J Biol Chem, Vol. 274, Issue 45, 32091-32098, November 5, 1999
The Nuclear Factor-
B Engages CBP/p300 and Histone
Acetyltransferase Activity for Transcriptional Activation of the
Interleukin-6 Gene Promoter*
Wim
Vanden Berghe,
Karolien
De Bosscher
,
Elke
Boone,
Stéphane
Plaisance§, and
Guy
Haegeman¶
From the Department of Molecular Biology, University of Gent and
Flanders Interuniversity Institute for Biotechnology,
B-9000 Gent, Belgium
 |
ABSTRACT |
Expression of the pleiotropic cytokine
interleukin (IL)-6 can be stimulated by the proinflammatory cytokine
tumor necrosis factor (TNF) and the microbial alkaloid staurosporine
(STS). In this report, the transcriptional mechanisms were thoroughly
investigated. Whereas transcription factors binding to the activator
protein-1-, cAMP-responsive element-, and CAAT enhancer-binding
protein-responsive sequences are necessary for gene activation by STS,
nuclear factor (NF)-
B alone is responsible and sufficient for
inducibility by TNF, which reveals distinct signaling pathways for both
compounds. At the cofactor level, cAMP-responsive element-binding
protein-binding protein (CBP) or p300 potentiate basal and induced IL-6
promoter activation via multiple protein-protein interactions with all transcription factors bound to the promoter DNA. However, the strongest
promoter activation relies on the p65 NF-
B subunit, which
specifically engages CBP/p300 for maximal transcriptional stimulation
by its histone acetyltransferase activity. Moreover, treatment of
chromatin-integrated promoter constructions with the histone
deacetylase inhibitor trichostatin A exclusively potentiates TNF-dependent (i.e. NF-
B-mediated) gene
activation, while basal or STS-stimulated IL-6 promoter activity
remains completely unchanged. Similar observations were recorded with
other natural NF-
B-driven promoters, namely IL-8 and endothelial
leukocyte adhesion molecule (ELAM). We conclude that, within an
"enhanceosome-like" structure, NF-
B is the central mediator of
TNF-induced IL-6 gene expression, involving CBP/p300 and requiring
histone acetyltransferase activity.
 |
INTRODUCTION |
Interleukin (IL)1-6
contributes to a multitude of physiological and pathophysiological
processes. Among its many functions, IL-6 plays an active role in
immunological responses, bone metabolism, reproduction, inflammation,
neoplasia, and aging. Overexpression of IL-6 has been implicated in the
pathology of a number of diseases including multiple myeloma,
rheumatoid arthritis, Castleman's disease, psoriasis, Alzheimer's
disease, and postmenopausal osteoporosis. The cellular and molecular
biology of IL-6 has been explored by a variety of approaches (1). In
view of its pleiotropic functions, studies on the regulation of IL-6
gene expression may be of prior importance. The characterization of the
IL-6 promoter revealed a complex control region that can be triggered
by multiple activation pathways (2, 3). In the case of tumor necrosis
factor (TNF), the main transcriptional activator for IL-6 gene
induction is the nuclear factor NF-
B, which is typically a dimer
between p50 and the transactivating subunit p65 (RelA). In unstimulated
cells, NF-
B resides in the cytoplasm, bound to its inhibitor I
B.
After cell stimulation, NF-
B is released from I
B and migrates
into the nucleus, where it induces gene expression after DNA binding (4). Access of NF-
B complexes is partially blocked by the constitutive occupancy of the IL-6-
B site by the recombination signal sequence-binding protein (RBP)-J
, which is involved in the
constitutive repression of the IL-6 gene under normal physiological conditions (5). Activation of IL-6 gene expression by NF-
B is
probably the most important pathway. For maximum response, additional
factors are also required, the most important being activator protein
(AP)-1, cyclic AMP-responsive element-binding protein (CREB) and CAAT
enhancer-binding protein (C/EBP) (6, 7). AP-1 is formed by the
dimerization of Fos and Jun family members through a leucine zipper
structural motif and becomes activated by mitogenic stimuli,
oncoproteins, cytokines, and UV light. Another dimeric transcription
factor is CREB, which binds to cAMP-responsive elements and is involved
in cAMP-signaling pathways. The C/EBP family of transcription factors
is involved in the expression of both acute phase cytokine genes and
cytokine-inducible acute-phase proteins.
Transcription is a multistep process with many potential levels of
control. Recent data indicate that numerous transcription factors
mediate their effects via recruitment of cofactors (8, 9). The
cofactors CREB-binding protein (CBP), p300, and steroid receptor
coactivator (SRC)-1 have indeed received much attention due to their
promiscuous interactions with a wide range of transcription factors,
such as AP-1, CREB, C/EBP, and NF-
B (10-15). In addition to their
bridging function between upstream DNA-binding proteins and the basal
transcription complex, some cofactors also appear to play a role in
chromatin remodeling via their intrinsic histone acetyltransferase
(HAT) or deacetylase (HDAC) activity (16, 17).
We have already reported on the essential role of NF-
B to trigger
IL-6 gene activation in response to TNF in the mouse fibrosarcoma cell
line L929sA (3). In addition, we showed that staurosporine (STS)
sensitizes tumor cells to TNF cytotoxicity and markedly potentiates
TNF-induced IL-6 production (18). In the present paper, we further
studied the transcriptional mechanisms of TNF- and STS-mediated IL-6
gene activation. We focused on the functional interaction between TNF-
or STS-responsive DNA-bound factors and the cofactor CBP/p300 in the
IL-6 promoter context. The relation between
cofactor-dependent HAT activity and IL-6 promoter
stimulation was further explored with a HAT-defective p300 variant and
with the potent HDAC inhibitor trichostatin A (TSA). Finally, we also extend our observations to other NF-
B-containing promoters.
 |
MATERIALS AND METHODS |
Cell Culture, Cytokines, and Inhibitors--
Murine fibrosarcoma
L929sA cells and human embryonic kidney HEK293T cells were maintained
in Dulbecco's modified Eagle's medium supplemented with 5% newborn
calf serum, 5% fetal calf serum, 100 units/ml penicillin, and 0.1 mg/ml streptomycin. 24 h before induction, cells were seeded in
multiwell dishes such that they were confluent at the time of the
experiment. Recombinant murine TNF has been characterized previously
(3). STS was purchased from Calbiochem-Novabiochem International (San
Diego, CA) and was stored as a 2-mM solution in dimethyl sulfoxide at
20 °C. TSA was purchased from Biomol (Plymouth Meeting, PA) and
was stored as a 10 mM solution in EtOH at
20 °C. Control
experiments showed that the final quantities of organic solvent used
did not interfere with any of the assays. Secreted IL-6 levels were
determined in a biological 7TD1 assay (19).
