Frances C. Lucibello

Mutual transrepression of Fos and the glucocorticoid receptor: involvement of a functional domain in Fos which is absent in FosB.

In this study, we show that Fos protein can repress transactivation by the glucocorticoid receptor (GR). In addition, we demonstrate that GR is capable of inhibiting, in a hormone‐dependent fashion, Fos‐mediated transactivation of AP‐1 dependent transcription. Moreover, repression of the serum response element by Fos is abolished by the GR in the presence of hormone. Transrepression of glucocorticoid mediated induction involves a region of Fos, located between amino acids 40 and 111, to which no function has been previously assigned, and which is poorly conserved among Fos, FosB and Fra‐1. In agreement with this finding, FosB is not capable of transrepressing GR activation of transcription, representing the first functional difference between Fos and FosB. We have mapped the domain of the GR which is required for repression of AP‐1 dependent transcription, to the region of central DNA binding domain. Our results suggest that Fos and the GR may form transcriptionally inactive complexes and point to a regulatory interrelationship between different signal transduction pathways.

Cell Cycle Regulation of E2F Site Occupation in Vivo

DNA-binding E2F complexes have been identified throughout the mammalian cell cycle, including the transcriptionally inactive complexes with pocket proteins, which occur early in the prereplicative G1 phase of the cycle, and the transactivating free E2F, which increases in late G1. Here, a regulatory B-myb promoter site was shown to bind with high affinity to free E2F and to E2F-pocket protein complexes in an indistinguishable way in vitro. In contrast, in vivo footprinting with NIH 3T3 cells demonstrated E2F site occupation specifically in early G1, when the B-myb promoter is inactive. These observations indicate that a novel mechanism governs E2F-DNA interactions during the cell cycle and emphasize the relevance of E2F site-directed transcriptional repression.

Dendritic cells derived from peripheral monocytes express endothelial markers and in the presence of angiogenic growth factors differentiate into endothelial-like cells.

CD14-positive monocytes obtained from human peripheral blood were cultured with GM-CSF and IL-4. During the early culture phase immature dendritic cells (DCs) developed which not only expressed CD1a, HLA-DR and CD86, but also expressed the endothelial cell markers von Willebrand factor (vWF), VE-cadherin and VEGF receptors Flt-1 and Flt-4. Further maturation of DCs was achieved by prolonged cultivation with TNFalpha. These cells showed typical DC morphology and like professional antigen-presenting cells (APCs) expressed CD83 and high levels of HLA-DR and CD86. However, if immature DCs were grown with VEGF, bFGF and IGF-1 on fibronectin/vitronectin-coated culture dishes, a marked change in morphology into caudated or oval cells occurred. In the presence of these angiogenic growth factors the cultured cells developed into endothelial-like cells (ELCs), characterized by increased expression of vWF, KDR and Flt-4 and a disappearance of CD1a and CD83. Addition of IL-4 and Oncostatin M also increased VE-cadherin expression, and the loosely adherent cells formed clusters, cobblestones and network-like structures. vWF- expressing ELCs mainly originated from CD1a-positive cells, and VEGF was responsible for the decrease in the expression of the DC markers CD1a and CD83. In mixed leukocyte cultures, mature DCs were more potent APCs than ELCs. Moreover, Ac-LDL uptake, and the formation of tubular structures on a plasma matrix was restricted to ELCs. These results suggest that in the presence of specific cytokines immature DCs have the potential to differentiate along different lineages, i.e. into a cell type resembling ELCs.

Trans-repression of the mouse c-fos promoter: A novel mechanism of fos-mediated trans-regulation

Fos protein can trans-activate AP-1-dependent gene expression and trans-repress the c-fos promoter. Although we find that trans-repression is enhanced by coexpression of c-Jun, it does not require any of the AP-1 or ATF sites in the mouse c-fos promoter. A major target for repression is the serum response element (SRE). Fos mutants with an impaired leucine zipper are defective in trans-repression and transformation, suggesting that these functions involve the formation of Fos protein complexes. In contrast, mutations that abolish DNA binding of Fos enhance trans-repression but destroy the transforming potential of Fos. In addition, v-Fos protein efficiently transforms but is unable to trans-repress. These findings point to different mechanisms involved in trans-activation and trans-repression and suggest that trans-repression of the type described here is neither sufficient nor required for Fos-induced transformation.

Signals and genes in the control of cell-cycle progression.

II. G1 restriction points in yeast: models for eukaryotic cell-cycle-control mechanisms . . . . . . . . . . . . 152 A. The G1 restriction point (START) in the budding yeast S. cerevisiae . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 153 1. The Cdc28 serine/threonine protein kinase . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 153 2. G1 cyclins encoded by CLN genes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 154 3. The Swi4/Swi6 transcription factors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 154 4. A START-associated feedback regulatory loop involving Cdc28, C1n l /2 /3 and Swi4/6 . . . . 155 5. Different roles for CLN gene products in cell-cycle regulation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 156 6. Negative regulation of Cln function by pheromone . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 156 7. Protein phosphorylation/dephosphorylation and cell-cycle progression . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 157 B. Putative cell-cycle genes acting in the G1 phase of the cell cycle in S. pombe . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 158

Periodic cdc25C transcription is mediated by a novel cell cycle-regulated repressor element (CDE).

