J Biol Chem, Vol. 274, Issue 40, 28794-28802, October 1, 1999
Expression of MXI1, a Myc Antagonist, Is
Regulated by Sp1 and AP2*
Linda Q.
Benson
,
Melissa R.
Coon,
Leslie M.
Krueger,
Grace C.
Han,
Amod A.
Sarnaik, and
Daniel S.
Wechsler§
From the Division of Pediatric Hematology/Oncology, Department of
Pediatrics and Communicable Diseases, University of Michigan School of
Medicine, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48109
 |
ABSTRACT |
MXI1, a member of the MAD
family of Myc antagonists, encodes a transcription factor whose
expression must be tightly regulated to maintain normal cell growth and
differentiation. To more closely investigate the transcriptional
regulation of the human MXI1 gene, we have cloned and
characterized the MXI1 promoter. After clarification of the
5'- and 3'-untranslated regions of the cDNA (indicating that the
true length of the MXI1 transcript is 2643 base pairs), we
identified two transcription initiation sites. We subsequently isolated
the MXI1 promoter, which is GC-rich and lacks a TATA box.
Although it contains at least six potential initiator sequences, functional studies indicate the proximal two initiator sequences in
combination with nearby Sp1 and MED-1 sites together account for
virtually all promoter activity. We also demonstrate that MXI1 promoter activity is repressed by high levels of AP2.
These studies provide further insight into the complex regulatory
mechanisms governing MXI1 gene expression and its role in
cellular differentiation and tumor suppression.
 |
INTRODUCTION |
The MYC family of nuclear proto-oncogenes plays a
central role in normal cell function, including cell growth,
differentiation, and apoptosis (1, 2). While the exact role of Myc
proteins remains uncertain, expression of the c-MYC gene
enhances expression of a number of growth-promoting genes, while
inhibiting genes associated with differentiation and growth arrest (3,
4). Exogenous expression of c-MYC has been shown in
vitro to result in malignant transformation of cells (5, 6), and
dysregulated c-MYC expression has been identified in a
number of human malignancies (7, 8).
The c-Myc protein is a basic helix-loop-helix leucine zipper
transcription factor that heterodimerizes with a partner protein, Max;
this duplex can then interact with target DNA sequences to modulate
transcription. Additional basic helix-loop-helix leucine zipper
proteins able to heterodimerize with Max have been identified, including Mxi1, Mad1, Mad3, Mad4, and Mnt/Rox (9-13). Unlike Myc, Mxi1
(Max Interactor 1) does
not stimulate transcription of target genes but rather interacts with a
putative transcriptional repressor, mSin3 (14), which then recruits a
histone deacetylase complex mediating transcriptional repression (15,
16). A regulatory model can be envisioned in which Myc-Max complexes
activate transcription and stimulate cell proliferation, while Mxi1-Max
complexes negatively regulate these actions, promoting cellular
differentiation. Further studies of MXI1 have supported this
model, showing up-regulation of MXI1 mRNA levels in
differentiating cells (17-19). In addition, MXI1 expression
vectors are able to suppress MYC-associated neoplastic transformation in rat embryo fibroblast cells (20). We have previously
shown that ectopic MXI1 expression results in decreased growth of glioblastoma cells in vitro (21), while DU145
prostate cancer cells infected with an MXI1-expressing
adenovirus likewise demonstrate decreased cell
proliferation.1 Finally,
homozygous MXI1 knockout mice exhibit an increased
susceptibility to tumorigenesis (22). Thus, MXI1 is a
putative tumor suppressor gene.
In support of this notion, the MXI1 gene has been localized
to chromosome 10q24-25 (Refs. 23-25), a region demonstrating
deletions or rearrangements in 60-97% of human glioblastomas (26, 27) and up to 30% of human prostate cancers (28, 29). Although loss of
heterozygosity for MXI1 is seen in a substantial fraction of
glioblastoma tumors (64%), no MXI1 coding sequence
mutations have been seen in these tumors (21). Furthermore, a majority of studies have failed to demonstrate MXI1 mutations in
prostate tumors (30-33). Since Mxi1 acts as a Myc antagonist, reduced
expression of the MXI1 gene might contribute to development
or progression of malignancy. However, none of these studies has
analyzed the regulatory regions of the MXI1 gene for
mutations or alterations, since little was previously known about the
promoter region and transcriptional regulation of the gene.
Understanding this regulation may help clarify the role of
MXI1 in tumor suppression.
In order to investigate transcriptional regulation of the
MXI1 gene, we have cloned and characterized the
MXI1 promoter and regulatory regions. After noting potential
cloning artifacts in the previously published MXI1 cDNA,
we have clarified the true 5'- and 3'-untranslated regions and
identified at least two transcription initiation sites. Subsequent
analyses of the GC-rich, TATA-less MXI1 promoter delineate a
number of critical promoter elements, including two consensus initiator
elements (Inrs),2 a MED-1
site, and Sp1 sites, all of which positively contribute to promoter
activity. Finally, we demonstrate that the tissue-regulated and
developmentally regulated transcription factor AP2 acts as a negative
regulator of the MXI1 promoter.
 |
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES |
Cell Culture--
Human erythroleukemic K562 cells (ATCC) were
subcultured in RPMI 1640 medium (Life Technologies, Inc.) supplemented
with 10% heat-inactivated fetal bovine serum, 1%
penicillin/streptomycin, and 2 mM glutamine. Hepatocellular
carcinoma HepG2 cells (ATCC) were subcultured in modified Eagle's
medium with Earl's salts and sodium bicarbonate (Life Technologies,
Inc.), supplemented with 10% heat-inactivated fetal bovine serum, 1%
penicillin/streptomycin, 1% glutamine, 1% sodium pyruvate, and 1%
nonessential amino acids. Both cell lines were maintained in a
humidified atmosphere with 5% CO2 at 37 °C.
Primer Synthesis--
Primer oligonucleotides used in RACE,
primer extension, gel shift, and PCRs were all synthesized on a
Perkin-Elmer/Applied Biosystems Division (PE/ABd) 394 DNA Synthesizer
at the University of Michigan Oligonucleotide Synthesis Core Facility.
DNA Sequence Analysis--
Sequencing of genomic and cDNA
subclones, as well as the relevant regions of chimeric luciferase
constructs, was performed using the fluorescent dideoxy terminator
method of cycle sequencing on a PE/ABd 373a automated DNA sequencer
following ABd protocols at the University of Michigan Core DNA
Sequencing Facility. All reactions involving the GC-rich proximal
promoter were performed using Me2SO. Chromatograms of
sequences were analyzed both visually and using MacVector 6.0 with
Assemblylign (Oxford).
RACE--
Both 5'- and 3'-RACE were performed using
modifications of the MarathonTM cDNA amplification kit
(CLONTECH). Total RNA isolated from K562, HL60, or
U937 cells was treated with DNase I (1 unit/µg RNA). For 3'-RACE,
first strand cDNA was synthesized using a modified oligo(dT) primer
(CLONTECH). 5'-RACE products were synthesized with
an MXI1-specific reverse primer complementary to Exon 2 sequence (5'-CATGGACGGGAATGAAGAGGCGTAG). For both reactions, primers
were combined with 20-40 µg of total RNA, 200 units of Superscript reverse transcriptase (Life Technologies, Inc.), and 1 M
GC-MeltTM (CLONTECH). After incubation
at 48 °C for 3 h, RNA was hydrolyzed, and second strand
cDNA was synthesized and isolated according to the manufacturer's instructions.
