|
J Biol Chem, Vol. 275, Issue 2, 847-854, January 14, 2000
Transcription of the Human c-Src Promoter Is Dependent on Sp1, a
Novel Pyrimidine Binding Factor SPy, and Can Be Inhibited by
Triplex-forming Oligonucleotides*
Shawn
Ritchie ,
F. Mark
Boyd,
Jason
Wong, and
Keith
Bonham§
From the Saskatoon Cancer Center Research Unit, Saskatchewan Cancer
Agency. Division of Oncology and Department of
Biochemistry, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon,
Saskatchewan S7N 4H4, Canada
 |
ABSTRACT |
The tyrosine kinase
pp60c-src has been implicated in the
regulation of numerous normal physiological processes as well the
development of several human cancers. However, the mechanisms
regulating its expression have not been addressed. In the present
study, we report the presence of two Sp1/Sp3 binding sites and three
polypurine:polypyrimidine (Pu:Py) tracts in the c-Src promoter that are
essential for controlling expression. We demonstrate that Sp1, but not
Sp3, is capable of activating the c-Src promoter and that Sp3 is also
capable of inhibiting Sp1-mediated transactivation. The presence of
multiple Pu:Py tracts conferred S1 sensitivity on plasmids in
vitro, suggesting they are capable of adopting non B-DNA
conformations. These tracts specifically bind a nuclear factor we named
SPy (Src pyrimidine binding factor), which
demonstrates both novel double- and single-stranded binding
specificities. Mutations eliminating SPy binding compromised Src
transcriptional activity, especially in concert with additional mutations affecting Sp1 binding, suggesting the two factors may cooperate in regulating c-Src expression. Finally, we demonstrate that
triplex-forming oligonucleotides designed to target both Sp1 and SPy
binding sites can down-regulate c-Src expression in vitro,
suggesting a potential therapeutic approach to controlling c-Src
expression in diseases where aberrant expression or activity has been documented.
 |
INTRODUCTION |
The human c-Src proto-oncogene gene encoding the tyrosine kinase,
pp60c-src, was originally identified as a
homologue of the transforming gene of Rous sarcoma virus (1). c-Src is
the prototype of a large family of highly conserved genes (Yes, Fyn,
Fgr, Lyn, Lck, Hck, Blk, and Yrk), whose products have been implicated
in many signal transduction pathways and a wide variety of cellular
processes (2). Most c-Src research over the last decade has focused on identifying the enzyme's targets, the mechanisms of post-translational kinase activity, and interacting proteins. In addition, considerable progress has been made in elucidating the many signal transduction pathways of which c-Src and its family members appear to be a part (2,
3). For example, it has been shown that c-Src activation is required in
growth factor mediated passage of fibroblasts from the G2
phase of the cell cycle to mitosis (4, 5), as well as a variety of
other diverse signaling mechanisms including
endothelin-dependent hypertrophic activation in cardiac
myocytes (6). c-Src has also been implicated in the regulation of
Ca2+ release through store-operated channels (7).
Interestingly, c-Src knockout mice display a single major phenotype,
osteopetrosis, identifying c-Src activation as an essential component
of osteoclast function (8). This finding also supports the hypothesis
of redundancy between Src family members (especially Yes and Fyn), which appear to share critical functions (9). In addition to these
normal physiological functions, overexpression or activation of c-Src
has been frequently linked to the development of human neoplasms,
especially those of the colon (10-12) but also breast (13), lung (14),
and pancreas (15). Most recently, activating mutations in the c-Src
gene have been documented in a small percentage of advanced colon
tumors (16).
Thus, while considerable information and knowledge has accumulated on
pp60c-src, it is curious that virtually nothing
is known about the transcriptional regulation of this important gene in
normal or neoplastic cells. This is despite the fact that c-Src gene
expression is developmentally regulated in the brain (17) and
transcriptionally up-regulated during osteoclast activation (18) and in
regenerating neurons (19). In addition, c-Src mRNA levels vary
dramatically in both human cell lines and tissues, and we have recently
shown that the frequently reported c-Src overexpression in many colon
cancer cell lines results from transcriptional activation of the
gene.1 To begin to address
this hitherto unexplored facet of c-Src regulation, we have isolated
and identified a human c-Src promoter (20). The promoter region has
characteristics typical of the housekeeping class of genes, such as
high GC content, lack of obvious TATA or CCAAT regulatory sequences,
and multiple transcription start sites (20). Many of these start sites
were mapped to three unusual polypurine:polypyrimidine
(Pu:Py)2 tracts, identified
in a region of the promoter essential for full transcriptional
activity. In this current report we describe a detailed study of the
basal c-Src promoter. We show that transcriptional regulation of the
c-Src promoter is absolutely dependent on the Sp family of
transcription factors but also on the presence of these Pu:Py tracts.
In addition, we describe a novel factor (SPy) which displays both
double-stranded and single-stranded binding specificity when
interacting with these important Pu:Py tracts. Finally, we were able to
design a series of synthetic triplex-forming oligonucleotides (TFOs),
which were able to specifically target the Pu:Py tracts in the c-Src
promoter and inhibit transcription in vitro. In addition to
expanding our understanding of c-Src gene regulation and genes
controlled by similar sequence motifs, this work also suggests a
potential therapeutic approach to down-regulating c-Src in diseases
related to c-Src overexpression.
 |
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES |
Cell Culture--
Mouse fibroblast 10T1/2 and human colon
adenocarcinoma SW480 and SW620 cell lines were grown in Dulbecco's
modified Eagle's medium (Life Technologies, Inc.) supplemented with
10% fetal calf serum at 37 °C, 5% CO2. The
Drosophila SL2 cell line was obtained from the American Type
Culture Collection (ATCC) and grown at room temperature in Schneider's
medium (Life Technologies, Inc.) supplemented with 10% fetal calf
serum. Other cell lines used for nuclear extract production were
obtained from ATCC and maintained as suggested by the supplier.
Oligonucleotides--
Table I
lists the synthetic oligonucleotides that were used in these
experiments. All of the TFOs used in this study were purchased from
Life Technologies, Inc. and were unmodified.