We show that the cell cycle‐regulated transcription of the TATA‐less cdc25C gene in late S/G2 is largely mediated by a novel promoter element (CDE) located directly 5′ to one of the two major transcription initiation sites. Genomic dimethylsulfate footprinting experiments, using either synchronized or sorted normally cycling cells, show the formation in vivo of a CDE‐protein complex in both G0 and G1 cells and its dissociation in G2. Mutation of the CDE severely impairs cell cycle regulation of the cdc25C promoter and results in high expression in G0/G1, indicating that the CDE functions as a cell cycle‐regulated cis‐acting repressor element. Cell cycle regulation is also lost upon removal of the enhancer region located immediately upstream of the CDE, but is largely restored when this enhancerless minimal cdc25C promoter fragment is linked to the constitutive SV40 early enhancer. This indicates that the CDE is dependent on the presence of a transcriptional enhancer to effect cell cycle regulation. Our observations suggest that the periodic activation of the cdc25C gene in late S/G2 is brought about, at least in part, by a unique regulatory mechanism involving the cell cycle‐regulated dissociation of a repressor from the CDE.

A new model of cell cycle-regulated transcription : Repression of the cyclin A promoter by CDF-1 and anti-repression by E2F

Cell cycle regulation of the cyclin A gene is determined by a bipartite repressor binding site in the region of the basal promoter, termed CDE-CHR, which also controls the expression of cell cycle genes upregulated in S or G2 (such as cdc25C). The CDE–CHR in the cyclin A promoter is recognized by both E2F complexes and CDF-1, but the contribution of each of these factors in cell cycle regulation is unknown. In the present study, we have introduced mutations into the cyclin A promoter which lead to either a loss or enhancement of E2F binding, while having only marginal effects on the interaction with CDF-1. Unlike mutants deficient for CDF-1 binding, promoter variants lacking E2F binding showed an unchanged repression in G0, thus identifying CDF-1 as the principal repressor of the cyclin A gene. The same mutants did show, however, a delayed derepression while a mutation leading to increased E2F binding resulted in premature up-regulation. These findings clearly suggest that E2F contributes to the correct timing of cyclin A transcription, presumably by acting as an anti-repressor. In agreement with this conclusion, we find that the cyclin A promoter only poorly interacts with E2F-4, which is the major E2F family member in G0 cells, while a clear binding is seen with E2F-1 and -3, which are up-regulated in late G1.

Functional domains in cyclin D1 : pRb-kinase activity is not essential for transformation

Although cyclin D1 plays a major role during cell cycle progression and is involved in human tumourigenesis, its domain structure is still poorly understood. In the present study, we have generated a series of cyclin D1 N- and C-terminal deletion constructs. These mutants were used to define the domains required for transformation of rat embryonal fibroblasts (REF) in cooperation with activated Ha-ras and and to establish correlations with defined biochemical properties of cyclin D1. Protein binding and REF assays showed that the region of the cyclin box required for the interaction with CDK4 as well as C-terminal sequences determining protein stability were crucial for transformation. Surprisingly, however, the N-terminal deletion of 20 amino acids which impaired pRb kinase activity did not affect the transforming ability of cyclin D1. Likewise, no effect on transformation was observed with mutants defective in p21CIP interaction. These observations argue against a crucial role of pRb inactivation or p21CIP squelching in cyclin D1-mediated transformation.

Multiple interdependent regulatory sites in the mouse c-fos promoter determine basal level transcription: cell type-specific effects.

Although the induction of the mouse c-fos promoter by growth factors and specific signal transduction pathways has been analyzed in some detail, the mechanisms involved in the control of basal level transcription remain largely elusive. In this study, we present evidence for the existence of at least 9 different elements, located between the putative TATA box and position -610, that figure in basal level transcription and represent protein binding sites in different cell types. A major regulatory site in F9END, NIH3T3 and HeLa cells is the CRE around position -60. Other sites, including the SRE, a NF1 site around position -165, a novel site downstream of the SRE and three new sites upstream of the SRE play different cell type-specific roles. In addition, we have identified two regions upstream of the SRE, which seem to have cell type-specific negative regulatory effects. We also find that the precise function of several of these sites depends on the presence or absence of other elements, indicating some form of interaction between different regulatory sites. Finally, we present evidence, that the block of c-fos transcription in F9EC cells is due to the lack of transregulatory proteins, which are induced during retinoic acid mediated differentiation.

Cell cycle regulated promoters for the targeting of tumor endothelium.

Targeting of gene expression to tumors is one of the major challenges in cancer gene therapy. In this context both vector targeting and cell-specific transcription are of particular importance. Promotors or enhancers, which are potentially useful for gene therapy, have been shown to be selectively or preferentially active in certain cell types [1] or tumors [2–4] or to be inducible by drugs [5] or radiation [6]. We have designed a new concept, in which cell cycle regulated promoters are used to express therapeutic genes specifically in proliferating cells [7].