PCR of 3'-RACE products was performed using an MXI1-specific
primer (Revrep 146; 5'-GACCTTACCCCTGGCTGTTTGGAC) complementary to
nucleotides 2130-2153 of the published cDNA (9) and the nested
adaptor primer 2 (AP2; CLONTECH). PCR of 5'-RACE
products also used AP2 in conjunction with several progressively nested primers complementary to known MXI1 Exon 1 sequences (R+42,
5'-CTCCAGCAGACGCTGCACGTTG; R+12, 5'-CACCCGCTCCATGGGCACCG; and R
88,
5'-TCCGGAACATGTGCGACGGG). All 5' amplification reactions utilized
Me2SO or the CLONTECH Advantage®-GC
cDNA PCR kit to optimize amplification of GC-rich regions of the
cDNA. PCR amplification was carried out by an initial denaturation
at 94 °C for 5 min, followed by 30-35 cycles of denaturation at
94 °C for 45 s, annealing at 55-65 °C for 45 s, and
extension at 72 °C for 1 min, with a final elongation step at
72 °C for 7 min. In addition, some reactions required the use of
touchdown PCR. PCR products were electrophoresed on a 1.5% agarose gel
and purified from the gel with a Jetsorb kit (QIAGEN). After subcloning into pGEM-T or pGEM-T Easy vectors (Promega), the RACE products were
sequenced using the M13 forward or reverse primers.
Primer Extension--
Primer extension was performed using a
modification of the Promega primer extension system. Two
oligonucleotide primers, R
126 and R
206 (Fig. 2B) were
end-labeled with [
-32P]ATP using T4 polynucleotide
kinase. The labeled primers were combined with GC-MeltTM,
primer extension buffer (Promega) and 29 µg of DNase I-treated RNA
harvested from K562 cells. This mixture was heated to 90 °C for 10 min then incubated at 48 °C for 3 h. Elongation was carried out
in the presence of Superscript reverse transcriptase (20 units/reaction; Life Technologies, Inc.) at 48 °C for 4 h.
Products were analyzed on a 7 M urea, 8% polyacrylamide
gel in parallel with the products of double-stranded sequencing
reactions using the same two labeled primers as in the primer extension
reactions, according to the manufacturer's instructions for the
Taq DNA Sequencing Kit for Standard Sequencing (Roche).
Construction of Chimeric Luciferase Plasmids--
1084 base
pairs (bp) of genomic sequence preceding the MXI1 ATG was
cloned upstream of the promoterless luciferase gene in the
XhoI/NcoI sites of the pGL3-Basic vector
(Promega) and denoted p3B1084. As a control, a luciferase plasmid was
constructed with the 1084-bp insert in the reverse orientation
(p3B1084Rev) by digesting the 1084-bp fragment with NcoI,
filling in with Klenow fragment of DNA polymerase I, and then digesting
with XhoI; this insert was ligated into pGL3-Basic digested
with MluI (filled)/XhoI.
A series of 5' unidirectional nested deletions of the promoter was
generated using the Erase-a-Base system (Promega) with p3B1084 doubly
digested with KpnI/NheI. The resultant plasmids were sequenced to determine the extent of the deletion and named according to the length of the promoter fragment (p3B708, p3B533, p3B421, p3B374, and p3B297). The p3B308 construct was created by PCR,
using p3B1084 as the template, the sense primer F-308 (5'-CCGCTCGAGCGGCGGGACTACATTTCCCAGGG) incorporating an
XhoI site (underlined), and the antisense GL2 primer
(Promega), complementary to luciferase gene sequences downstream of the
MXI1 promoter insert. The PCR product was digested with
XhoI/NcoI and ligated into
pGL3-Basic/XhoI/NcoI. Plasmid preparations of all
constructs were purified with a plasmid preparation kit (QIAGEN).
Site-specific Mutagenesis--
Full-length promoter constructs
containing point mutations of potential Inrs or the MED-1 site were
generated using p3B1084 as template, mutated oligonucleotide primer
pairs (Table I), and the RVp3 and GLp2
primers (Promega). Briefly, a 5'-mutated promoter fragment was
amplified using RVp3 and the desired mutated antisense primer, while an
overlapping 3'-mutated promoter fragment was amplified using GLp2 and
the corresponding mutated sense primer. The 5' and 3' PCR products were
heated to 94 °C and cooled slowly to allow annealing of the
overlapping fragments. RVp3 and GLp2 were then used to amplify the
full-length promoter containing the appropriate mutation. All PCRs were
performed with GC-MeltTM and Advantage®-GC polymerase mix
(CLONTECH). The full-length PCR fragments were
digested with XhoI/NcoI and ligated into
pGL3-Basic/XhoI/NcoI. Although two different
mutations of Inr 2 were constructed, they gave similar results on all
assays, so their data were combined.
View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Table I
Primers used to construct promoter mutants
Inr or MED-1 site in each primer is underlined; mutated bases are shown
in lowercase letters.
|
|
The p3BDel construct containing a deletion of the promoter sequence
from
535 to
498 was generated by digesting p3B1084 with either
AccI (at
535) or DraIII (at
498), treating
with Klenow, and then digesting with XhoI or
NcoI, respectively. These two fragments were ligated into
pGL3-Basic/XhoI/NcoI. Combination mutants were
constructed either by similar PCR strategies as above, using singly
mutated p3B1084 DNA as template, or by utilizing restriction enzyme
sites between mutations to isolate and then recombine mutant promoter
fragments in desired combinations. Relevant regions of all wild-type
and mutant constructs were sequenced to confirm the presence of the mutation(s).
Transient Transfections and Luciferase Assays--
K562 cells in
log phase were washed with ice-cold Opti-MEM (Life Technologies, Inc.)
and resuspended in Opti-MEM at a concentration of 5 × 107/ml. 1 × 107 cells were preincubated
with 5 µg of the indicated plasmid and 50 ng of pRL-TK
Renilla vector at room temperature for 10 min. Cells were
transfected by electroporation with a BTX Electro Cell Manipulator 600 at 350 V, 650 microfarads, and 13 ohms. Cells were then incubated at
room temperature for 15 min and transferred to 3 ml of warmed RPMI 1640 medium with additives. The transfected cells were maintained in 5%
CO2 at 37 °C for 17 h, at which time they were
harvested, and both luciferase and Renilla activity were
measured using the Dual-LuciferaseTM assay system
(Promega). Luciferase activity values were normalized to the
Renilla activities for each sample (L/R). All reactions were
performed in triplicate and repeated at least three times; results are
expressed as the mean ± S.E.
For AP2 assays in HepG2 cells, HepG2 cells in log phase were
trypsinized, washed with ice-cold Opti-MEM, and then resuspended at a
concentration of 2.5 × 107/ml. 0.5 × 107 cells were preincubated with 5 µg of the promoter
construct p3B1084, 1 µg of pRL-TK Renilla vector, and the
indicated amounts of a pCMX-PL1/AP2
expression vector (gift of R. Buettner) at room temperature for 10 min. Cells were transfected by
electroporation at 150 V, 1700 microfarads, and 186 ohms. Cells were
then incubated at room temperature for 30 min and transferred to 3 ml
of warmed modified Eagle's medium with additives. The transfected
cells were maintained in 5% CO2 at 37 °C for 48 h,
at which time they were harvested (with scraping) and assayed as above.
