Nimanthi Jayathilaka

2.45 GHz radiofrequency fields alter gene expression in cultured human cells

The biological effect of radiofrequency (RF) fields remains controversial. We address this issue by examining whether RF fields can cause changes in gene expression. We used the pulsed RF fields at a frequency of 2.45 GHz that is commonly used in telecommunication to expose cultured human HL‐60 cells. We used the serial analysis of gene expression (SAGE) method to measure the RF effect on gene expression at the genome level. We observed that 221 genes altered their expression after a 2‐h exposure. The number of affected genes increased to 759 after a 6‐h exposure. Functional classification of the affected genes reveals that apoptosis‐related genes were among the upregulated ones and the cell cycle genes among the downregulated ones. We observed no significant increase in the expression of heat shock genes. These results indicate that the RF fields at 2.45 GHz can alter gene expression in cultured human cells through non‐thermal mechanism.

Consistent deregulation of gene expression between human and murine MLL rearrangement leukemias.

Important biological and pathologic properties are often conserved across species. Although several mouse leukemia models have been well established, the genes deregulated in both human and murine leukemia cells have not been studied systematically. We performed a serial analysis of gene expression in both human and murine MLL-ELL or MLL-ENL leukemia cells and identified 88 genes that seemed to be significantly deregulated in both types of leukemia cells, including 57 genes not reported previously as being deregulated in MLL-associated leukemias. These changes were validated by quantitative PCR. The most up-regulated genes include several HOX genes (e.g., HOX A5, HOXA9, and HOXA10) and MEIS1, which are the typical hallmark of MLL rearrangement leukemia. The most down-regulated genes include LTF, LCN2, MMP9, S100A8, S100A9, PADI4, TGFBI, and CYBB. Notably, the up-regulated genes are enriched in gene ontology terms, such as gene expression and transcription, whereas the down-regulated genes are enriched in signal transduction and apoptosis. We showed that the CpG islands of the down-regulated genes are hypermethylated. We also showed that seven individual microRNAs (miRNA) from the mir-17-92 cluster, which are overexpressed in human MLL rearrangement leukemias, are also consistently overexpressed in mouse MLL rearrangement leukemia cells. Nineteen possible targets of these miRNAs were identified, and two of them (i.e., APP and RASSF2) were confirmed further by luciferase reporter and mutagenesis assays. The identification and validation of consistent changes of gene expression in human and murine MLL rearrangement leukemias provide important insights into the genetic base for MLL-associated leukemogenesis.

Characterization of genomic breakpoints in MLL and CBP in leukemia patients with t(11;16)

The recurring chromosome translocation t(11;16)(q23;p13) is detected in leukemia patients, virtually all of whom have received previous chemotherapy with topoisomerase (topo) II inhibitors. In the t(11;16), 3′ CBP, on 16p13, is fused to 5′ MLL, on 11q23, resulting in an MLL–CBP fusion gene that plays an important role in leukemogenesis. In this study, we cloned genomic breakpoints of the MLL and CBP genes in the t(11;16) in the SN‐1 cell line and in five patients with therapy‐related leukemia, all of whom had received topo II inhibitors for previous tumors. In all patients except one, both the genomic MLL–CBP and the reciprocal fusions were cloned. Genomic breakpoints in MLL occurred in the 8.3‐kb breakpoint cluster region in all patients, whereas the breakpoints in CBP clustered in an 8.2‐kb region of intron 3 in four patients. Genomic breakpoints in MLL occurred in intron 11 near the topo II cleavage site in the SN‐1 cell line and in one patient, and they were close to LINE repetitive sequences in two other patients. In the remaining two patients, genomic breakpoints were in intron 9 in Alu repeats. Genomic breakpoints in CBP occurred in and around Alu repeats in one and two patients, respectively. In two patients, the breaks were near LINE repetitive sequences, suggesting that repetitive DNA sequences may play a role. No specific recombination motifs were identified at or near the breakpoint junctions. No topo II cleavage sites were detected in introns 2 and 3 of CBP. However, there were deletions and duplications at the breakpoints in both MLL and CBP and microhomologies or nontemplated nucleotides at most of the genomic fusion junctions, suggesting that a nonhomologous end‐joining repair mechanism was involved in the t(11;16).