Plasmids--
The IL-6 promoter-containing plasmids
p1168hu.IL6P-luc+, p234hu.IL6P-luc+, p110hu.IL6P-luc+, p50hu.IL6P-luc+,
and p(IL6
B)350hu.IL6P-luc+ were described previously (3,
5). p1481.IL8P-luc+, containing an IL-8 promoter fragment of 1481 bp
(20), was kindly provided by Dr. N. Mukaida (Cancer Research Institute,
Kanazawa, Japan). pELAMP-luc+, containing the ELAM promoter, was a gift
from Dr. D. V. Goeddel (Tularik, San Francisco, CA) (21). The
synthetic reporter gene constructs pCRE-luc+ and pAP1-luc+, containing
multimerized responsive elements in front of a minimal promoter, were
purchased from Stratagene Cloning Systems (La Jolla, CA).
pPGK
GeobpA, constitutively expressing a neomycin-resistant
-galactosidase fusion protein under control of the
3-phosphoglycerate kinase promoter from the mouse housekeeping
3-phosphoglycerate kinase enzyme (22), was a gift of Dr. P. Soriano
(Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, WA). pCMV-CBP or
pCMV-p300, expressing full-length CBP or p300, were provided by Dr. R. Eckner (Institute for Molecular Biology, Zurich, Switzerland) (23). The
expression vectors containing wild-type (wt) p300 (pCI.p300) and its
HAT deletion derivative (pCI.p300HAT
1472-1522) were a gift of Dr.
J. Boyes (MRC Clinical Sciences Center, London, UK) (24). The mammalian
expression plasmid for full-length SRC-1 was provided by Dr. B. W. O'Malley (25). pcDNA3 was purchased from Invitrogen (San Diego,
CA). NF-
B p50 and p65 expression plasmids were provided by Dr. G. Manfioletti (University of Trieste, Trieste, Italy) (26). The c-Jun
expression plasmid was cloned by inserting a full-length EcoRI-flanked cDNA fragment of murine c-Jun in
pRSV-cDNA3.
Site-directed Mutagenesis--
The IL-6 promoter was mutated as
described previously (3). To create the double point-mutated IL-6
promoter variant CRE-C/EBP-mut 1168hu.IL6P-luc+, the following mutator
oligonucleotide, containing specific restriction sites, was used
(altered nucleotides are italicized): CRE-C/EBP-mut
5'-GCGATGCTAAAGGGATCCACAGATATCAATCTTAATAAGG-3'. Mutant clones were screened for the presence of newly created restriction sites and confirmed by sequence analysis. To obtain the
double mutant AP-1-CRE-mut 1168hu.IL6P-luc+, a
NheI-HindIII IL-6 promoter fragment from the CRE
point mutant plasmid 1168hu.IL6P-luc+, containing a 234-bp proximal
promoter sequence including the CRE mutation, was used to replace the
corresponding sequence in the AP-1 point-mutated IL-6 promoter variant
1168hu.IL6P-luc+. The single IL-6 promoter mutant IL6
B>Ig
B-mut,
which does no further bind RBP-J
, was described previously (5). All
designed mutations have been described to abolish respective
transcription factor binding (2) and were confirmed by sequence analysis.
Transfection Procedures--
Stable transfection of L929sA cells
was described previously (3). Transient transfection of HEK293T cells
was performed with Fugene (Roche Molecular Biochemicals) according to
the manufacturer's instructions. Briefly, approximately 5 × 104 exponentially growing HEK293T cells were seeded in
24-well plates 24 h before transfection. After appropriate mixing
of Fugene with the DNA plasmids of interest, transfection mixtures
(containing a total amount of 500 ng of DNA) were added to each well
and left on the cells for 24 h, after which medium was refreshed
and cells were further used in induction experiments 60 h after
transfection. Total amounts of expression vectors were kept constant in
all set-ups by using an empty vector DNA. All experiments were carried out at least in triplicate.
Electrophoretic Mobility Shift Assay (EMSA)--
L929sA cells
were seeded in dishes at 5 × 105 cells/dish at day
1. After appropriate induction, cells were washed with ice-cold PBS,
harvested with a rubber policeman and pelleted in 15 ml PBS by
centrifugation for 5 min at 1100 × g. Lysate
preparation and EMSAs were performed essentially as described
previously (5). The binding sequences for appropriate EMSAs comprised
the oligonucleotides 5'-CGCTTGATGACTCAGCCGGAA-3' (AP-1),
5'-AGAGATTGCCTGACGTCAGAGAGCTAG-3' (CREB),
5'-TGCAGATTGCGCAATCTGCA-3' (C/EBP), and
5'-AGCTATGTGGGATTTTCCCATGAGC-3' (NF-
B). For
competition assays, extracts were incubated with a 100-fold excess of
unlabeled over labeled oligonucleotide. For supershift analysis,
anti-p50, anti-p65, anti-CREB, anti-C/EBP
, anti-C/EBP
,
anti-c-Fos, and anti-c-Jun antibodies (Santa Cruz Biotechnology, Santa
Cruz, CA) were added to the extracts 15 min before addition of the probe.
Coimmunoprecipitation and Western Analysis--
The
immunoprecipitation conditions were essentially as described previously
(10). 3 × 105 cells were seeded in six-well plates on
day 1. 40 h after transfection of the various expression plasmids,
150 µg of protein from cell lysate was incubated with 5 µg/ml
anti-p65 antibody or an irrelevant antibody as control (anti-X-press;
Invitrogen) in a final reaction volume of 800 µl. After
immunoprecipitation, 20 µg of protein was supplemented with Laemmli
buffer and loaded on a 6% denaturing polyacrylamide gel for
electrophoresis. Following blotting onto nitrocellulose membranes,
samples were subjected to Western analysis with anti-CBP antibody and,
after stripping, with anti-p65 according to the manufacturer's instructions.
Immunofluorescence Assay Revealing Histone-4
Acetylation--
Cells were grown on coverslips for 48 h.