Reporter Gene Constructs--
The human c-Src promoter-CAT
constructs p0.54Src-CAT, p0.38Src-CAT, and p0.20Src-CAT have been
described before (20). The p0.84Src-BS plasmid was similar in content
to 0.38Src-CAT but contained an extra 460 bp of 3' intron 1 sequence
cloned in pBluescript (Stratagene). The mutant 0.38Src-CAT constructs
GC1, GA2, and GC1/GA2 were designed using the two-step PCR-based
site-directed mutagenesis technique of Landt (21). For example, to
generate the GC1 mutant construct, a first step PCR was carried out
using the mutagenic GC1 primer and the T7 reverse primer (located
downstream in the polylinker region of the template vector
0.54Src-CAT). The PCR product was then digested with SacII,
and the resulting mutant 339-bp fragment used to replace the wild-type
SacII fragment in p0.54Src-CAT. The vector was then cut with
NarI and religated, producing a mutated version of the
wild-type p0.38Src-CAT construct. The same strategy was used to
generate the GA2 mutant construct, using the GA2 mutagenic primer.
Construction of the GC1/GA2 mutant vector was identical to that of the
GA2 mutant, except that the template was the GC1 mutant version of
p0.54Src-CAT. All of the mutant constructs containing mutations of the
SPy sites in TC1 and TC2 alone and in combination with GC1mut, GA2mut,
and GC1/GA2mut, as well as the mutants containing deletions of TC1 and
TC2 were generated based on the QuickChange site-directed mutagenesis
protocol (Stratagene). The desired mutations were introduced into
either wild-type or previously mutated p0.38Src-CAT constructs using the complementary mutagenic primers listed in Table I to produce the 15 combinations of mutations between GC1mut, GA2mut, TC1mut, and TC2mut.
All mutant plasmids generated in the PCR stage were then digested with
NarI and SacII to isolate the promoter region, and the fragment ligated back into wild-type p0.38Src-CAT to ensure the
absence of possible mutations elsewhere in the plasmid that could have
occurred during the mutagenesis step. Construction of the TC3 deletion
mutant has been reported previously (22). All mutations were verified
by DNA sequencing. pPacSp1, a Sp1 expression plasmid, was obtained from
R. Tjian (Howard Hughes Medical Institute, University of California).
pPacSp3, an Sp3 expression plasmid, was obtained from G. Suske
(Institut für Molekularbiologie and Tumorforschung,
Philipps-Universität, Marburg, Germany). The -galactosidase
expression plasmids pCH110 and pCMV- gal were obtained from Promega
and W. Roesler (University of Saskatchewan), respectively. p97B, a
-galactosidase expression plasmid under the control of a
Drosophila promoter, was a gift of L. Lania (University of
Naples "Federico II," Naples, Italy).
Nuclear Extract Preparations and Electrophoretic Mobility Shift
Assays (EMSA)--
Nuclear extracts were prepared from various human
cell lines as described by Dignam et al. (23). For EMSAs,
32P-labeled fragments A and B were prepared simultaneously
by digesting 0.38Src-CAT with NarI and BssHII,
followed by an in-fill reaction with Klenow fragment and
[32P]dCTP. Following several precipitations, the two
fragments were separated on a 2.5% agarose gel and purified.
Double-stranded probes were generated by annealing complementary
single-stranded oligonucleotides and labeling with in-fill reactions
using Klenow fragment and [32P]dCTP. Single-stranded
probes were end-labeled with [ -32P]ATP and T4
polynucleotide kinase. For a typical EMSA, 5-10 µg of nuclear
extract were incubated with 20,000-50,000 cpm of probe in Binding
Buffer (25 mM HEPES (pH 7.0), 4 mM Tris-HCl (pH
8.0), 5 mM MgCl2, 1 mM
CaCl2, and 1 mM dithiothreitol), 3 µg of
poly(dI-dC), and 10 µg of bovine serum albumin in a 20-µl final
volume. When competitor oligonucleotides or antibodies were used, they
were added at the same time as nuclear extracts. The reactions were incubated on ice for 15 min before the addition of the labeled probe,
followed by a 30-min incubation at 25 °C. The bound and free probes
were resolved on either 4% (fragment A or B) or 6% (for synthetic
oligonucleotide probes) polyacrylamide gels in running buffer
containing 50 mM Tris base, 380 mM glycine, and 2 mM EDTA at 150 V for 3 h at 4 °C. Gels were dried
and visualized by autoradiography.
Mapping S1 Nuclease-sensitive Sites--
The plasmid p0.84Src-BS
containing the entire c-Src promoter region and a small portion of
intron 1 was digested with 5 units/µg S1 in S1 buffer (300 mM NaCl, 30 mM sodium acetate, pH 4.5, 3 mM ZnCl2) for 30 min. S1 digestion was
terminated by phenol/chloroform extraction and the plasmid recovered by
precipitation. The resulting S1-treated plasmid was then either left
untreated or further digested with one of several restriction enzymes,
and the products resolved by agarose gel electrophoresis. The regions
of S1 sensitivity were determined by gel purification of the resulting
S1/restriction fragments, followed by cloning and sequence analysis of
several individual clones.
Transient Expression of Reporter Gene--
Supercoiled plasmids
were prepared for transfections using an EndoFree Plasmid Maxi Kit
(Qiagen). For SL2 cells, CAT expression vector 0.38Src-CAT (10.0 µg),
p97b (10 µg), and pPacSp1 (0.1 µg) were typically co-precipitated
with calcium phosphate and applied to 5 × 106
cells/plate in duplicate. For 10T1/2 and SW480 cells, CAT expression vector (3.0 µg) and pCH110 (1.0 µg) were mixed with 172 µl of OptiMEM (Life Technologies, Inc.) and 20 µl of Superfect (Qiagen). Following a 15-min incubation at room temp, 1200 µl of Dulbecco's modified Eagle's medium containing 10% fetal calf serum and
appropriate antibiotics were added to the DNA-Superfect complexes, and
applied in duplicate to two wells of a six-well plate (1.5 × 105 10T1/2 cells or 3.75 × 105 SW480
cells/well). Cells were harvested 48 h later with the provided lysis buffer, and protein levels determined using Bio-Rad reagent. -Galactosidase activity was determined as described previously (24),
and CAT protein levels quantified using a CAT ELISA kit (Roche
Molecular Biochemicals). Reported CAT levels are all corrected for
transfection efficiency and were repeated at least three times in
duplicate. For triplex inhibition studies, 200-500 molar excess of TFO
over reporter plasmid concentration was first preannealed to the
plasmid in a 40-µl reaction containing 10 mM
MgCl2, 90 mM Tris, and 90 mM
borate. The reactions were heated to 65 °C for 10 min and left at
room temperature for at least 2 h. The annealing reaction was then
transfected in duplicate to six-well plates as described above.
 |
RESULTS |
The c-Src Promoter Binds the Sp Family of Transcription
Factors--
The isolation and identification of the c-Src promoter
has been previously reported (20, 22). Construction of a series of 5'
promoter-CAT deletion plasmids identified a 180-bp region located
between 0.38Src-CAT and 0.20Src-CAT (Fig.
