnik. 2001. Inactivation of the apoptosis effector Apaf-1 in malignant melanoma. Nature 409:207-211.[CrossRef][Medline]
51. Stancheva, I. 2005. Caught in conspiracy: cooperation between DNA methylation and histone H3K9 methylation in the establishment and maintenance of heterochromatin. Biochem. Cell Biol. 83:385-395.[CrossRef][Medline]
52. Strahl, B. D., and C. D. Allis. 2000. The language of covalent histone modifications. Nature 403:41-45.[CrossRef][Medline]
53. Suzuki, H., E. Gabrielson, W. Chen, R. Anbazhagan, M. Van Engeland, M. P. Weijenberg, J. G. Herman, and S. B. Baylin. 2002. A genomic screen for genes upregulated by demethylation and histone deacetylase inhibition in human colorect