Serum-deprived cells (24 h in 0.5% serum) were stimulated for 2 h, after which cells were washed with pBSA and fixed for 1 min in 95%
methanol, 5% acetic acid at room temperature. Following fixation,
cells were washed twice in PBS and incubated for 1 h in PBS + 8%
BSA. Incubations with primary antisera started overnight at 4 °C,
using rabbit polyclonal anti-acetylated histone-4 (Upstate
Biotechnology, Lake Placid, NY) diluted up to 10 µg/ml in pBSA + 1%
BSA. Coverslips were washed twice in pBSA for 5 min, after which cells
were incubated with secondary antibody (goat anti-rabbit IgG
biotin-conjugated antibody at 1/100 in PBS, 1% BSA) for 1 h at
room temperature. After washing with pBSA, marker IgG
(streptavidin-fluorescein isothiocyanate 1/100 dilution in pBSA + 10%
BSA) was added for 1 h. Coverslips were finally washed three times
for 15 min, after which cells were examined under a fluorescent
microscope. Images were recorded using a Zeiss Axiophot fluorescence
microscope coupled to a CCD video camera. Captured images were
processed by MacProbe 3.4 video software.
Reporter Gene Analysis--
Cell lysates were assayed for
luciferase and galactosidase reporter gene activities as described
previously (3). All promoter activities are expressed as "induction
factor," i.e. the ratio of expression levels recorded
either under induced and noninduced conditions, or under transfected
and mock-transfected conditions.
 |
RESULTS |
STS Potentiates TNF-induced IL-6 Production--
The supernatant
of L929sA cells was tested for the presence of secreted IL-6 in
response to TNF or STS or to their combination. Elevated levels of IL-6
protein were detected after TNF or STS treatment; a synergistic effect
was observed after TNF + STS treatment (Fig.
1A). To verify whether the
increase in IL-6 protein levels was due to transcriptional regulation
at the promoter level, the IL-6 promoter reporter gene
p1168hu.IL6P-luc+ and the internal control plasmid pPGK
GeobpA were
stably transfected in L929sA cells. The resulting stable cell pool was
identically treated, and the lysates were assayed for corresponding
reporter gene activity (Fig. 1B). Enhanced luciferase
expression levels were measured in response to TNF or STS alone; they
increased synergistically after a combined treatment, thus mimicking
endogenous IL-6 gene regulation. This shows that the necessary and
appropriate regulatory elements for IL-6 promoter activation are
present in the 1168-bp promoter fragment used. However, the stronger
TNF response at the IL-6 protein level as compared with that obtained
with the IL-6 promoter-driven reporter gene may be explained by a
combination of transcriptional effects (3) and posttranscriptional
events (27). The specificity of the observed regulatory effects is further demonstrated by the internal control, which remained unaffected by the different stimulating agents used.

View larger version (22K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 1.
TNF- and STS-dependent gene
regulation. Confluent L929sA cell monolayers of a stable pool of
promoter reporter gene constructs were untreated, treated with 2500 IU/ml TNF for 6 h, or treated with 60 nM STS, starting
at 2 h. At the end of induction, supernatants were pooled for testing
the secreted IL-6 levels in a biological 7TD1 assay (A), or
cell lysates were assayed for reporter gene activities
(B).
|
|
STS Does Not Affect AP-1, C/EBP, CREB, or NF-
B
Binding--
EMSAs with L929sA cell extracts showed constitutive
binding complexes for AP-1-, CRE-, and C/EBP-specific probes,
irrespective of any stimulation with TNF or STS. The specificity of
these complexes was further demonstrated by competition and/or
supershift analysis (Fig. 2). On the
other hand, TNF activated a specific doublet of NF-
B complexes, but
the amount of constitutively binding factor RBP-J
remained
unchanged. However, no quantitative alterations of the complexes
involved were observed after treatment with STS. Similar results were
obtained in HEK293T cells (data not shown).

View larger version (76K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 2.
Effect of TNF and/or STS on DNA binding by
AP-1, C/EBP, CREB, and NF- B complexes.
Confluent L929sA cell monolayers were assayed for binding activity with
specific oligonucleotides containing respective binding sequences.
Equivalent amounts of total cellular extracts were analyzed by EMSA.
Cells were treated either with 2500 IU/ml TNF for 2 h and/or with
60 nM STS, starting at 2 h. TNF-treated extracts were
used for supershift analysis with antibodies or for competition
(comp.) assays with cold oligonucleotide.
|
|
IL-6 Gene Activation by TNF and STS Can Be
Discriminated--
Since (reversible) phosphorylation of the
transcription factors may have important implications in functionality
and transactivation capacity (28), we further focused on reporter gene
analysis. After transfection of various IL-6 promoter mutants in L929sA cells, the resulting stable pools were assayed for their responsivity to TNF and STS (Fig. 3). After truncation
of the IL-6 promoter from the 5' end, a fairly decreased inducibility
by STS is observed in the 234-bp promoter lacking the AP-1 site, as
compared with the full-size fragment; moreover, the inducibility by STS
is completely lost in the 110- and 50-bp IL-6 promoter variants, in
which the three upstream sequence elements for AP-1, CREB and C/EBP are lacking (Fig. 3, STS). The inducibility by TNF, however,
remains fairly similar for the different deletion variants, except for p50hu.IL6P-luc+, in which the NF-
B motif is absent (Fig. 3,
TNF). These results clearly point at different activation
mechanisms after stimulation of the IL-6 promoter by TNF or STS.

View larger version (27K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 3.
Localization of TNF- and STS-responsive
elements in the IL-6 promoter. Various IL-6 promoter-derived
recombinant reporter gene constructs were used in induction experiments
(black boxes, transcription factor-binding sites;
crossed boxes, mutations of the transcription factor-binding
sites yielding the point-mutated versions of p1168hu.IL6P-luc+). Stable
cell pools of the promoter reporter gene constructs were left untreated
or were induced with 2500 IU/ml TNF for 6 h, with 60 nM STS for 8 h, or added 2 h prior to TNF in a
combined treatment.
|
|
In order to further characterize the contribution of defined sequence
elements, different point-mutated IL-6 promoter variants were also
tested for their responsivity to TNF or STS. As far as TNF treatment is
concerned, only the specific mutation affecting the NF-
B motif
abolished TNF inducibility (Fig. 3, TNF); however, the same
mutation had no effect at all on activation by STS (Fig. 3,
STS). It appears that regulatory elements other than the
NF-
B motif are involved in the responsivity to STS, since single
mutations of the AP-1, CREB, or C/EBP elements partially affect the
inducibility by STS and point at a redundancy in the activation
mechanism. Treatment with TNF + STS confirmed the observations made
with TNF and STS alone, and resulted in a superposition of both
separate profiles; mutations in the AP-1, CRE, C/EBP, or NF-
B motif
all drastically affect the synergistic effect of TNF + STS (Fig. 3, TNF + STS).