1A) that was required for full
promoter activity in mouse fibroblast and several human cell lines
(20).1 We therefore began our studies by examining the
ability of nuclear extracts from both human and mouse 10T1/2 cell lines
to form specific complexes with DNA probes derived from this promoter
region. Digestion of the promoter with Nar I and Bss HII generated two
fragments spanning the 180 bp of interest (Fig. 1A), which,
when used as probes, formed three DNA-protein complexes (Fig.
2, A and B). The
relative intensity of the complexes was observed to be very similar
between human and mouse cells (data not shown). Due to the high GC
content (82%) of this region of the promoter, it was not surprising to
find two strong consensus binding sites (GC1 and GA2 at positions
608/ 617 and 471/ 481, respectively) for the transcription factor
Sp1 ((G/T)(G/A)GG(C/A)G(G/T)(G/A)(G/A)(C/T)) (25) (Fig. 1B).
To determine if the bandshifted complexes were indeed Sp
family-related, a series of competition experiments were carried out.
The DNA-protein complexes formed with both fragments A and B were
successfully competed with an excess of double-stranded oligonucleotide
containing a canonical high affinity site for the Sp1 transcription
factor (Fig. 2, A and B). However, an
oligonucleotide containing the GC-rich AP2 transcription factor
consensus binding site failed to compete (Fig. 2, A and
B).

View larger version (18K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 1.
Schematic of the human c-Src promoter
region. A, the positions of the two Sp1 consensus
binding sites (GC1 and GA2) and the three Pu:Py tracts (TC1, TC2, and
TC3) are shown. The boundaries of the Src-CAT constructs 0.38Src-CAT
and 0.20Src-CAT are also shown, as well as restriction sites used to
generate fragments A and B used in EMSAs. B, wild-type and
mutated base pairs for each nuclear factor binding site are listed.
Mutated bases are shown in bold, and the conserved SPy
binding sites (CTTCC and CTTTC) are underlined.
|
|

View larger version (48K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 2.
Specific interaction of the 5' c-Src flanking
region with nuclear extracts. A and B, major
complexes (C1-C3) and a minor complex (*) formed using
32P-radiolabeled fragment (Frag) A and B with
nuclear extracts (N.E.) derived from human Colo 205 cells.
C and D, fragments A and B were incubated with
Colo 205 nuclear extract in the presence or absence of various
antibodies, as described under "Experimental Procedures."
|
|
Since the Sp family comprises several similar proteins (Sp1, Sp3, and
Sp4), each capable of binding the same consensus site (26), we
performed EMSAs using antibodies specific to the different Sp family
members. Using both fragments A and B, the addition of anti-Sp1 and
anti-Sp3 antibodies to the bandshift reaction resulted in the loss of
one band with anti-Sp1, two bands with anti-Sp3, or all three bands
with both antibodies (Fig. 2, C and D). Purified
recombinant Sp1 formed a complex that co-migrated with the band
recognized by anti-Sp1 (Fig. 2C, right
lane). The apparent decrease in intensity of the remaining
bands with anti-Sp1 was not a consistent observation. It therefore
appears that these three complexes can be accounted for by just two Sp
family members. To confirm that the regions GC1 and GA2 were truly
responsible for complex formation, the sites were mutated as described
under "Experimental Procedures." EMSAs using the mutated fragments
showed the complete loss of complex formation with Sp1 and Sp3 (results not shown). It was therefore concluded that these two sites in the
c-Src promoter were responsible for interacting specifically with Sp
family members. Occasionally we observed a slower migrating complex
that disappeared with anti-Sp3 antibody (Fig. 2, band noted by
asterisk). We are uncertain as to the identity of this factor; however, it could be the result of either Sp3 multimers or Sp
factors binding to other low affinity Sp1 sites present within each fragment.
Sp1, but Not Sp3, Is Capable of Transactivating the c-Src
Promoter--
Our next objective was to determine if Sp family members
were able to influence c-Src promoter activity. However, the vast majority of mammalian cells contain endogenous Sp1 and Sp3, making transfection experiments using exogenous Sp1 and Sp3 difficult to
interpret. Therefore, to determine the effects of Sp family members on
c-Src promoter activity, transfection experiments were performed in the
Drosophila SL2 cell line, which lacks endogenous Sp1.
Transfection of 0.38Src-CAT wild-type constructs into SL2 cells alone
showed no detectable CAT expression. However, when co-transfected with
the Sp1 expression vector, pPacSp1, the c-Src promoter was highly
activated in a dose-dependent manner (Fig. 3A and results not shown). The
construct 0.20Src-CAT, lacking the GC1 and GA2 binding sites (but
containing several weaker Sp1 motifs), was transactivated by Sp1 to
less than 10% the level of 0.38Src-CAT (Fig. 3A). Since
protein/DNA interactions at GC1 and GA2 consist of Sp1 as well as Sp3
members, we investigated the role of Sp3 on c-Src transcription. In SL2
cells, Sp3 alone was unable to transactivate c-Src under any condition
tested. However, when increasing concentrations of Sp3 were expressed with constant amounts of 0.38Src-CAT and pPacSp1, Sp3 could repress Sp1-dependent transactivation of the c-Src promoter in a
dose-dependent manner (Fig. 3B). It therefore
appears that Sp3 can negatively effect Sp1-mediated transactivation of
the c-Src gene. We concluded that c-Src promoter activity was Sp1, but
not Sp3 dependent in this experimental system.

View larger version (12K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 3.
