Project description:Cancer cells maintain a sensitive balance between growth-promoting oncogenes and apoptosis inhibitors. We show that WT RUNX1 is required for survival of t(8;21)-Kasumi-1 and inv(16)-ME-1 AML cell lines. The malignant AML phenotype is sustained by a delicate AML1-ETO/RUNX1 balance that involves competition for common DNA binding sites regulating a subset of AML1-ETO/RUNX1 targets. Genomewide sequencing data is included herein: Transcription factors RUNX1 c-terminus and n-terminus which is shared with AML1-ETO were profiled independently), AML1-ETO and AP4 were profiled using ChIP-Seq in Kasumi-1 cells, as well as control ChIP-Seq experiments of non immune serum. Two replicates were performed for each transcription factor profiling and control experiment.
Project description:Cancer cells maintain a sensitive balance between growth-promoting oncogenes and apoptosis inhibitors. We show that WT RUNX1 is required for survival of t(8;21)-Kasumi-1 and inv(16)-ME-1 AML cell lines. The malignant AML phenotype is sustained by a delicate AML1-ETO/RUNX1 balance that involves competition for common DNA binding sites regulating a subset of AML1-ETO/RUNX1 targets. Genome expression was profiled after performing knockdown of RUNX1 and AML1-ETO in Kasumi-1 cells using specific siRNA-oligo nucleotides, and analyzed using Affymetrix Gene 1.0 ST arrays.
Project description:Cancer cells maintain a sensitive balance between growth-promoting oncogenes and apoptosis inhibitors. We show that WT RUNX1 is required for survival of t(8;21)-Kasumi-1 and inv(16)-ME-1 AML cell lines. The malignant AML phenotype is sustained by a delicate AML1-ETO/RUNX1 balance that involves competition for common DNA binding sites regulating a subset of AML1-ETO/RUNX1 targets.
Project description:Cancer cells maintain a sensitive balance between growth-promoting oncogenes and apoptosis inhibitors. We show that WT RUNX1 is required for survival of t(8;21)-Kasumi-1 and inv(16)-ME-1 AML cell lines. The malignant AML phenotype is sustained by a delicate AML1-ETO/RUNX1 balance that involves competition for common DNA binding sites regulating a subset of AML1-ETO/RUNX1 targets.
Project description:Patients with core-binding factor (CBF) acute myeloid leukemia (AML), caused by either t(8;21)(q22;q22) or inv(16)(p13q22)/t(16;16)(p13;q22), have higher complete remission rates and longer survival than patients with other subtypes of AML. However, ∼40% of patients relapse, and the literature suggests that patients with inv(16) fare differently from those with t(8;21). We retrospectively analyzed 537 patients with CBF-AML, focusing on additional cytogenetic aberrations to examine their impact on clinical outcomes. Trisomies of chromosomes 8, 21, or 22 were significantly more common in patients with inv(16)/t(16;16): 16% vs 7%, 6% vs 0%, and 17% vs 0%, respectively. In contrast, del(9q) and loss of a sex chromosome were more frequent in patients with t(8;21): 15% vs 0.4% for del(9q), 37% vs 0% for loss of X in females, and 44% vs 5% for loss of Y in males. Hyperdiploidy was more frequent in patients with inv(16) (25% vs 9%, whereas hypodiploidy was more frequent in patients with t(8;21) (37% vs 3%. In multivariable analyses (adjusted for age, white blood counts at diagnosis, and KIT mutation status), trisomy 8 was associated with improved overall survival (OS) in inv(16), whereas the presence of other chromosomal abnormalities (not trisomy 8) was associated with decreased OS. In patients with t(8;21), hypodiploidy was associated with improved disease-free survival; hyperdiploidy and del(9q) were associated with improved OS. KIT mutation (either positive or not tested, compared with negative) conferred poor prognoses in univariate analysis only in patients with t(8;21).
Project description:Acute myeloid leukemia (AML) is a heterogeneous disease caused by mutations in transcriptional regulator genes, but how different mutant regulators shape the chromatin landscape is unclear. Here, we compared the transcriptional networks of two types of AML with chromosomal translocations of the RUNX1 locus that fuse the RUNX1 DNA-binding domain to different regulators, the t(8;21) expressing RUNX1-ETO and the t(3;21) expressing RUNX1-EVI1. Despite containing the same DNA-binding domain, the two fusion proteins display distinct binding patterns, show differences in gene expression and chromatin landscape, and are dependent on different transcription factors. RUNX1-EVI1 directs a stem cell-like transcriptional network reliant on GATA2, whereas that of RUNX1-ETO-expressing cells is more mature and depends on RUNX1. However, both types of AML are dependent on the continuous expression of the fusion proteins. Our data provide a molecular explanation for the differences in clinical prognosis for these types of AML.