Additional evidence for the specific role of NF-
B in TNF
inducibility and of AP-1 or CREB in responsivity to STS was obtained from reporter gene variants containing multimerized synthetic responsive sequences for AP-1, CREB, or NF-
B in front of an
unresponsive minimal promoter. Whereas the NF-
B reporter construct
exclusively responds to TNF and not to STS, the CRE and AP-1 reporter
constructs respond to STS but not to TNF (Fig.
4).

View larger version (24K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 4.
TNF- and STS-dependent gene
activation can be discriminated. Stable cell pools of reporter
gene constructs were left untreated or were induced with 2500 IU/ml TNF
for 6 h, with 60 nM STS for 8 h, or added 2 h prior to TNF. Lysates were assayed for reporter gene expression and
normalized for protein concentration.
|
|
Cofactor-dependent Regulation of NF-
B Mainly Relies
on the p65 Subunit--
Since interaction of CBP, p300, and SRC-1 with
various IL-6 promoter-binding factors has already been demonstrated, we
tested the functional implication of the p50 and p65 NF-
B subunits
together with CBP, p300, or SRC-1 in activating 1168hu.IL6P-luc+ (Fig. 5A). To avoid interference of
signaling cascades with the expression levels of transgenes controlled
by cytomegalovirus- or Rous sarcoma virus-driven promoters (29),
experiments were performed in the absence of TNF or STS. As a matter of
fact, transcription factor interactions with CBP can be achieved in the
absence of appropriate stimuli, since transient transfection by itself
enhances constitutive kinase activities (30). While basal IL-6 promoter
activity is clearly induced after overexpression of p65, overexpression
of p50 does not affect the promoter activity. This is in complete agreement with the presence and absence of transactivation domains in
the p65 and p50 subunits, respectively. Furthermore, we detected a
synergistic promoter activation of 20-30-fold after cotransfection of
p65 with p300 or CBP, but a very weak activation only with p50. On the
other hand, SRC-1 cotransfection marginally enhanced basal IL-6
promoter activity with p50, but not with p65. It may be noted that IL-6
promoter stimulation with p300 or CBP alone, i.e. in the
absence of p65, also enhances reporter gene activity (3-5-fold), since
AP-1, CREB, and C/EBP are constitutively bound to their corresponding
responsive elements and have been shown to also interact with CBP/p300.
Extra supply of the AP-1 subunit c-Jun (in addition to the endogenous
amounts of c-Jun present) under transfection conditions identical to
those used for p65 does not further enhance basal or CBP-stimulated
IL-6 promoter activity. This experiment demonstrates a potent and
specific role for p65 in coactivator effects with CBP/p300 within the
IL-6 promoter context and to their strong cooperative activity in
transcriptional stimulation.

View larger version (28K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 5.
Cofactor recruitment by
NF- B mainly depends on the p65 subunit.
A, HEK293T cells were transiently transfected with
p1168hu.IL6P-luc+ in combination with various expression plasmids (+).
The quantity of DNA per 24-well amounts to 80 ng (IL-6 promoter
construct), 80 ng (p65, p50, or c-Jun expression vector), and 350 ng
(CBP, p300 or SRC-1 expression plasmid). The total amount of expression
vectors was kept constant in all set-ups by using empty-vector DNA.
Cells were lysed 60 h after transfection, and the luciferase
expression levels in the lysates were normalized for protein
concentration. B, HEK293T cells were transiently transfected
with two expression plasmids (+). Lanes 1,
2, and 5 contain lysates of mock-transfected
cells and of cells transfected with pRSV-p65 and pRSV-p65 + pCMV-CBP,
respectively, immunoprecipitated with anti-p65 antibody and revealed
with anti-CBP antibody after Western blot analysis. Control set-ups
(lanes 3 and 4) contain
immunoprecipitates of lysis buffer (LB) alone and an
irrelevant antibody, respectively, revealed by anti-CBP antibody in a
Western blot. The input lane represents one third of cell lysate used
for the assay. Black arrowhead, nonspecific band;
white arrowhead, 265-kDa band corresponding with
coimmunoprecipitated CBP.
|
|
To assess the physical interaction between p65 and CBP, cells
transfected with pRSV-p65 and/or pCMV-CBP were subjected to coimmunoprecipitation analysis with anti-p65 antibody, followed by
Western analysis with anti-CBP (Fig. 5B). p65 is able to
trap CBP from the cell lysate (lane 5), which
suggests a strong and distinct interaction between these two factors.
Membranes were subsequently stripped and reprobed with anti-p65
antibody to verify equal amounts of immunoprecipitated p65 protein
(data not shown).
CBP Potentiates Basal and Inducible IL-6 Gene Expression--
We
further analyzed the relative contribution of CBP interactions with
AP-1, C/EBP, CREB, or NF-
B in basal or p65-driven IL-6 gene
expression. Mutation of the AP-1- or CREB-responsive elements clearly
shows a decreased CBP-mediated effect on basal promoter activity, while
mutations in the C/EBP or NF-
B elements are less pronounced (Fig.
6). Consequently, a further reduction of
CBP effects is observed in the double mutants AP-1-CRE or CRE-C/EBP. The role of CBP interactions in the activated state of the IL-6 promoter was also analyzed. Mimicking NF-
B activation by
overexpression of p65 consistently increased the IL-6 promoter
activity, whereas mutation of the NF-
B motif abolished the induction
(none of the other mutations affected p65-mediated transactivation).
Coexpression of p65 and CBP resulted in a strong synergistic
up-regulation of IL-6 promoter activity with the wt promoter and the
different promoter variants; this was not the case for the NF-
B
mutant, where the synergistic effect is totally absent and where the
induction level is similar to the promoter activity in the presence of
CBP alone. Since promoter activation after coexpression of CBP and p65
also includes CBP effects with the constitutively bound factors, the
various mutations in the AP-1, CRE, and/or C/EBP motifs correspondingly reduce the level of promoter activation; the synergism, however, between p65 and CBP (i.e. the activity of cotransfected CBP
and p65 versus CBP alone) remains constant (5-fold). These
data suggest that CBP is settled in the IL-6 promoter complex by
multiple protein-protein interactions with different transcription
factors bound constitutively or activated by external stimuli.

View larger version (32K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 6.