Activation of c-Src promoter-CAT constructs
in SL2 and mammalian cells. A, various promoter
constructs were co-transfected with pPacSp1 and p97b into SL2 cells as
described under "Experimental Procedures." CAT levels were
determined by ELISA and standardized to total protein and
-galactosidase expression. B, SL2 cells were
co-transfected with equal amounts of 0.38Src-CAT, pPacSp1, and p97b
along with increasing amounts of pPacSp3, ranging from equimolar (100 ng) to a 20 molar excess (2000 ng) as described under "Experimental
Procedures." C, Src-CAT constructs were transfected into
SW480 cells as described under "Experimental Procedures." Results
are given relative to wild-type levels obtained with 0.38Src-CAT and
are the average of at least three duplicate experiments.
|
|
The GC1 and GA2 Sites Are Critical for c-Src Expression--
We
next investigated the relative contribution of the various Sp1 binding
sites to c-Src transactivation by constructing a number of mutant
0.38Src-CAT vectors as described under "Experimental Procedures."
The mutant constructs were then co-transfected with pPacSp1 into SL2
cells. Individual mutations in GC1 and GA2 reduced promoter activity to
about 60% of wild-type (Fig. 3A). Mutations in both GC1 and GA2
together further reduced transactivation to about 30% of wild-type. It
therefore appeared that these two sites could account for the bulk of
Sp1-mediated transactivation in this system. Since our interest is in
the transcriptional regulation of c-Src in human cells, the effects of
these mutations were next examined in a human cell line. When the
wild-type and mutated 0.38Src-CAT constructs were transfected into
human adenocarcinoma (SW480) cells, similar results to the SL2 system
were observed (Fig. 3C). Together, these results show that
Sp1, through its interaction at two sites, is required for full c-Src
transcriptional activation.
The Pu:Py Tracts Confer S1 Sensitivity and Are Also Required for
Optimal Transcriptional Activity--
In addition to the small Pu:Py
tract overlapping the Sp1-GA2 binding site, the c-Src promoter contains
three other longer Pu:Py sequences located between regions 515 and
391 (Fig. 1). Pu:Py sequences have the ability adopt non-BDNA
conformations known as H-DNA, a structure consisting of triple-stranded
and single-stranded regions of DNA (27). H-DNA motifs can be assayed by
their hyperreactivity to S1 nuclease, and in numerous other cases such
regions have been reported to render supercoiled plasmids S1-sensitive
(28). We therefore tested whether supercoiled plasmids containing the
c-Src promoter were also susceptible to S1 nuclease. Plasmid
p0.84Src-BS, containing the complete c-Src promoter, was treated with
S1 nuclease in combination with several restriction enzymes, and the
fragments separated on an agarose gel, as described under
"Experimental Procedures" (Fig.
4A). S1 digestion alone appeared to act to linearize the supercoiled plasmid (compare plasmid,
lanes 3 and 4) and this was confirmed
by subsequent digestion with XbaI or PstI
(lanes 5-10). The resulting fragments were
generated only when supercoiled plasmid containing the c-Src promoter
was treated with S1 nuclease before treatment with restriction enzymes. Control constructs lacking the c-Src promoter failed to generate any
fragments (results not shown). Subsequent cloning and sequence analysis
of a number of these fragments demonstrated that they arose from S1
cleavage throughout the TC2-TC3 region (Fig. 4B). It was
concluded from these results that the presence of Pu:Py tracts within
the c-Src promoter could confer a non-BDNA (probably H-DNA) structure
containing a single-stranded region. To further investigate the
significance of these Pu:Py tracts, we engineered a series of Pu:Py
deletion mutants in the basic 0.38Src-CAT vector, as described under
"Experimental Procedures," and tested their activity following
transfection. Interestingly, we found individual deletions in TC1, TC2,
and TC3 reduced CAT activity to 35%, 55%, and 65% compared with
wild-type, respectively, even in the presence of the Sp1 binding sites
GC1 and GA2 (Fig. 4C). We concluded that these Pu:Py tracts
were also essential for full activity of the c-Src promoter.

View larger version (18K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 4.
The c-Src promoter contains a
nuclease-hypersensitive region. A, p0.84Src-BS was
electrophoresed on an EtBr-stained gel following treatment by S1
nuclease and restriction enzymes as described under "Experimental
Procedures." Lanes 1, 2, and
11, markers; lane 3, p0.84Src-BS
plasmid; lane 4, plasmid treated with S1 nuclease
alone; lane 5, plasmid treated with
XbaI alone; lane 6, plasmid treated
with S1 nuclease followed by XbaI; lane
7, plasmid cut with PstI alone; lane
8, plasmid treated with S1 followed by PstI;
lane 9, plasmid digested with
XbaI/PstI; lane 10, plasmid
treated with S1 followed by XbaI/PstI.
B, schematic representation of plasmid p0.84Src-BS and
localization of S1-sensitive sites. Black bars
indicate the positions of the three Pu:Py tracts, while the
large open box represents the
beginning of Exon 1a. C, 0.38Src-CAT constructs containing
deletions in TC1, TC2, and TC3 were transfected into mouse 10T1/2
cells. Reported values were standardized to protein levels and
-galactosidase expression and are relative to wild-type
0.38Src-CAT.
|
|
A Novel Nuclear Factor Interacts with the c-Src Pu:Py
Tracts--
We next investigated potential protein/DNA interactions at
these Pu:Py sites by EMSAs using nuclear extracts from both human and
mouse 10T1/2 cells. A major complex was observed using
32P-labeled synthetic oligonucleotides to double-stranded
TC1 and TC2, but not with TC3 (Fig.
5A). Examination of the
sequences of each Pu:Py tract revealed that the sequence CTTCC was
present twice in TC1 and once in TC2, but was absent in TC3 (Fig.
1B). A single base pair substitution in both of these sites
in TC1 (CTTCC to CTTTC) completely abolished the binding of
this factor (Fig. 5A), while maintaining the integrity of
the pyrimidine tract. A similar mutation in the single site in TC2 also
prevented any complex formation (results not shown). Competition
experiments demonstrated that unlabeled double-stranded TC1 and TC2
oligonucleotides could effectively compete away the binding of this
factor, while the TC1mut or Sp1 double-stranded oligonucleotides failed
to do so (Fig. 5B). The nonspecific band in Fig.