Gel Shifts--
Double-stranded oligonucleotide probes (I-IV,
as illustrated in Fig. 6) were synthesized by heating primer pairs in
the presence of GC-MeltTM to 95 °C for 10 min and then
cooling slowly to room temperature. Probe I/MMED was designed with a
6-bp mutation of the MED-1 site from GCTCCC to CATATG but was otherwise
identical to Probe I. DNA-protein reactions were performed in gel
mobility shift buffer (10 mM Tris-HCl (pH 7.4), 80 mM NaCl, 1 mM dithiothreitol, and 5%
glycerol), with 5 µg of K562 nuclear extract (Santa Cruz
Biotechnology, Inc., Santa Cruz, CA), 0.25 µg of herring sperm DNA,
and 0.5 µg of poly(dI-dC). Reactions with purified protein contained
1 footprint unit recombinant Sp1 or AP2 (Promega) with 1 µg of
herring sperm DNA and 0.5 µg of poly(dI-dC). Where indicated,
unlabeled competitor Sp1 or AP2 oligonucleotide (Promega) was included.
Reactions were incubated at room temperature for 15 min prior to and
again after adding 33P-labeled probe. For certain
reactions, Sp1 or AP2 antibody (Santa Cruz Biotechnology) was then
added, and incubation continued at room temperature for 15 min. The
DNA-protein complexes were analyzed on a 5% polyacrylamide gel run at
16 °C in 0.25× TBE buffer at 200 V for approximately 2 h.
 |
RESULTS |
Clarification of the MXI1 3'-Untranslated Region
(UTR)--
We previously obtained and partially sequenced a genomic
clone encompassing the MXI1 gene (34). Comparison of the
genomic sequence with the published MXI1 cDNA sequence
(35, 36) revealed several discrepancies. First, the MXI1
genomic sequence contains a 16-bp poly(A) tract corresponding to the
site of cDNA termination, which may have resulted in the
construction of an artificially truncated cDNA. There is, however,
a consensus polyadenylation sequence (AATAAA) 102-bp downstream of the
terminal A in the genomic poly(A) tract (Fig.
1A). To confirm the extent of
the MXI1 3'-UTR, we performed 3'-RACE with a poly(dT)
synthesis primer. PCR amplification of this cDNA using an
MXI1-specific oligonucleotide primer (Revrep 146) detected
two bands, a lower molecular weight one corresponding to the genomic
poly(A) tract, and a second more prominent band of ~275 bp (Fig.
1B). DNA sequencing of this second PCR product confirmed
that the 3'-UTR extends an additional 126 bp downstream of the genomic
poly(A) tract.

View larger version (30K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 1.
Organization of the MXI1 cDNA and genomic regions. A, the originally
published cDNA is shown in the center, with the
black box representing the MXI1 coding sequence
and the gray boxes indicating the 5' and 3' inverted repeat
sequences (IR). The upper diagram is
an expanded view of the genomic region corresponding to the cDNA 3'
termination; A16 refers to the 16-bp genomic
poly(A) tract, while the polyadenylation (poly(A)) signal (AATAAA) is
indicated 102 bp downstream of the final A in the poly(A) tract. The
lower panel is an expanded view of the genomic
region corresponding to the 5'-UTR of the cDNA, with the
hatched box representing the GC-rich region. B,
3'-RACE analysis of the MXI1 cDNA was performed using
U937 RNA, and the MXI1-specific sense primer Revrep 146 (see
"Experimental Procedures"). The resultant two bands are shown in
the right lane, while the left lane shows the markers (M) with their sizes in bp
indicated to the left.
|
|
Clarification of the 5'-UTR--
Comparison of the MXI1
5'-UTR with the corresponding genomic sequence revealed an abrupt loss
of homology of the genomic sequence with the cDNA just upstream of
the ATG translation start site. Analysis of this region revealed that
nucleotides 68-174 in the published 5'-UTR are an exact inverted
repeat of the final 107 nucleotides of the cDNA (Fig.
1A), suggesting that the 5' inverted repeat sequence may
have resulted from a cloning artifact. This was particularly likely,
since the genomic sequence upstream of the MXI1 translation
start site is extremely GC-rich. Furthermore, previous attempts to
detect the presence of this inverted sequence by Southern blotting
consistently demonstrated only a single band corresponding to the 3'
repeat (34). To clarify the MXI1 5'-UTR, we employed the
5'-RACE technique with K562 and HL60 RNA and several nested antisense
oligonucleotides corresponding to recognized MXI1 exon 2 and
exon 1 cDNA sequences. The resulting 5'-RACE products confirmed
that the true MXI1 cDNA sequence extends at least 254 bp
upstream of the ATG; although this sequence loses homology with the
published cDNA sequence at the region of the inverted repeat, it
corresponds exactly to the MXI1 genomic sequence (data not shown).
Identification of the MXI1 Transcription Initiation
Site(s)--
Initial attempts to identify the transcription initiation
site(s) of the MXI1 gene using 5'-RACE proved difficult due
to the extremely GC-rich nature of this region. However, primer
extension analysis using two sequence-specific reverse primers revealed at least two potential start sites, as well as a number of faint bands
over a several hundred-bp range (Fig. 2).
Simultaneous sequencing reactions determined that the two strongest
primer extension bands correspond to a G at
307 (major site), and a C
at
274 (minor site).

View larger version (49K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 2.
Identification of the transcription start
sites for the human MXI1 gene by primer
extension. A, primer extension was performed using two
different primers, R 126 (lanes 1 and
2) or R 206 (lanes 7 and
8) in the presence (+) or absence ( ) of K562 RNA.
Double-stranded sequencing reactions were run alongside each primer
extension reaction (lanes 3-6 and
9-12), using the same labeled primers and an
MXI1 genomic subclone to localize the start sites. The major
start site is identified by the double asterisk to the
right of the band in lane 8, while a
minor start site is identified by the single asterisk to the
left of lane 2. B, the
MXI1 genomic sequence encompassing the two primers used in
the primer extension reactions (arrows), the start sites
(asterisks), and their location relative to the first Inr
(box) is shown. The numbering, indicated to the
left in bp, is relative to the ATG translation start site at
+1.
|
|
Characterization of the 5' Regulatory Region--
In order to
evaluate MXI1 promoter and regulatory regions, we isolated
and sequenced a 1084-bp fragment of genomic DNA immediately upstream of
the MXI1 translation start site (GenBankTM
accession no. AF148881). Sequence analysis revealed neither TATA nor
CAAT boxes. However, the region immediately proximal to the ATG is
extremely GC-rich, with an 80% GC content between
1 and
300. Just
upstream of this GC-rich region are six consensus sequences for Inr
sites (YYAN(A/T)YY) over a 230-bp range (Fig. 3). A search for potential transcription
factor binding sites revealed seven Sp1 (GGGCGG) (37) and numerous AP2
consensus sequences (CCC(A/C)N(G/C)(G/C)(G/C) or GCCNNNGGC) (38, 39) clustered in the region between
1 and
410, an area also containing the first two potential Inrs. Of note, one of the transcription initiation sites identified by primer extension (at
307) is located 4 bases upstream of the first consensus Inr, while the second start site
(at
274) lies within a nearby Sp1 binding sequence. Just downstream
of the transcription initiation sites is a consensus MED-1 site
(multiple start site element
downstream, GCTCC(C/G)) (40) at
250 (see below). Further
upstream is a polypurine tract at
491, as well as several E boxes and
a potential p53 binding site (not shown).