CBP overexpression potentiates basal and
inducible IL-6 promoter activation. HEK293T cells were transiently
transfected with wt and various point-mutated IL-6 promoter variants,
together with plasmids for CBP and p65. The quantity of plasmid DNA
used per 24-well was 80 ng (IL-6 promoter construct), 80 ng (p65
expression vector), and 350 ng (CBP expression vector); the total
amount of plasmid DNA was kept constant in all set-ups by using
empty-vector DNA. Cells were treated 60 h after transfection as
described in the legend to Fig. 5.
|
|
HAT Activities Specifically Potentiate NF-
B-driven IL-6 Gene
Expression--
Several characterized transcriptional adaptors and
cofactors, including CBP/p300, have been recognized to be HATs. Since
we showed an important role of CBP/p300 in IL-6 promoter activity, we
might expect the HAT capacity of CBP/p300 and/or its associated factors
to be an integral part of the activation mechanism for promoter
stimulation. We measured the contribution of CBP/p300 HAT function in
IL-6 promoter activation after coexpression of p65 with wt p300 or
p300HAT(
1472-1522) (Fig. 7).
Remarkably, the strong synergism between p65 and p300 is drastically
reduced after deletion of the HAT domain; this is accompanied by a
strong reduction of HAT activity (24, 31). In another approach, the impact of HAT/HDAC activity was tested with TSA. Immunofluorescence analysis demonstrates increased in vivo histone-4
acetylation after treatment with TSA (Fig.
8A, inset). As
such, TSA effects were also evaluated in reporter gene analysis on TNF-
and/or STS-driven IL-6 promoter induction. Since transiently
transfected DNA often shows aberrant chromatin packaging, and since TSA
effects have been shown to depend on native chromatin (32, 33), we used stable pools of the wt promoter, various point-mutated IL-6 promoter variants and other related recombinant constructs in those experiments (Fig. 8). The most striking observation, however, is that only the
TNF-dependent promoter activation could be enhanced
(2.5-fold) after treatment with TSA, while the basal or
STS-dependent gene activity remained unaffected (Fig.
8A). The strong synergistic activity of TNF + STS could also
be enhanced with TSA to the same extent as TNF stimulation alone
(i.e. 2.5-fold). These results suggest a close link between
cofactor-dependent HAT activities and NF-
B-driven gene
transcription. A comparative experiment with the point-mutated IL-6
promoter variants (Fig. 8B) showed that the TSA effect is
limited to the NF-
B site. Indeed, none of the point mutations
affected TSA-enhanced induction by TNF, whereas mutation of the NF-
B
motif completely eliminated the up-regulation by TSA, as is the case
for p50hu.IL6P-luc+. Since the IL-6-
B motif also constitutively
binds the RBP-J
repressor complex, including the TSA-sensitive
molecule HDAC-1 (5, 34, 35), we further investigated whether removal of
this complex might influence the observed TSA effect. However, mutation
of IL-6-
B to an Ig-
B-responsive site that no longer binds
RBP-J
(5) did not alter the observed TSA effects, which further
points at an exclusive role of NF-
B. Similar conclusions can be
drawn from synthetic reporter constructs containing multiple copies of
AP-1-, CRE-, or NF-
B-responsive elements in front of a minimal promoter. Also in this case, a major TSA effect is observed only with
the TNF-stimulated NF-
B reporter gene activity, while the STS-stimulated reporter gene activity remains almost fully unaffected (Fig. 8B). Finally, the constitutive 3-phosphoglycerate
kinase promoter, which lacks NF-
B-responsive elements, is (as
expected) completely unresponsive to TSA. These data clearly show an
exclusive link between the increase in NF-
B-mediated IL-6 promoter
activation and enhanced HAT activity.

View larger version (22K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 7.
HAT activity potentiates
NF- B-driven IL-6 gene expression. HEK293T
cells were transiently transfected with p1168hu.IL6P-luc+ together with
various expression plasmids (+). The quantity of DNA per 24-well was 48 ng (IL-6 promoter construct), 0.4 ng (p65 expression plasmid), and 28 ng (p300 or p300HAT( 1472-1522) expression plasmid); the total
amount of expression vectors was kept constant in all set-ups by using
empty-vector DNA. Cells were lysed 60 h after transfection; the
luciferase expression levels in the lysates were normalized for protein
concentration.
|
|

View larger version (51K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 8.
TSA potentiates
NF- B-dependent reporter gene
expression. Stable cell pools of wt (A and
B), different point-mutated IL-6 promoter variants
(B) and synthetic reporter gene constructs with multimerized
responsive elements (B) were left untreated, or were treated
with 2500 IU/ml TNF for 7 h, with 60 nM STS for 9 h, with TNF (7 h) + STS (9 h), whether or not in the presence of 100 nM TSA (7 h). Lysates were assayed for reporter gene
expression and normalized for protein concentration. A,
inset, immunofluorescent image of in vivo
histone-4 hyperacetylation (serum-deprived L929sA cells were untreated
or treated with 100 nM TSA for 2 h; HAT levels were
revealed with anti-acetyl histone-4 antibody). B, TSA
effects are expressed as relative increase caused by TSA,
i.e. the ratio of induction factor of a treatment with or
without TSA.
|
|
CBP Engagement and HAT Activity May Be Generally Required for
NF-
B-dependent Promoter Activation--
Since NF-
B
appears to play a unique role in switching on IL-6 gene expression, by
engagement of CBP and HAT-dependent activities, we
investigated whether other NF-
B-containing promoters, such as the
IL-8 and ELAM promoters, respond similarly to a treatment with TNF,
STS, and/or TSA, or to overexpression of CBP. Stable cell pools of IL-8
and ELAM promoter reporter gene constructs were treated with TNF or STS
alone or with their combination, and the lysates were assayed for
corresponding reporter gene expression (Fig.
9A). Strongly enhanced
luciferase expression levels were measured in response to TNF in both
cases, which is in agreement with the presence of one or more NF-
B
sites in the IL-8 and ELAM promoters (20, 36). STS also stimulated both
promoters, whereas TNF + STS synergistically increased the promoter
activities, as also observed with the IL-6 promoter. In addition, after
stimulation of the pools with TNF or STS, whether or not in combination
with TSA (Fig. 9B), effects similar to those obtained with
the IL-6 reporter gene were found, namely specific enhancement of
NF-
B-mediated transcription versus non-NF-
B-driven
gene expression. Transient transfection experiments carried out with
the IL-8 and ELAM promoters clearly showed that the strong
up-regulation of promoter activity after coexpression of p65 and CBP is
maintained by the different NF-
B-driven promoters (Fig.
9C).

View larger version (34K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 9.