5B was an inconsistent observation with certain nuclear
extracts, and could be competed away by dissimilar oligonucleotides
such as Sp1 (data not shown).

View larger version (37K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 5.
EMSA analysis of factors binding
double-stranded Pu:Py tracts. A, radiolabeled synthetic
double-stranded oligonucleotides representing the Pu:Py tracts within
the c-Src promoter were used as probes in EMSAs as described under
"Experimental Procedures." Nuclear extracts and competitor
oligonucleotides are indicated along the top, and the probes
used are shown at the bottom of each panel. C
indicates the position of the observed complex. B, EMSAs
with double-stranded TC1 probe and the indicated unlabeled
double-stranded competitors. The solid triangles
refer to the use of increasing molar excess of oligonucleotide (50:1,
100:1, and 200:1). Sp1 and TC1mut double-stranded competitors are
50-fold molar excess. NS, nonspecific.
|
|
Since our S1 experiments had demonstrated that this region of the c-Src
promoter is capable of adopting structures that are partially
single-stranded, we also examined potential complex formation using
32P-labeled single-stranded probes in EMSAs. A robust
bandshift was observed with probes derived from the pyrimidine strand
of TC1 and TC2, while probes from the TC3 pyrimidine strand appeared to
produce a bandshift consisting of more than one complex. Probes, on the
other hand, derived from the corresponding purine strands showed
significantly weaker interactions (Fig.
6A). For these reasons we have
named this factor SPy (Src pyrimidine binding factor). SPy was effectively competed away using a molar excess of
unlabeled pyrimidine strands, including unlabeled TC1mut CT (Fig.
6B). Most significantly, SPy was also competed away using excess unlabeled double-stranded TC1 and TC2 but not the mutated double-stranded form of TC1 (Fig. 6B). The reciprocal
competitions also held true, and the complex formed with
32P-labeled double-stranded TC1 was competed away with
unlabeled single-stranded pyrimidine oligonucleotides but not purine
oligonucleotides (Fig. 6B). The most logical conclusion from
these experiments is that SPy is a factor with a double-stranded
binding specificity dependent on a CTTCC motif, which is also capable
of binding single-stranded pyrimidine strands with a more relaxed
sequence requirement.

View larger version (51K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 6.
EMSA analysis of factors binding
single-stranded Pu:Py tracts. A, radiolabeled synthetic
purine and pyrimidine strands of TC1, TC2, and TC3 were incubated with
human SW620 nuclear extract and analyzed by EMSA as described under
"Experimental Procedures." B, EMSAs using the indicated
competitors and probes. The solid triangles refer
to competitor concentrations of 50:1 and 200:1. TC1 GA, TC1 CT, TC2 GA,
and TC2 CT competitor concentrations are 50-fold molar excess.
|
|
SPy and Sp1 Act Together in the Transactivation of the c-Src
Promoter--
To determine the consequence of mutations that abolish
SPy double-stranded binding, 0.38Src-CAT vectors containing the SPy mutations in TC1 and TC2 were generated as described under
"Experimental Procedures." In addition, each SPy mutation was
introduced into 0.38Src-CAT constructs already containing the Sp1
mutations at GC1 and GA2, producing 15 possible combinations of
mutants. The constructs were then transfected into mouse 10T1/2 cells
and reporter CAT levels assayed as described under "Experimental
Procedures" (Fig. 7). The SPy mutation
in TC1 alone produced a 25% decrease in activity compared with
wild-type, while the comparable TC2 mutations reduced CAT levels to
about 50%. Interestingly, mutations in the TC1 SPy and the Sp1 GC1
sites together inhibited CAT activity significantly more than either of
the individual mutations (Fig. 7). In addition, a similar cooperative
effect was observed between the TC1, TC2, and GA2 triple mutant. Any
one or two of these mutations showed CAT activity of 70-75%; however,
the combination of all three mutations resulted in CAT activity near
40%. This cooperativity was not observed with any other combinations
of Sp1 and SPy mutants. Similar findings were observed when
transfection of the mutants were performed in human SW480 cells. We
conclude that full c-Src transcriptional activity is dependent on
SPy's ability to bind its double-stranded targets in TC1 and TC2 in
coordination with the binding of Sp1 at GC1 and/or GA2, and that these
SPy-Sp1 interactions can regulate transcription cooperatively.

View larger version (11K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 7.
Transient expression studies using mutated
Src-CAT constructs. All 15 of the combinations of mutations
between GC1, GA2, TC1, and TC2 within 0.38Src-CAT were generated as
described under "Experimental Procedures." The constructs were
transfected into mouse 10T1/2 fibroblasts and reporter CAT levels
assayed. All CAT levels were standardized to protein and
-galactosidase expression and are relative to wild-type 0.38Src-CAT.
The data are an average of at least three experiments each performed in
duplicate. Black bars represent mutated sites in
GC1, TC1, GA2, TC2, and TC3.
|
|
Inhibition of c-Src Promoter Activity Using Triplex-forming
Oligonucleotides--
We have previously reported on the design of a
series of purine antiparallel (Aap)-based TFOs targeted to each of the
c-Src Pu:Py sequences (22). It was shown that all four TFOs could specifically interact with their respective targets with nanomolar affinities. In this study we describe the ability of these TFOs to
down-regulate c-Src promoter activity. Each of the TFOs was pre-annealed to 0.38Src-CAT, and the constructs transfected into 10T1/2
cells. An oligonucleotide incapable of binding to the promoter was also
included as a control, as well as a reporter construct lacking the TC2
TFO target sequence (0.38Src-CAT TC2), incapable of binding TC2Aap.
All four TFOs (TC1Aap, TC1.1Aap, TC2Aap, and TC3Aap) could inhibit
c-Src promoter activity (Fig. 8);
however, TC1.1Aap (targeted to the GA2 binding site) and TC2Aap were
most effective. These results further demonstrate the importance of these Pu:Py tracts in c-Src regulation and suggest that a TFO-based methodology may be a realistic and very specific approach to inhibiting c-Src overexpression.

View larger version (15K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 8.