View larger version (38K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 3.
Sequence of the ATG 5'-flanking region of the
human MXI1 gene. Analysis of the first 600 bp of
sequence upstream of the MXI1 ATG is shown. The
A+1TG translation start site is indicated by the
thick arrow. Numbering in bp is indicated to the
left, with negative numbers representing sequence upstream
of the ATG. The two transcription initiation sites determined by primer
extension (at 274 and 307) are indicated by asterisks.
The six potential consensus Inr sequences are boxed, with
the number of each Inr shown above the box.
Consensus Sp1 sequences are indicated by lower half boxes
and identified by letter (A-G). The AP2 consensus sequences
are delineated by unlabeled upper half boxes. The polypurine
tract (starting at 474) is shown in lowercase
letters.
|
|
Functional Analysis of the MXI1 Promoter--
Potential promoter
activity of the MXI1 5'-flanking region was investigated
using a luciferase reporter vector with 1084 bp of MXI1
genomic sequence (p3B1084). Transient transfection of this vector into
K562 cells, which constitutively express MXI1, demonstrated
an 11-fold increase in promoter activity relative to the pGL3-Basic
empty vector (Fig. 4). This promoter
activity was largely abolished using a construct containing the 1084-bp MXI1 fragment cloned into pGL3-Basic in reverse orientation
(p3B1084Rev). Several additional cell lines, including U87MG and U373MG
glioblastoma, HL60 myelomonocytic, and U937 promonocytic cell lines,
also demonstrated increased promoter activity when transfected with the
p3B1084 promoter construct (data not shown). Although the degree of
promoter activity varied by cell line, in each case it was essentially not seen with the p3B1084Rev construct.

View larger version (18K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 4.
Measurement of MXI1 promoter
activity by transient transfection in K562 cells. Luciferase
activity of p3B1084 is shown on the right relative to both
the promoterless luciferase reporter (p3B) and a construct with the
1084-bp promoter fragment in reverse orientation (p3B1084Rev).
Additional promoter constructs are illustrated on the left,
with their luciferase activity relative to p3B1084 (100%) shown on the
right. Construct names represent the length of the promoter
fragment in bp. The Inrs are indicated by the black boxes
(Inrs 4 and 5 are shown as one box, since their
sequences overlap), and the major transcription start site at 307 is
represented by the arrow. Luciferase activities are
normalized to cotransfected Renilla activities, with each
experiment being performed in triplicate a minimum of three
times.
|
|
To delineate the minimal promoter region as well as critical regulatory
regions, we constructed a series of nested 5' deletions and compared
their promoter activities in K562 cells with that of p3B1084 (100%
activity). The results of this analysis (Fig. 4) revealed a 47%
increase in promoter activity with p3B708, suggesting the loss of a
negative regulatory element within that 376-bp deleted region. Further
5' deletion from
708 to
421, with sequential loss of potential Inrs
3-6, did not significantly alter promoter activity, with p3B421 still
having 130% activity. However, deletion of an additional 47 bp of 5'
sequence to
374 resulted in a decrease in promoter activity to 47%,
a nearly two-thirds reduction relative to the p3B421 construct.
Notably, this 47-bp promoter region contains the Inr 2 consensus
sequence at
400. Progressive deletion of promoter sequence between
Inr 2 and Inr 1 (p3B308) resulted in loss of promoter activity to only
20% of that of the full-length construct. Finally, the p3B297
construct, in which Inr 1 is also deleted, showed little luciferase
activity above base line. These results suggest that the first 308 bp
upstream of the MXI1 translation start site contain the
minimal sequences required for promoter activity.
The Effect of Initiator Element Mutations on Promoter
Activity--
To further evaluate the effect of each putative Inr on
overall promoter activity, we mutated or deleted potential Inr
sequences and assayed their promoter activities in K562 cells relative
to wild-type p3B1084 (Fig. 5). The
construct p3BDel (deletion of
535 to
498, including Inrs 4-6)
demonstrated a minimal decrease in MXI1 promoter activity to
82%. Point mutation of Inr 3 or Inr 2 likewise resulted in minimal
decreases in promoter activity (to 80 or 73% activity, respectively).
The construct in which the Inr 1 consensus site was mutated
demonstrated the largest single reduction in promoter activity, having
only 46% activity relative to wild-type p3B1084.

View larger version (20K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 5.
Effect of Inr mutations on MXI1 promoter activity. Promoter constructs containing mutations
or deletions of potential Inrs, either singly or in combination, are
illustrated on the left, with black boxes
representing intact Inr sequences and hatched boxes
indicating the mutated/deleted Inrs. The names of each construct
indicate the number of the Inr mutated, with the exception of p3BDel,
in which Inrs 4-6 were deleted as a group. These constructs were
transiently transfected into K562 cells, and their resultant corrected
luciferase activities, relative to p3B1084 (100%), are shown on the
right. All experiments were performed in triplicate and
repeated a minimum of three times.
|
|
Since none of these individual Inr mutations completely abolished
MXI1 promoter activity, we next constructed combination mutants. Although deletion of Inrs 4-6 or mutation of Inr 3 caused slight decreases in promoter activity, a promoter construct containing both the deletion of Inrs 4-6 and mutation of Inr 3 (p3BM3/Del) showed
a 64% increase in promoter activity over the wild-type p3B1084
construct (Fig. 5). On the other hand, combining mutations of Inrs 1 and 2 (p3BM1/2) resulted in a dramatic reduction in promoter activity
to 22%, suggesting that these two Inr sequences are critical
MXI1 promoter elements. Finally, a promoter construct in
which Inrs 4-6 were deleted and Inrs 1-3 were mutated (p3BM1/2/3/Del) still maintained 34% of promoter activity, a slight increase over that
of p3BM1/2 but consistent with the fact that p3BM3/Del alone resulted
in an increase in promoter activity.
The Role of MED-1 and Sp1 Sites in the MXI1 Promoter--
The fact
that no combination of Inr mutations completely eliminated promoter
activity suggested the presence of additional promoter elements capable
of initiating transcription, albeit at a low level. Sp1 is a ubiquitous
transcriptional activator that may initiate transcription, either
independently or in concert with Inrs in other TATA-less promoters (41,
42). Evaluation of the MXI1 promoter revealed 7 consensus
Sp1 binding sites in the 325-bp, GC-rich region just upstream of the
start codon. Four of these Sp1 sites (Sp1-D, -E, -F, and -G) are
clustered in an 80-bp region surrounding Inr 1; one of these four
(Sp1-F) contains the minor transcription initiation site identified by
primer extension (Fig. 6). In addition to
the potential Sp1 sites, there is also a consensus MED-1 site at
250;
this sequence was first described in a class of TATA-less promoters
with multiple transcription initiation sites (40). Located just
downstream of the start site window, it contributes to utilization of
multiple start sites. We speculated that the residual promoter activity
seen despite mutation of Inrs 1 and 2 might be a result of Sp1-mediated
transcription initiation at minor start sites, regulated in part
through the MED-1 site.