Engagement of CBP and sustained HAT activity
reveal a general mechanism for
NF- B-dependent promoter
activation. L929sA cells stably transfected with
NF- B-containing promoter constructs p1481hu.IL8P-luc
(IL-8) or with pELAMP-luc (ELAM) were treated
either as described in the legend to Fig. 1 (A) or to Fig. 8
(B). HEK293T cells were transiently transfected with various
reporter gene constructs as described in the legend to Fig. 5
(C).
|
|
 |
DISCUSSION |
Transcription factor-selective and signal-specific cofactor and/or
HAT/HDAC recruitment have recently become a prime focus of
investigation (8, 37-40). In the present work, we explored how the
multiresponsive IL-6 promoter may be differentially modulated by TNF or
STS and what the underlying mechanism for promoter stimulation might be
at the transcription factor and cofactor levels. We clearly demonstrate
that TNF- and STS-dependent IL-6 gene transcription can be
distinctly discriminated. Whereas NF-
B alone is responsible and
sufficient for responsiviness to TNF, neighboring binding factors such
as AP-1, CREB, or C/EBP are crucial but redundant for
STS-dependent gene activation. Investigation into the
cofactor regulation in IL-6 promoter stimulation revealed a strong
synergism between p65 and CBP/p300, which is highly dependent on its
HAT properties. Under conditions of sustained histone-4 acetylation following treatment with TSA, TNF-dependent
(i.e. NF-
B-mediated) gene activation is distinctly
increased, while basal or STS-stimulated IL-6 promoter activity remains
completely unchanged. The exclusive link between the effect of TSA and
activated NF-
B was further strengthened by the fact that only the
NF-
B mutation completely eliminates the TNF/TSA synergism.
So one may postulate that the IL-6 promoter is dynamically regulated at
the NF-
B site by an equilibrium of a coactivator complex including
CBP/p300, interacting with NF-
B, and a corepressor complex
containing HDAC-1, associated with RBP-J
. In the absence of
activated NF-
B, the IL-6-
B site is occupied by RBP-J
(5). Hence, the moderate CBP effects by AP-1, CRE, and C/EBP might result
from a dominant RBP-J
repressor complex, shielding the RNA
polymerase holoenzyme from CBP effects. Furthermore, the strong synergistic effect of p65 + CBP may be the consequence of dislocation of RBP-J
and its associated corepressor complex by NF-
B, followed by efficient engagement and/or activation of CBP/p300. The observed TSA
effects might originate from inhibited HDAC activity associated with
RBP-J
, in addition to sustained HAT activity engaged by p65.
However, inhibition of HDAC activity in the basal state or after
treatment with STS does not lead to enhanced gene activity, which
suggests a minor contribution of the repressor complex. Replacement of
the RBP-J
-binding site in the corresponding IL-6 promoter mutant
does not alter the effects of TSA on TNF induction. This observation
further minimizes the role of the repressor complex in TSA phenomena
linked to the NF-
B site. In addition, other NF-
B-dependent promoters, in which binding of RBP-J
does not occur or was at least not reported, respond in the same way to CBP and TSA as the IL-6 promoter. Therefore, cofactor (CBP)- and HAT-dependent regulation converge exclusively at the factor
NF-
B, and may represent two different aspects of the same activation mechanism. TSA-effects have now been specifically linked to
transactivation by the factors RXR/RAR in an RA-responsive promoter
(41), to Sp1 in the WAF1/Cip1 promoter (42), to C/EBP and Stat5 in the
-casein promoter (43), as well as to NF-Y in the MDR1 and hsp70 gene
promoters (44, 45). Our observations permit to extend the list of
linkage of TSA effects to transactivation by NF-
B in IL-6- and other
NF-
B-dependent gene promoters.
Although transcriptional activation by nucleosomal relaxation due to
local hyperacetylation of histones by CBP/p300 is now generally
accepted (32, 46, 47), it cannot be ruled out that other nuclear
factors, corecruited to the IL-6 promoter, are also responsible for
(part of) the acetylation process and/or chromatin remodeling
activities (48-52). It may also be noted that nonhistone proteins,
like transcription factors, have also been reported to serve as
substrates for HAT activity (17). In view of the enhanced
NF-
B-driven gene transcription in response to sustained HAT
activity, one may expect acetylation of p50 and p65 by CBP/p300; such
acetylation has, however, not been demonstrated (53). Alternatively,
cross-talk of acetylation with phosphorylation (54, 55), methylation
(56) and caspase regulation (57) has been reported. But neither the p38
mitogen-activated protein kinase inhibitor SB203580 nor the
methylation inhibitor azacytidine, nor the caspase inhibitor
benzyloxycarbonyl-Asp(O-Me)-Glu(O-Me)-Val-Asp(O-Me)-fluoromethylketone (zDEVD-fmk) were able to revert the TSA effects observed at the IL-6 promoter level in L929sA
cells.2
Our experimental data support a model for synergistic transcription in
which the cointegrator CBP/p300 may be recruited to the multiresponsive
IL-6 promoter by multiple protein-protein interactions with the
DNA-bound factors AP-1, CREB, C/EBP, and NF-
B, sequentially arranged
along the promoter sequence (Fig. 10).
In this context, the ultimate switch for gene induction is achieved by
TNF-induced NF-
B, which engages the available CBP/p300 for maximal
transcriptional stimulation. Whether this engagement relies on
conformational changes of CBP by interaction with NF-
B (58, 59) or
whether it is the result of concomitant posttranslational modification
of either NF-
B or CBP, for example by TNF induction, is not clear
(17, 30, 60-63). We have indeed reported that activation of
extracellular signal-regulated kinase and p38 mitogen-activated protein
kinases is a necessary step for IL-6 gene expression in response to TNF
(3); we have, however, not found p65 itself to be a substrate for
TNF-induced mitogen-activated protein kinase phosphorylation.3 To fully
understand IL-6 gene regulation, it will be needed to determine how CBP
can simultaneously integrate functions of various transcriptional
activators present in the IL-6 promoter. A similar model with multiple
transcription factor-CBP interactions and a strictly stereo-specific
arrangement has been suggested for virus-induced stimulation of the
interferon-
promoter enhanceosome (9). Alternatively, a coactivator
sequestration model has also been proposed in which multiple
transcription factors are competing for limiting amounts of CBP and
become opponents to mediate CBP effects (64). So far, our experimental
data favor the first model since all factors are required for optimal
promoter activation in synergy with CBP. The dominant role of p65 in
the engagement of CBP within the IL-6 promoter context is
representative of an enhanceosome-like structure and function different
than those proposed for the interferon-
gene promoter.