Down-regulation of c-Src promoter activity
using triplex-forming oligonucleotides. Unmodified antiparallel
purine-based oligonucleotides (TC1Aap, TC1.1Aap, TC2Aap, and TC3Aap)
targeted to each of the Pu:Py tracts were preannealed to either
0.38Src-CAT or 0.38Src-CAT TC2 as detailed under "Experimental
Procedures," and the resulting triplex-bound constructs transfected
into 10T1/2 cells. CAT expression levels were standardized to protein
and -galactosidase expression, and are reported relative to CAT
levels in the presence of a control oligonucleotide previously shown to
have zero affinity for any of the Pu:Py tracts. The data are the
average of three duplicate experiments.
|
|
 |
DISCUSSION |
Although the activation and/or overexpression of
pp60c-src has been implicated in many cellular
processes, the mechanisms concerning transcriptional regulation of the
c-Src gene are completely unknown. Our approach, therefore, has been to
focus on c-Src transcriptional regulation by initially examining the
basal promoter in detail. Through EMSA analysis, two Sp1/Sp3 binding
sites, GC1 and GA2, were identified in a region of the promoter
previously determined to be required for transactivation. Mutational
analysis confirmed that these sites are responsible for Sp1/Sp3
binding, and transfection studies in Drosophila, mouse, and
human cells demonstrated that these regions are critical for promoter
activity. It was also observed that mutations in both GC1 and GA2
together resulted in greater than 75% decrease in promoter activity,
suggesting that these sites may be acting cooperatively. Taken
together, these data strongly implicate these two Sp1 binding sites in
the regulation of the c-Src promoter. Sp3 was shown to negate Sp1 transactivation of the c-Src promoter, as has been observed in a number
of other systems (29). While it is clear that Sp3 can act through
direct competition for the same binding site, it also appears to
contain an active repression domain (30, 31). Interestingly, there are
also an increasing number of reports that Sp3 can transactivate genes
using the identical SL2 cell line and expression vectors described in
this report (32-34). To date, it appears that the ability of Sp3 to
either activate or repress transcription is purely a matter of promoter
context and is thus difficult to predict. The observation that Sp3 does
not activate c-Src transcription and inhibits Sp1-mediated
transactivation suggests the Sp1:Sp3 ratio within a cell could
influence c-Src expression levels.
The most intriguing aspect of the c-Src promoter is the presence, size,
and strategic location of three perfect Pu:Py tracts. Many of the
multiple transcription start sites mapped in the gene arise either
within or close to these tracts (20). Similar Pu:Py sequences are
critical components of other promoters and often display the ability to
adopt H-DNA structures composed of an intramolecular triplex and
single-stranded DNA (27). The S1 sensitivity observed in the TC2-TC3
region of the c-Src promoter suggests that, under appropriate
conditions, this area is capable of adopting an H-DNA conformation.
Furthermore, deletion of the individual Pu:Py tracts had a significant
impact on promoter activity. This is a notable finding, considering the
GC1 and GA2 Sp1 binding sites were both intact in these constructs,
demonstrating that these Pu:Py tracts are also essential for full
promoter activity. However, since internal deletions disrupt the normal
architecture and spacing within a promoter, we decided to examine the
ability of these individual tracts to bind sequence-specific nuclear
factors. A factor with novel double- and single-stranded DNA binding
characteristics was identified. This factor, which we named SPy,
recognizes and binds specifically to the double-stranded CTTCC motif
shared by TC1 and TC2, as well as to the single-stranded pyrimidine
tracts of all three Pu:Py tracts. We believe this factor shares both double- and single-stranded binding properties, based on the following reasons. First, the relative mobility and diffuse appearance of this
complex following electrophoresis was very similar with both double and
single-stranded probes. Second, SPy bound to the TC1 double-stranded
probe could be competed for with pyrimidine (including the mutant
forms) but not purine single-stranded oligonucleotides. Conversely, SPy
bound to single-stranded pyrimidine probes and could be competed for
with wild-type double-stranded TC1 or TC2 but, importantly, not the
mutated forms. Competition experiments using excess double-stranded TC2
unlabeled oligonucleotide successfully compete for SPy binding;
however, bands migrating at a higher molecular weight seem to appear.
This phenomenon, we feel, is due to the abundance of other pyrimidine
binding factors with a variety of affinities within the cell, which,
after the titration of SPy with unlabeled competitor, can bind to the
labeled probe with lower affinity. Third, a subtle difference in the
sequence requirements for SPy binding for single- versus
double-stranded probes was observed. A strong requirement for the core
CTTCC motif when binding to double-stranded probes was noted, and
binding was abolished when this motif was mutated to CTTTC.
Binding and competition experiments demonstrated SPy was also able to
bind single-stranded TC3 and the mutated single-stranded pyrimidine versions of TC1 and 2. Interestingly, the resulting mutated binding motif of TC1 and 2, CTTTCC, is present in the wild-type TC3
sequence. This provides a rationale to explain why SPy binds TC1 and
TC2 in both single- and double-stranded forms but only binds the
single-stranded form of TC3 .
Transfection of CAT vectors containing SPy mutations alone or in
combination with Sp1 mutations confirmed that SPy binding appears to be
critical for full promoter activity and is therefore a positive
regulatory factor. Interestingly, the most dramatic reduction in
promoter activity involving a SPy mutation was seen when a construct
containing both a TC1 and GC1 mutation was assayed. Here activity was
reduced by 70%, suggesting these two individual sites also act in a
cooperative or additive manner, similar to the results seen with the
GC1 and GA2 Sp1 sites. In contrast, no single additional mutation
decreased the activity of the vector with a TC2 SPy mutation. Taken
together, these results confirm the individual importance of the GC1,
GA2, TC1, and TC2 sites and suggest a complex series of interactions
might occur, which will require further experiments to elucidate. In
addition, it is important to note the SPy mutations described here
interfered only with this factor's ability to interact with
double-stranded targets. Further mutations that destroy SPy's ability
to interact with TC1, TC2, and TC3 in a single-stranded manner could
also prove to be most informative. The association of transcription sites with the Pu:Py tracts (35) suggests they may be acting as
initiator (Inr) elements, possibly similar to the atypical Inrs
detailed in the majority of ribosomal protein (36) as well as other
promoters (37). These Inrs are characterized as a 12-20-bp Pu:Py tract
often buried within a GC-rich sequence. Based on the location of the
Pu:Py tracts and the unusual binding characteristics of SPy, we propose
the following working model; SPy initially binds to its specific
double-stranded target sequence in TC1 and 2 and is either involved in
local DNA melting or stabilization of the resulting "bubble" by
virtue of its specific pyrimidine-strand binding properties. The
subsequent entry of the RNA polymerase (possibly aided by SPy) and
transcription from the opposite purine-rich strand is activated by Sp1
and possibly other factors (including SPy). Thus, SPy may represent a
novel Inr binding protein. Since we have shown that the promoter is
probably capable of adopting an H-DNA conformation (27), it is also
formally possible that SPy may be involved in stabilizing or promoting
such a structure by virtue of its single-stranded binding
characteristics, which may then influence promoter strength and
transcription initiation.