View larger version (8K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 6.
Schematic representation of gel shift probes
and relevant MXI1 promoter elements.
MXI1 promoter sequence from 200 to 450 is diagrammed on
top, with the numbered boxes representing Inrs
and the black oval representing the MED-1 site.
Transcription initiation sites are indicated by asterisks.
Potential Sp1 sites are illustrated by boxes below the
promoter, designated D-G. AP2 sites are shown as open
boxes above the promoter. Gel shift probes I-IV are diagrammed as
triple bars below the promoter. The extent and
sequence composition of each probe is delineated by numbers indicating
its initial and terminal bases (numbering is identical to that used in
Fig. 3).
|
|
To investigate whether Sp1 could bind to any of the consensus Sp1
sequences in the MXI1 promoter, we performed gel shift
assays. In Fig. 7A, a
double-stranded DNA probe including MXI1 sequence from
227
to
262 (probe I; see Fig. 6), containing the Sp1-D site and the
partially overlapping MED-1 site, was used as a labeled probe. Both
pure Sp1 protein (lane 2) and K562 nuclear
extract (lane 3) bound to the probe; these
similarly shifted complexes were specifically competed away with
unlabeled Sp1 oligonucleotide (lane 4) and were
supershifted with anti-Sp1 antibody (lane 5). Additionally, the lanes with K562 nuclear extract (lanes
3-5) demonstrated a faster migrating complex
(arrow 1) that may be due to the binding of
unknown proteins to the MED-1 site. Mutation of the MED-1 site, which
also partially mutated the Sp1 site from GGGCGG to GGGCCA, did not
affect Sp1 binding (lanes 6-10). However, the
faster migrating complex was dramatically diminished, while a slightly
higher band was amplified (arrow 2), consistent
with altered binding to the mutated MED-1 site. Similar gel shift
experiments with probes containing MXI1 sequence from
258
to
287 (probe II) and
285 to
325 (probe III) showed that Sp1 was
capable of binding specifically to each of these probes, both as a pure
protein and in K562 nuclear extracts (data not shown). These results
support the hypothesis that Sp1 binding to sites in the MXI1
promoter may play an important role in its regulation. In addition, the MED-1 sequence at
250 appears to support protein-DNA interactions independent of Sp1 binding nearby.

View larger version (36K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 7.
Analysis of MED-1 and Sp1 sites in the
MXI1 promoter. A, gel shift assays
were performed using either probe I, containing MXI1
promoter sequence from 227 to 262 (lanes 1-5), or probe I/MMED, in which a 5-bp mutation of the
MED-1 site was introduced (lanes 6-10). Assays
were performed with probe alone ( ) (lanes 1 and
6), with purified Sp1 protein (S)
(lanes 2 and 7), or with K562 nuclear
extracts (N) (lanes 3-5 and
8-10). An unlabeled Sp1 oligonucleotide was added as a
specific competitor (C) in lanes 4 and
9, while an anti-Sp1 antibody (A) was added in
lanes 5 and 10. The upper two
arrows indicate the shifted band due to Sp1 binding the probe and
the supershifted band seen with the addition of Sp1-specific antibody.
The bands indicated by arrows 1 and 2 are seen
with native and mutated MED-1 sites, respectively. B, the
effect of MED-1/Sp1 mutations on MXI1 promoter activity was
assayed, with diagrams of the promoter constructs on the
left and their corrected luciferase activities relative to
p3B1084 (100%) on the right. Black boxes
indicate intact Inrs, the black oval indicates an intact
MED-1 site, and open boxes below the promoter
represent intact Sp1 sites (labeled D-G). Mutated elements
are shown as hatched boxes/ovals. The asterisks
indicate transcription initiation sites.
|
|
We next began to assess the functional contribution of the MED-1 and
Sp1 sites to MXI1 promoter activity. Despite multiple attempts to prepare a reporter construct with a MED-1/Sp1-D mutation by
PCR, every effort resulted in concomitant mutations in one or more
nearby Sp1 sites. One of these constructs, p3BMMED/Sp1, contained a
point mutation in the Sp1-F site that encompassed one of the
transcription initiation sites, in addition to the original MED-1
mutation. When transfected into K562 cells, this construct showed no
significant change in promoter activity compared with p3B1084 (Fig.
7B). We then combined these mutations with mutations of both
Inrs 1 and 2. While p3BM1/2 still retained 22% of the full promoter
activity seen with p3B1084, the addition of the MED-1/Sp1 mutations
(p3BM1/2/MED/Sp1) effectively abolished all promoter activity. Thus, it
appears that the MED-1 site and at least one Sp1 site, in conjunction
with the proximal two Inrs, are functionally significant
MXI1 promoter elements, accounting for nearly all of the
promoter activity in K562 cells.
To determine the effect of overexpression of Sp1 on the MXI1
promoter, we cotransfected an Sp1 expression vector in addition to
p3B1084 into K562 cells. These experiments showed no consistent change
in promoter activity with the overexpression of Sp1 (data not shown).
Since Sp1 is ubiquitously expressed in mammalian cells, we postulated
that the promoter construct might have been saturated with endogenous
Sp1. This cotransfection analysis was then performed in
Drosophila SL2 cells, which lack Sp1. Transfection of the
p3B1084 MXI1 promoter construct alone demonstrated no
significant promoter activity; cotransfection with the Sp1 expression
vector did not alter this lack of activity (data not shown). It would
appear, then, that Sp1 alone cannot drive expression of
MXI1; additional transcription factors not present in
Drosophila cells must be required for MXI1
transcriptional activity.
AP2 Repression of the MXI1 Promoter--
The MXI1
promoter includes multiple consensus AP2 transcription factor binding
sites, many of which overlap Sp1 sites (Fig. 6). Since AP2 has been
implicated in both positive and negative transcriptional regulation of
other genes with GC-rich promoters (43, 44), we investigated the role
of AP2 in the regulation of MXI1 promoter activity. We first
performed gel shift experiments with the same labeled MXI1
probes described previously. Probes I, II, and III each contain at
least one consensus AP2 binding sequence; Probe IV (
390 to
424)
also includes an AP2 binding site but no consensus Sp1 sequence. A
representative gel shift using probe III, containing overlapping
AP2/Sp1 sites, is shown in Fig.
8A. The labeled probe bound
purified AP2 protein (lane 4), which was competed
away by unlabeled AP2 oligonucleotide (lane 5);
it also bound pure Sp1 (lanes 2 and
3). However, when K562 nuclear extracts were used, the probe
did not appear to bind AP2. Instead, there was a slower migrating
doublet, consistent with Sp1 binding, and a faster migrating triplet of
bands. Since this probe contains Inr 1 and one of the transcription
start sites, these lower bands may represent transcription
initiation-related DNA-protein complexes. Similar gel shift experiments
were performed with probes I, II, and IV, all of which bound purified
AP2 protein, but did not demonstrate shifted bands consistent with AP2
binding with K562 nuclear extracts. Thus, although purified AP2 can
bind to several AP2 consensus sequences in the MXI1
promoter, in the context of K562 nuclear extracts, Sp1 rather than AP2
bound preferentially.

View larger version (41K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 8.