In conclusion, our results suggest an essential role for NF-
B in
engaging CBP and HAT-responsive transcription from the IL-6 promoter
and other NF-
B-driven promoters in vivo. For the first time, we identify (histone) acetylation as a new player in specific modulation of NF-
B-mediated gene induction on chromatin-embedded promoters.
 |
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS |
We thank K. Van Wesemael for excellent
technical assistance, F. Cherbal for help in cloning promoter variants,
M. Vandecasteele for critical reading of the manuscript, as well as R. Cocquyt and F. Molemans for DNA sequencing. Drs. R. Eckner, D. V. Goeddel, G. Manfioletti, N. Mukaida, B. W. O'Malley, J. Boyes,
and P. Soriano are acknowledged for kindly providing plasmids.
 |
FOOTNOTES |
*
This work was supported in part by the Interuniversitaire
Attractiepolen.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.
Fellow with the Vlaams Instituut voor de Bevordering van het
Wetenschappelijk-technologisch Onderzoek in de Industrie.
§
Present address: Center for Molecular and Vascular Biology,
University of Leuven, B-3000 Leuven, Belgium.
¶
Research Director with the Fonds voor Wetenschappelijk
Onderzoek-Vlaanderen. To whom correspondence should be addressed: Dept. of Molecular Biology, K. L. Ledeganckstraat 35, B-9000 Gent,
Belgium. Tel.: 32-9-264-51-66; Fax: 32-9-264-53-04; E-mail:
guy.haegeman@dmb.rug.ac.be.
2
W. Vanden Berghe, unpublished results.
3
L. Vermeulen, unpublished results.
 |
ABBREVIATIONS |
The abbreviations used are:
IL, interleukin;
AP, activator protein;
CBP, cyclic AMP-responsive element-binding
protein-binding protein;
C/EBP, CAAT enhancer-binding protein;
CREB, cyclic AMP-responsive element-binding protein;
HAT, histone
acetyltransferase;
HDAC, histone deacetylase;
RBP, recombination signal
sequence-binding protein;
SRC, steroid receptor coactivator;
STS, staurosporine;
TNF, tumor necrosis factor;
TSA, trichostatin A;
wt, wild-type;
BSA, bovine serum albumin;
bp, base pair(s);
EMSA, electrophoretic mobility shift assay;
PBS, phosphate-buffered saline;
NF, nuclear factor.
 |
REFERENCES |
| 1.
|
Gadient, R. A.,
and Otten, U. H.
(1997)
Prog. Neurobiol.
52,
379-390[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 2.
|
Dendorfer, U.,
Oettgen, P.,
and Libermann, T. A.
(1994)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
14,
4443-4454[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 3.
|
Vanden Berghe, W.,
Plaisance, S.,
Boone, E.,
De Bosscher, K.,
Schmitz, M. L.,
Fiers, W.,
and Haegeman, G.
(1998)
J. Biol. Chem.
273,
3285-3290[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 4.
|
May, M. J.,
and Ghosh, S.
(1998)
Immunol. Today
19,
80-88[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 5.
|
Plaisance, S.,
Vanden Berghe, W.,
Boone, E.,
Fiers, W.,
and Haegeman, G.
(1997)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
17,
3733-3743[Abstract]
|
| 6.
|
Keller, E. T.,
Wanagat, J.,
and Ershler, W. B.
(1996)
Frontiers Biosci.
1,
d340-d357[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 7.
|
Koj, A.
(1996)
Biochim. Biophys. Acta
1317,
84-94[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 8.
|
Korzus, E.,
Torchia, J.,
Rose, D. W.,
Xu, L.,
Kurokawa, R.,
McInerney, E. M.,
Mullen, T. M.,
Glass, C. K.,
and Rosenfeld, M. G.
(1998)
Science
279,
703-707[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 9.
|
Merika, M.,
Williams, A. J.,
Chen, G.,
Collins, T.,
and Thanos, D.
(1998)
Mol. Cell
1,
277-287[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 10.
|
Gerritsen, M. E.,
Williams, A. J.,
Neish, A. S.,
Moore, S.,
and Shi, Y.
(1997)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
94,
2927-2932[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 11.
|
Mink, S.,
Haenig, B.,
and Klempnauer, K. H.
(1997)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
17,
6609-6617[Abstract]
|
| 12.
|
Perkins, N. D.,
Felzien, L. K.,
Betts, J. C.,
Leung, K.,
Beach, D. H.,
and Nabel, G. J.
(1997)
Science
275,
523-527[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 13.
|
Shikama, N.,
Lyon, J.,
and La Thangue, N. B.
(1997)
Trends Cell Biol.
7,
230-236
|
| 14.
|
Lee, S. K.,
Kim, H. J.,
Na, S. Y.,
Kim, T. S.,
Choi, H. S.,
Im, S. Y.,
and Lee, J. W.
(1998)
J. Biol. Chem.
273,
16651-16654[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 15.
|
Na, S.,
Lee, S.,
Han, S.,
Choi, H.,
Im, S.,
and Lee, J.
(1998)
J. Biol. Chem.
273,
10831-10834[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 16.
|
Kuo, M. H.,
and Allis, C. D.
(1998)
BioEssays
20,
615-626[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 17.
|
Berger, S. L.
(1999)
Curr. Opin. Cell Biol.
11,
336-341[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 18.
|
Beyaert, R.,
Vanhaesebroeck, B.,
Heyninck, K.,
Boone, E.,
De Valck, D.,
Schulze-Osthoff, K.,
Haegeman, G.,
Van Roy, F.,
and Fiers, W.
(1993)
Cancer Res.
53,
2623-2630[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 19.
|
Landegren, U.
(1984)
J. Immunol. Methods
67,
379-388[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 20.
|
Mukaida, N.,
Mahe, Y.,
and Matsushima, K.
(1990)
J. Biol. Chem.
265,
21128-21133[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 21.
|
Schindler, U.,
and Baichwal, V. R.
(1994)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
14,
5820-5831[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 22.
|
Soriano, P.,
Montgomery, C.,
Geske, R.,
and Bradley, A.
(1991)
Cell
64,
693-702[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 23.
|
Eckner, R.
(1996)
Biol. Chem.
377,
685-688
|
| 24.
|
Boyes, J.,
Byfield, P.,
Nakatani, Y.,
and Ogryzko, V.
(1998)
Nature
396,
594-598[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 25.
|
Smith, C. L.,
Onate, S. A.,
Tsai, M. J.,
and O'Malley, B. W.