The identity of SPy is currently unknown; however, over the last
several years a number of factors with both double-stranded and
single-stranded binding characteristics have been described, including
testis-specific TTF-D (38), THZif-1 (39), estrogen-responsive element-binding factor (40), and a factor(s) binding to the lipoprotein
lipase promoter (41). In addition, a growing list of factors that bind
to pyrimidine single-strands has been characterized including chk-YB-1b
(42), hnRNP K (43, 44), and PTB (45). None of these factors appear to
have SPy-like characteristics, although Bayarsaihan et al.
(46) have cloned a single-stranded DNA binding factor thought to be
involved in the regulation of the chick 2(I) collagen gene promoter.
The binding characteristics of the factor are very similar to SPy with
the target sequence containing two copies of the CTTCC motif. We have
cloned the human homologue of this factor and are currently testing
both its binding and antigenic similarity to SPy.
This current study demonstrates the importance of four Pu:Py tracts
(TC1, TC2, TC3, and the shorter tract overlapping the GA2 site) in the
regulation of c-Src transcription. Such sequences can form
triple-helical structures with appropriate single-stranded oligonucleotides through Hoogstein base pairing (47). Considerable excitement has been generated over the possibility of an antigene therapy based on such agents targeted to essential Pu:Py genes such as
c-myc (48), c-fos (49), bcl-2 (50),
and c-Ki-ras (51). We have previously described the
characterization of a series of purine based TFOs designed to bind the
essential tracts described here (22). In this report we have
demonstrated that these same TFOs are able to significantly inhibit the
activity of the promoter when annealed to reporter plasmids. The
inhibitory mechanism of these TFOs could involve the interference of
transcription initiation processes, for example, the binding of
transcriptional regulators such as Sp1 and SPy required for proper
initiation complex formation, as well as the inhibition of RNA
polymerase elongation (52).
In conclusion, we report here the first detailed description of a c-Src
promoter, which will form the framework for future work aimed at
elucidating c-Src differential gene expression. In addition, the
characterization of the SPy factor will be important, not only for
c-Src biology, but for other genes controlled by similar means. The
strong dependence of c-Src promoter activity on the described Pu:Py
tracts and our demonstration of TFO mediated inhibition suggests the
possibility of a therapeutic approach to specifically target c-Src in
cancer of the colon and breast where c-Src overexpression or activation
has been documented. We are currently assessing a series of
phosphorothioate-modified TFOs for their ability to down-regulate c-Src
gene expression in c-Src-overexpressing cell lines.
 |
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT |
We are grateful to W. Roesler for careful
review of the manuscript.
 |
FOOTNOTES |
*
This work was supported by grants from the Medical Research
Council of Canada (to K. B.), the Health Services Utilization Research Commission, Saskatchewan, and the University of Saskatchewan College of Medicine scholarship program (to S. R.).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.
§
To whom correspondence should be addressed: Saskatoon Cancer Center
Research Unit, Saskatchewan Cancer Agency, Div. of Oncology, University
of Saskatchewan, 20 Campus Dr., Saskatoon, Saskatchewan S7N 4H4,
Canada. Tel.: 306-655-2313; Fax: 306-655-2910; E-mail: kbonham@scf.sk.ca.
1
K. Bonham, unpublished observations.
 |
ABBREVIATIONS |
The abbreviations used are:
Pu, polypurine;
Py, polypyrimidine;
TFO, triplex-forming oligonucleotide;
EMSA, electrophoretic mobility shift assay;
CAT, chloramphenicol
acetyltransferase;
Inr, initiator;
PCR, polymerase chain reaction;
bp, base pair(s).
 |
REFERENCES |
| 1.
|
Stehelin, D.,
Varmus, H. E.,
Bishop, J. M.,
and Vogt, P. K.
(1976)
Nature
260,
170-173[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 2.
|
Biscardi, J. S.,
Tice, D. A.,
and Parsons, S. J.
(1999)
Adv. Cancer Res.
76,
61-119[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 3.
|
Brown, M. T.,
and Cooper, J. A.
(1996)
Biochim. Biophys. Acta
1278,
121-149
|
| 4.
|
Roche, S.,
Fumagalli, S.,
and Courtneidge, S. A.
(1995)
Science
269,
1567-1569[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 5.
|
Chackalaparampil, I.,
and Shalloway, D.
(1988)
Cell
52,
801-810[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 6.
|
Kovacic, B.,
Ilic, D.,
Damsky, C. H.,
and Gardner, D. G.
(1998)
J. Biol. Chem.
273,
35185-35193[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 7.
|
Babnigg, G.,
Bowersox, S. R.,
and Villereal, M. L.
(1997)
J. Biol. Chem.
272,
29434-29437[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 8.
|
Soriano, P.,
Montgomery, C.,
Geske, R.,
and Bradly, A.
(1991)
Cell
64,
693-702[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 9.
|
Stein, P. L.,
Vogel, H.,
and Soriano, P.
(1994)
Genes Dev.
8,
1999-2007[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 10.
|
Talamonti, M. S.,
Roh, M. S.,
Curley, S. A.,
and Gallick, G. E.
(1993)
J. Clin. Invest.
91,
103-60
|
| 11.
|
Cartwright, C. A.,
Kamps, M. P.,
Meisler, A. I.,
Pipas, J. M.,
and Eckhart, W.
(1989)
J. Clin. Invest.
83,
2025-2033
|
| 12.
|
Cartwright, C. A.,
Mamajiwalla, S.,
Skolnick, S. A.,
Eckhart, W.,
and Burgess, D. R.