AP2 represses the MXI1 promoter. A, a representative gel shift assay
using probe III, containing MXI1 promoter sequence from
285 to 325, was performed using probe alone ( ) (lane 1) or with the addition of recombinant Sp1
(lanes 2 and 3), AP2
(lanes 4 and 5), or K562 nuclear
extracts (NE) (lanes 6-8).
Competition assays included either unlabeled Sp1 oligonucleotide
(C1) (lanes 3 and 7) or
unlabeled AP2 oligonucleotide (C2) (lanes 5 and 8). The position of the Sp1-DNA complexes
and AP2-DNA complexes are indicated by arrows. B, the effect
of AP2 on MXI1 promoter activity was determined by
transiently transfecting an AP2-null cell line (HepG2) with 5 µg of
the chimeric p3B1084 MXI1 promoter construct and increasing
amounts of an AP2 expression vector (pCMX-PL1/AP2 ). The resulting
corrected luciferase activities are expressed as a percentage of the
activity of the p3B1084 construct when transfected with the empty
pCMX-PL1 vector (the combined amount of pCMX-PL1/AP2 + empty pCMX-PL1
vector was identical in all samples). These assays were performed in
triplicate and repeated a minimum of three times.
|
|
To assess the functional effect of AP2 expression on the
MXI1 promoter, we utilized HepG2 human hepatocarcinoma
cells, which do not express AP2. The p3B1084 MXI1 promoter
construct was cotransfected with varying amounts of an AP2
expression vector into HepG2 cells (Fig. 8B). Although there
was a slight increase in promoter activity with low amounts of
AP2, there was a significant dose-dependent repression of the MXI1 promoter with increasing AP2,
suggesting that AP2 behaves as a repressor of MXI1
transcription at high concentrations.
 |
DISCUSSION |
MXI1, a candidate tumor suppressor gene that has been
implicated in the induction and maintenance of the differentiated
state, appears to function in a tightly regulated network with the
MYC oncogene in order to maintain normal cell growth and
differentiation. Loss of MXI1, as seen in
MXI1-deficient mice (22), results in increased
susceptibility to tumorigenesis, while overexpression of
MXI1 in both glioblastoma (21) and prostate tumor
cells1 leads to decreased tumor growth. Understanding the
regulation of MXI1 expression should contribute to our
insight into the regulation of normal cell growth and differentiation.
In this study, therefore, we set out to identify and characterize the
regulatory regions of the MXI1 gene.
Published studies had delineated a 2417-bp MXI1 cDNA (9,
36) but an approximately 2800-3200-bp product on Northern analysis (18). In comparing the cDNA sequence with the corresponding sequence of the genomic clone, we noted several potential reasons for
this discrepancy, including an inverted repeat sequence in the 5'-UTR.
Further investigation of both the 3'- and 5'-untranslated regions of
the cDNA using RACE techniques determined that the full
MXI1 cDNA contains an additional 126 bp in the 3'-UTR.
More significantly, we were able to clarify the 5'-UTR, which varies from the previously published cDNA but corresponds exactly to the
genomic sequence. These additional 3' and 5' sequences result in an
MXI1 cDNA of 2590 bp. Using primer extension assays, we identified two distinct transcription initiation sites at
307 and
274. When the major start site at
307 is taken into account, the
calculated length of the MXI1 cDNA is 2643 bp. Although
some of the primer extension assays did reveal additional weaker bands throughout the GC-rich region, it is unclear whether these represent true transcription initiation sites or merely premature pausing of the
reverse transcriptase. Since many genes with GC-rich TATA-less promoters have multiple transcription initiation sites (45-47), it is
certainly possible that there are additional MXI1 start sites, creating some variability in the cDNA size.
We next isolated and sequenced a 1084-bp region of genomic sequence
immediately upstream of the MXI1 translation start site. Evaluation of this sequence revealed a number of elements consistent with an active promoter. Although there are no canonical TATA or CAAT
boxes, there are six potential Inrs between
530 and
300. TFIID is
thought to interact with Inr sequences, recruiting and stabilizing
components of the transcription initiation machinery (reviewed in Refs.
48 and 49). In addition to the potential Inrs, the MXI1
promoter region contains multiple Sp1 and AP2 consensus binding sites,
a MED-1 site, and a polypurine tract just upstream of Inr 3. Polypurine
tracts, which are essential elements in some promoters, may function by
altering the structure or stability of the nucleosome, increasing the
accessibility of downstream sequences to gene-activating proteins (50).
The presence of all these elements clustered over several hundred base
pairs upstream of the MXI1 ATG strongly supports the
likelihood that this region is a functional promoter.
Subsequent promoter analyses confirmed that the 1084 bp of sequence
upstream of the MXI1 ATG has significant promoter activity. This activity was abrogated when the 1084-bp sequence was in the reverse orientation, consistent with the orientation-specific requirement of an active promoter. A series of promoter deletions and
Inr mutations demonstrated that significant MXI1 promoter activity requires at least 421 bp of sequence upstream of the ATG. This
region includes Inrs 1 and 2, which both contribute to transcriptional
activation. Interestingly, the sequences adjacent to and including
these two Inrs demonstrate a remarkable 14/17 bp homology with each
other. However, mutation of Inr 1 resulted in the greatest single
reduction of promoter activity. Further reduction in promoter activity
was seen with a construct containing a double mutation of Inrs 1 and 2. Mutation of Inrs 3-6 did not cause significant loss of promoter
activity, either individually or in addition to mutations of Inrs 1 and
2, confirming that these four potential Inrs do not contribute
significantly to overall promoter activity. Therefore, the residual
promoter activity seen despite mutation of Inrs 1 and 2 suggests the
ability of additional elements to contribute to transcriptional activation.
One of the sequences potentially contributing to transcriptional
activation is the consensus MED-1 site at
250. This sequence (GCTCC(C/G)) has been described in a series of TATA-less promoters with
multiple transcription initiation sites; it is found just downstream of
the start site window and contributes to the utilization of multiple
start sites (40). When this element was mutated in the P-glycoprotein
promoter, transcription was reduced due to decreasing utilization of
the downstream start sites. In the MXI1 promoter, gel shift
experiments using K562 nuclear extracts demonstrated that a probe with
the mutated MED-1 sequence had altered protein-DNA interactions when
compared with the nonmutated probe. Although this MED-1 mutation also
partially mutated the overlapping Sp1-D site, Sp1 binding to the probe
was not affected. Functionally, mutation of the MED-1 site in
combination with any of the Sp1 sites did not alter overall promoter
activity when Inrs 1 and 2 were intact. However, the residual promoter
activity seen despite mutation of Inrs 1 and 2 was abrogated by the
addition of the MED-1/Sp1 mutations.
It has been noted that Inr-containing promoters are frequently
responsive to specific transcriptional activators such as Sp1, which
contributes to basal promoter activity by stabilizing the transcriptional machinery (41, 48). Although Sp1 is ubiquitously expressed, it is involved in the transcriptional regulation of a number
of tissue-specific and differentiation-dependent genes, including genes regulating neural, epithelial, and hematopoietic cell
differentiation (44, 51, 52). Our promoter analyses support a role for
Sp1 in the transcriptional activation of MXI1 for several
reasons. First, the MXI1 sequence upstream of the ATG has 7 consensus Sp1 sites between
105 and
320, four of which are
clustered around Inr 1 and the MED-1 site. Second, one of the
transcription initiation sites detected by primer extension localized
to the Sp1-F site, just downstream of Inr 1. Third, gel shift
experiments demonstrated that Sp1 was capable of binding to each of the
four clustered Sp1 sites, even in the presence of a partial mutation of
the Sp1-D binding site. Fourth, functional promoter studies
demonstrated a loss of promoter activity when sequence containing the
Sp1-G site just upstream of Inr 1 was deleted (p3B374 to p3B308).