(1996)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
93,
8884-8888[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 26.
|
Berlingieri, M. T.,
Manfioletti, G.,
Santoro, M.,
Bandiera, A.,
Visconti, R.,
Giancotti, V.,
and Fusco, A.
(1995)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
15,
1545-1553[Abstract]
|
| 27.
|
Han, J.,
and Ulevitch, R. J.
(1999)
Nat. Cell Biol.
1,
E39-E40[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 28.
|
Calkhoven, C. F.,
and Ab, G.
(1996)
Biochem. J.
317,
329-342
|
| 29.
|
Bruening, W.,
Giasson, B.,
Mushynski, W.,
and Durham, H. D.
(1998)
Nucleic Acids Res.
26,
486-489[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 30.
|
Wang, D.,
and Baldwin, A. S., Jr.
(1998)
J. Biol. Chem.
273,
29411-29416[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 31.
|
Martinez-Balbas, M. A.,
Bannister, A. J.,
Martin, K.,
Haus-Seuffert, P.,
Meisterernst, M.,
and Kouzarides, T.
(1998)
EMBO J.
17,
2886-2893[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 32.
|
Van Lint, C. V.,
Emiliani, S.,
Ott, M.,
and Verdin, E.
(1996)
EMBO J.
15,
1112-1120[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 33.
|
Sheridan, P. L.,
Mayall, T. P.,
Verdin, P.,
and Jones, K. A.
(1997)
Genes Dev.
11,
3327-3340[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 34.
|
Kao, H. Y.,
Ordentlich, P.,
Koyano-Nakagawa, N.,
Tang, Z.,
Downes, M.,
Kintner, C. R.,
Evans, R. M.,
and Kadesch, T.
(1998)
Genes Dev.
12,
2269-2277[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 35.
|
Hsieh, J. J. D.,
Zhou, S.,
Chen, L.,
Young, D. B.,
and Hayward, S. D.
(1999)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
96,
23-28[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 36.
|
Collins, T.,
Read, M. A.,
Neish, A. S.,
Whitley, M. Z.,
Thanos, D.,
and Maniatis, T.
(1995)
FASEB J.
9,
899-909[Abstract]
|
| 37.
|
Kurokawa, R.,
Kalafus, D.,
Ogliastro, M. H.,
Kioussi, C.,
Xu, L.,
Torchia, J.,
Rosenfeld, M. G.,
and Glass, C. K.
(1998)
Science
279,
700-703[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 38.
|
Xu, L.,
Lavinsky, R. M.,
Dasen, J. S.,
Flynn, S. E.,
McInerney, E. M.,
Mullen, T. M.,
Heinzel, T.,
Szeto, D.,
Korzus, E.,
Kurokawa, R.,
Aggarwal, A. K.,
Rose, D. W.,
Glass, C. K.,
and Rosenfeld, M. G.
(1998)
Nature
395,
301-306[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 39.
|
Ikeda, K.,
Steger, D. J.,
Eberharter, A.,
and Workman, J. L.
(1999)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
19,
855-863[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 40.
|
Perissi, V.,
Dasen, J. S.,
Kurokawa, R.,
Wang, Z.,
Korzus, E.,
Rose, D. W.,
Glass, C. K.,
and Rosenfeld, M. G.
(1999)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
96,
3652-3657[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 41.
|
Minucci, S.,
Horn, V.,
Bhattacharyya, N.,
Russanova, V.,
Ogryzko, V. V.,
Gabriele, L.,
Howard, B.,
and Ozato, K.
(1997)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
94,
11295-11300[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 42.
|
Sowa, Y.,
Orita, T.,
Minamikawa, S.,
Nakano, K.,
Mizuno, T.,
Nomura, H.,
and Sakai, T.
(1997)
Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun.
241,
142-150[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 43.
|
Myers, C. A.,
Schmidhauser, C.,
Mellintin-Michelotti, J.,
Fragoso, G.,
Roskelley, C. D.,
Casperson, G.,
Mossi, R.,
Pujuguet, P.,
Hager, G.,
and Bissell, M. J.
(1998)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
18,
2184-2195[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 44.
|
Jin, S.,
and Scotto, K. W.
(1998)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
18,
4377-4384[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 45.
|
Li, Q.,
Herrler, M.,
Landsberger, N.,
Kaludov, N.,
Ogryzko, V. V.,
Nakatani, Y.,
and Wolffe, A. P.
(1998)
EMBO J.
17,
6300-6315[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 46.
|
Utley, R. T.,
Ikeda, K.,
Grant, P. A.,
Cote, J.,
Steger, D. J.,
Eberharter, A.,
John, S.,
and Workman, J. L.
(1998)
Nature
394,
498-502[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 47.
|
Parekh, B. S.,
and Maniatis, T.
(1999)
Mol. Cell
3,
125-129[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 48.
|
Kadonaga, J. T.
(1998)
Cell
92,
307-313[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 49.
|
Bjorklund, S.,
Almouzni, G.,
Davidson, I.,
Nightingale, K. P.,
and Weiss, K.
(1999)
Cell
96,
759-767[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 50.
|
Hampsey, M.,
and Reinberg, D.
(1999)
Curr. Opin. Genes Dev.
9,
132-139[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 51.
|
Ito, M.,
Yuan, C. X.,
Malik, S.,
Gu, W.,
Fondell, J. D.,
Yamamura, S.,
Fu, Z. Y.,
Zhang, X.,
Qin, J.,
and Roeder, R. G.
(1999)
Mol. Cell
3,
361-370[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 52.
|
Näär, A. M.,
Beaurang, P. A.,
Zhou, S.,
Abraham, S.,
Solomon, W.,
and Tjian, R.
(1999)
Nature
398,
828-832[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 53.
|
Munshi, N.,
Merika, M.,
Yie, J.,
Senger, K.,
Chen, G.,
and Thanos, D.
(1998)
Mol. Cell
2,
457-468[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 54.
|
Alberts, S.,
Geneste, O.,
and Treisman, R.
(1998)
Cell
92,
475-487[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 55.
|
Espinos, E.,
Van Thai, A. L.,
Pomiès, C.,
and Weber, M. J.
(1999)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
19,
3474-3484[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 56.
|
Bestor, T. H.
(1998)
Nature
393,
311-389[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 57.
|
Medina, V.,
Edmonds, B.,
Young, G. F.,
James, R.,
Appleton, S.,
and Zalewski, P. D.
(1997)
Cancer Res.
57,
3697-3707[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
|