Finally, the MXI1 promoter still retained more than 20% of
its original activity despite mutation or deletion of all putative
Inrs, suggesting the involvement of additional transcriptional
activators such as Sp1. This residual promoter activity was abolished
completely by adding mutations of the Sp1-F and MED-1 sites to the Inr
1/2 mutations, confirming a role for these sites in contributing to
MXI1 promoter activity in K562 cells.
We noted with special interest the presence of multiple consensus AP2
sequences in the MXI1 5'-UTR and promoter region. The product of one of three related genes (AP2
, AP2
, or
AP2
), AP2 is a developmentally regulated and
tissue-specific transcription factor expressed primarily in neural
crest cell and epidermal cell lineages (43, 53, 54). Although AP2 was
initially described as a transcriptional activator, several recent
studies have demonstrated its ability to behave as a repressor. In both
the human acetylcholinesterase gene and the K3 keratin gene, there are
overlapping Sp1 and AP2 sites in the promoter, with Sp1 activating and
AP2 repressing gene transcription (44, 51). In rabbit corneal
epithelial cells stimulated to differentiate, AP2 is dramatically
down-regulated, thus altering the Sp1:AP2 ratio and favoring the
activation of the K3 keratin gene by Sp1 in differentiating cells (51).
Since MXI1 is highly expressed in brain and its promoter
also has multiple overlapping Sp1 and AP2 sites, we postulated a role
for AP2 in MXI1 transcriptional regulation. Cotransfection
of AP2 with the MXI1 promoter construct p3B1084 in HepG2
cells (which lack endogenous AP2) clearly demonstrated a significant
repression of promoter activity with increasing levels of AP2. In gel
shift assays, both purified AP2 protein and Sp1 protein were able to
bind to several MXI1 probes containing overlapping AP2 and
Sp1 sites; however, only Sp1 bound in the context of K562 nuclear
extracts. It may be that the concentration of AP2 and the relative
ratio of AP2 to Sp1 in a particular cell environment determine the
efficiency of binding of AP2 to its binding sites in the
MXI1 promoter, thus partially controlling the balance
between gene activation and repression. In support of this hypothesis,
MXI1 promoter activity (with the p3B1084 construct) was
lower in all glioblastoma cell lines compared with the K562 cell line,
perhaps due to repression by endogenous AP2 in the glioblastoma cells
(data not shown). Additional studies of the role of AP2 in
MXI1 regulation in neural cell lines should further clarify
this issue.
Multiple elements contribute to the basal transcriptional activation of
the MXI1 gene, including Inrs 1 and 2, the MED-1 site, and
several Sp1 sites. This lack of a single well defined mechanism for
transcriptional activation may confer significant advantages and allow
for more precise regulation. Although some of the first GC-rich,
TATA-less promoters studied were associated with "housekeeping genes," it is now clear that many Inr-based genes are highly
tissue-specific or developmentally regulated (47, 55). The use of Inrs
rather than TATA boxes may allow differential regulation by activators and repressors depending upon a particular cell milieu. For example, certain proteins such as p53 repress transcription from some
TATA-containing promoters but not from Inr-based promoters (56). Other
transcription factors such as Myc have been shown to activate
transcription through an E-box but repress transcription through an Inr
(57-59). This type of differential regulation might allow a gradation
in gene expression during development or a mechanism by which cells can
initiate the cascade of events leading to differentiation.
In addition to the regulatory elements discussed above, the
transcriptional regulation of MXI1 expression may also rely
on certain structural elements. This is particularly likely with respect to the GC-rich 5'-UTR, especially in the region between
230
and
300. When analyzing this region, we noted that experimental modifications designed to limit formation of secondary structures were
critical, suggesting that this region may lend itself to structural
constraints that are difficult to disrupt. In support of this,
computer-based RNA structural analyses of these sequences indicate the
possible formation of a number of stem-loop structures within this
region. Interestingly, all of our MED-1/Sp1 mutant constructs developed
concomitant mutations in one or more nearby Sp1 sites, consistent with
the formation of favorable stem structures involving Sp1 sites. It may
be that this region serves as a negative regulatory element, limiting
access to Sp1 and Inr 1 sites. If so, the binding of a protein to the
MED-1 site may alter these structural constraints, increasing
accessibility of this region to the transcription initiation machinery.
On the other hand, the absence of factors able to bind the MED-1
sequence may result in limiting access to the Inr 1 region, favoring
transcription initiation from Inr 2.
In summary, we have demonstrated that regulation of the MXI1
promoter is complex and dependent on a number of factors. Multiple Inrs
and transcription initiation sites may allow for more precise transcriptional regulation. Involvement of Sp1 and AP2, both of which
play a role in neural development, supports a role for MXI1 in the developing nervous system. Finally, structural constraints may
impose yet another level of regulation. Ongoing studies should more
precisely elucidate the transcriptional regulation of the MXI1 gene and contribute to our understanding of mechanisms
of gene regulation.
 |
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS |
We appreciate the gifts of the AP2 expression
vector by R. Buettner and the Sp1 expression vector by C. Dang. We are
also grateful for the constructive input of C. Dang and M. D. Benson.
 |
FOOTNOTES |
*
The costs of publication of this
article were defrayed in part by the
payment of page charges. The article
must therefore be hereby marked
"advertisement" in
accordance with 18 U.S.C. Section
1734 solely to indicate this fact.
Supported by an American Society of Clinical Oncology Young
Investigator Award and the University of Michigan Cancer Center Pardee
Postdoctoral Fellowship.
§
Supported by the Strokes against Cancer Foundation; by NICHD,
National Institutes of Health (NIH), Child Health Research Center Grant
1-P30-HD28820-01; and by NCI, NIH, Prostate SPORE Grant 1-P50-CA69568S.
To whom correspondence should be addressed: Division of Pediatric
Hematology/Oncology, Dept. of Pediatrics and Communicable Diseases,
University of Michigan, CCGC 4312, 1500 E. Medical Center Dr., Ann
Arbor, MI 48109-0938. Tel.: 734-936-8875; Fax: 734-647-9654; E-mail:
dwechsl@umich.edu.
1
M. M. Taj and D. S. Wechsler, unpublished data.
 |
ABBREVIATIONS |
The abbreviations used are:
Inr, initiator;
UTR, untranslated region;
bp, base pair;
RACE, rapid amplification of
cDNA ends;
PCR, polymerase chain reaction.
 |
REFERENCES |
| 1.
|
Bouchard, C.,
Staller, P.,
and Eilers, M.
(1998)
Trends Cell Biol.
8,
202-206[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 2.
|
Potter, M.,
and Marcu, K. B.
(1997)
Curr. Top. Microbiol. Immunol.
224,
1-17[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 3.
|
Dang, C. V.
(1999)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
19,
1-11[Free Full Text]
|
| 4.
|
Facchini, L. M.,
and Penn, L. Z.
(1998)
FASEB J.
12,
633-651[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 5.
|
Land, H.,
Parada, L. F.,
and Weinberg, R. A.
(1983)
Nature
304,
596-601[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 6.
|
Stone, J.,
de Lange, T.,
Ramsay, G.,
Jakobovits, E.,
Bishop, J. M.,
Varmus, H.,
and Lee, W. M. F.
(1987)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
7,
1697-1709[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 7.
|
Dang, C. V.,
and Lee, L. A.
(1995)
c-MYC Function in Neoplasia
, R. G. Landes Co., Austin, TX
|
| 8.
|
Shim, H.,
Lewis, B. C.,
Dolde, C.,
Li, Q.,
Wu, C. S.,
Chun, Y. S.,
and Dang, C. V.
(1997)
Curr. Top. Microbiol. Immunol.
224,
181-190[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 9.
|
Zervos, A. S.,
Gyuris, J.,
and Brent, R.
(1993)
Cell
72,
223-232[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 10.
|
Ayer, D. E.,
Kretzner, L.,
and Eisenman, R. N.
(1993)
Cell
72,
211-222[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 11.
|
Hurlin, P. J.,
Queva, C.,
Koskinen, P. J.,
Steingrimsson, E.,
Ayer, D. E.,
Copeland, N. G.,
Jenkins, N. A.,
and Eisenman, R. N.
(1995)
EMBO J.
14,
5646-5659[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 12.
|
Hurlin, P. J.,
Queva, C.,
and Eisenman, R. N.
(1997)
Genes Dev.
11,
44-58[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 13.
|
Meroni, G.,
Reymond, A.,
Alcalay, M.,
Borsani, G.,
Tanigami, A.,
Tonlorenzi, R.,
Nigro, C. L.,
Messali, S.,
Zollo, M.,
Ledbetter, D. H.,
Brent, R.,
Ballabio, A.,
and Carrozzo, R.
(1997)
EMBO J.
16,
2892-2906[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 14.
|
Schreiber-Agus, N.,
Chin, L.,
Chen, K.,
Torres, R.,
Rao, G.,
Guida, P.,
Skoultchi, A. I.,
and DePinho, R. A.
(1995)
Cell
80,
777-786[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 15.
|
Alland, L.,
Muhle, R.,
Hou, H., Jr.,
Potes, J.,
Chin, L.,
Schreiber-Agus, N.,
and DePinho, R. A.
(1997)
Nature
387,
49-55[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 16.
|
Heinzel, T.,
Lavinsky, R. M.,
Mullen, T. M.,
Soderstrom, M.,
Laherty, C. D.,
Torchia, J.,
Yang, W. M.,
Brard, G.,
Ngo, S. D.,
Davie, J. R.,
Seto, E.,
Eisenman, R. N.,
Rose, D. W.,
Glass, C. K.,
and Rosenfeld, M. G.
(1997)
Nature
387,
43-48[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 17.
|
Delgado, M. D.,
Lerga, A.,
Canelles, M.,
Gomez-Casares, M. T.,
and Leon, J.
(1995)
Oncogene
10,
1659-1665[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 18.
|
Larsson, L. G.,
Pettersson, M.,
Oberg, F.,
Nilsson, K.,
and Luscher, B.
(1994)
Oncogene
9,
1247-1252[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 19.
|
Queva, C.,
Hurlin, P. J.,
Foley, K. P.,
and Eisenman, R. N.
(1998)
Oncogene
16,
967-977[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 20.
|
Lahoz, E. G.,
Xu, L.,
Schreiber-Agus, N.,
and DePinho, R. A.
(1994)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
91,
5503-5507[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 21.
|
Wechsler, D. S.,
Shelly, C. A.,
Petroff, C. A.,
and Dang, C. V.
(1997)
Cancer Res.
57,
4905-4912[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 22.
|
Schreiber-Agus, N.,
Meng, Y.,
Hoang, T.,
Hou, H., Jr.,
Chen, K.,
Greenberg, R.,
Cordon-Cardo, C.,
Lee, H. W.,
and DePinho, R. A.
(1998)
Nature
393,
483-487[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 23.
|
Wechsler, D. S.,
Hawkins, A. L.,
Li, X.,
Jabs, E. W.,
Griffin, C. A.,
and Dang, C. V.
(1994)
Genomics
21,
669-672[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 24.
|
Edelhoff, S.,
Ayer, D. E.,
Zervos, A. S.,
Steingrimsson, E.,
Jenkins, N. A.,
Copeland, N. G.,
Eisenman, R. N.,
Brent, R.,
and Disteche, C. M.
(1994)
Oncogene
9,
665-668[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 25.
|
Shapiro, D. N.,
Valentine, V.,
Eagle, L.,
Yin, X.,
Morris, S. W.,
and Prochownik, E. V.
(1994)
Genomics
23,
282-285[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 26.
|
Fults, D.,
and Pedone, C.
(1993)
Genes Chromosomes Cancer
7,
173-177[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 27.
|
Rasheed, B. K. A.,
Fuller, G. N.,
Friedman, A. H.,
Bigner, D. D.,
and Bigner, S. H.
(1992)
Genes Chromosomes Cancer
5,
75-82[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 28.
|
Carter, B. S.,
Ewing, C. M.,
Ward, W. S.,
Treiger, B. F.,
Aalders, T. W.,
Schalken, J. A.,
Epstein, J. I.,
and Isaacs, W. B.
(1990)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
87,
8751-8755[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 29.
|
Lundgren, R.,
Mandahl, N.,
Heim, S.,
Limon, J.,
Henrikson, H.,
and Mitelman, F.
(1992)
Genes Chromosomes Cancer
4,
16-24[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 30.
|
Eagle, L. R.,
Yin, X.,
Brothman, A. R.,
Williams, B. J.,
Atkin, N. B.,
and Prochownik, E. V.
(1995)
Nat. Genet.
9,
249-255[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 31.
|
Kawamata, N.,
Park, D.,
Wilczynski, S.,
Yokota, J.,
and Koeffler, H. P.
(1996)
Prostate
29,
191-193[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 32.
|
Edwards, S. M.,
Dearnaley, D. P.,
Ardern-Jones, A.,
Hamoudi, R. A.,
Easton, D. F.,
Ford, D.,
Shearer, R.,
Dowe, A.,
and Eeles, R. A.
(1997)
Br. J. Cancer
76,
992-1000[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 33.
|
Prochownik, E. V.,
Eagle Grove, L.,
Deubler, D.,
Zhu, X. L.,
Stephenson, R. A.,
Rohr, L. R.,
Yin, X.,
and Brothman, A. R.
(1998)
Genes Chromosomes Cancer
22,
295-304[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 34.
|
Wechsler, D. S.,
Shelly, C. A.,
and Dang, C. V.
(1996)
Genomics
32,
466-470[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 35.
|
Zervos, A. S.,
Gyuris, J.,
and Brent, R.
(1994)
Cell
79,
389[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 36.
|
Albarosa, R.,
DiDonato, S.,
and Finocchiaro, G.
(1995)
Hum. Genet.
95,
709-711[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 37.
|
Briggs, M. R.,
Kadonaga, J. T.,
Bell, S. P.,
and Tjian, R.
(1986)
Science
234,
47-52[Abstract/Free Full  |