(1993)
Oncogene
8,
1033-1039[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 13.
|
Biscardi, J. S.,
Belsches, A. P.,
and Parsons, S. J.
(1998)
Mol. Carcinog.
21,
261-272[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 14.
|
Makurenko, N. N.,
Kogan, E. A.,
Zborovskaya, I. B.,
and Kisseljov, F. L.
(1992)
Eur. J. Cancer
28,
372-377
|
| 15.
|
Lutz, M. P.,
Silke Eer, I. B.,
Flossmann-Kast, B. B. M,
Vogelmann, R.,
Luhrs, H.,
Friess, H.,
Buchler, M. W.,
and Adler, G.
(1998)
Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun.
243,
503-508[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 16.
|
Irby, R. B.,
Mao, W,
Coppola, D.,
Kang, J.,
Loubeau, J. M.,
Trudeau, W.,
Karl, R.,
Fujita, D. J.,
Jove, R.,
and Yeatman, T. J.
(1999)
Nat. Genet.
21,
187-190[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 17.
|
Fults, D. W.,
Towle, A. C.,
Lauder, J. M.,
and Maness, P. F.
(1985)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
5,
27-32[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 18.
|
Abu-Amer, Y.,
Ross, F. P.,
Edwards, J.,
and Teitelbaum.
(1997)
J. Clin. Invest.
100,
1557-1565[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 19.
|
Le Beau, J. M.,
Tedeschi, B.,
and Walter, G.
(1991)
J. Neurosci. Res.
28,
299-309[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 20.
|
Bonham, K.,
and Fujita, D. J.
(1993)
Oncogene
8,
1973-1981[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 21.
|
Landt, O.,
Grunert, H. P.,
and Hahn, U.
(1990)
Gene (Amst.)
96,
125-128[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 22.
|
Ritchie, S.,
and Bonham, K.
(1998)
Antisense Nucleic Acid Drug Dev.
8,
391-400[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 23.
|
Dignam, J. D.,
Lebovitz, R. M.,
and Roeder, R. G.
(1983)
Nucleic Acids Res.
11,
1475-1489[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 24.
|
Hall, C. V.,
Jacob, P. E.,
Ringold, G. M.,
and Lee, F.
(1983)
J. Mol. Appl. Genet.
2,
101-109[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 25.
|
Courey, A. J.,
and Tjian, R. I.
(1992)
in
Transcription Regulation
(McKnight, S. L.
, and Yamamoto, K. R., eds), Vol. 2
, pp. 743-769, Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press, Cold Spring Harbor, NY
|
| 26.
|
Hagen, G.,
Dennig, J.,
Preiß, A.,
Beato, M.,
and Suske, G.
(1995)
J. Biol. Chem.
270,
24989-24994[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 27.
|
Mirkin, S. M.
(1994)
Annu. Rev. Biophys. Biomol. Struct.
23,
541-576[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 28.
|
Johnson, A. C.,
Jinno, Y.,
and Merlano, G. T.
(1988)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
8,
4174-4184[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 29.
|
Hagen, G.,
Muller, S.,
Beato, M.,
and Suske, G.
(1994)
EMBO J.
13,
3843-3851[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 30.
|
Majello, B.,
De Luca, P.,
Hagan, G.,
Suske, G.,
and Lania, L.
(1994)
Nucleic Acids Res.
22,
4914-4921[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 31.
|
Majello, B.,
De Luca, P.,
and Lania, L.
(1997)
J. Biol. Chem.
272,
4021-4026[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 32.
|
Ko, J. L.,
Liu, H. C.,
Minnerath, S. R.,
and Loh, H. H.
(1998)
J. Biol. Chem.
273,
27678-27685[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 33.
|
Muller, S.,
Maas, A.,
Islam, T. C.,
Sideras, P.,
Suske, G.,
Philipsen, S.,
Xanthopoulos, K. G.,
Hendriks, R. W.,
and Smith, C. I.
(1999)
Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun.
259,
364-369[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 34.
|
Bigger, C. B.,
Melnikova, I. N.,
and Gardner, P. D.
(1997)
J. Biol. Chem.
272,
25976-25982[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 35.
|
Brahmachari, S. K.,
Sarkar, P. S.,
Raghavan, S.,
Narayan, M.,
and Maiti, A. K.
(1997)
Gene (Amst.)
190,
17-26[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 36.
|
Amaldi, F.,
Camacho-Vanegas, O.,
Cardinali, B.,
Cecconi, F.,
Crosio, C.,
Loreni, F.,
Mariottini, P.,
Pellizzoni, L.,
and Pierandrei-Amaldi, P.
(1995)
Biochem. Cell Biol.
73,
969-977[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 37.
|
Yu, M.,
Yang, X. Y.,
Schmidt, Y.,
Chinenov, Y.,
Wang, R.,
and Martin, M. E.
(1997)
J. Biol. Chem.
272,
29060-29067[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 38.
|
Oosterhuis, J. H.,
and van der Hoorn, F. A.
(1999)
J. Biol. Chem.
274,
11708-11712[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 39.
|
Sakatsume, O.,
Tsutsui, H.,
Wang, Y.,
Gao, H.,
Tang, X.,
Yamauchi, T.,
Murata, T.,
Itakura, K.,
and Yokoyama, K. K.
(1996)
J. Biol. Chem.
271,
31322-31333[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 40.
|
Lannigan, D. A.,
and Notides, A. C.
(1989)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
86,
863-867[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 41.
|
Tanuma, Y.,
Nakabayashi, H.,
Esumi, M.,
and Endo, H.
(1995)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
15,
517-523[Abstract]
|
| 42.
|
Dhalla, A. K.,
Ririe, S. S.,
Swamynathan, S. K.,
Weber, K. T.,
and Guntaka, R. V.
(1998)
Biochem. J.
336,
373-379
|
| 43.
|
Tomonaga, T.,
and Levens, D.
(1996)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
93,
5830-5835[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 44.
|
Michelotti, G. A.,
Michelotti, E. F.,
Pullner, A.,
Duncan, R. C.,
Eick, D.,
and Levens, D.
(1996)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
16,
2656-2669[Abstract]
|
| 45.
|
Lou, H.,
Helfman, D. M.,
Gagel, R. F.,
and Berget, S. M.
(1999)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
19,
78-85[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 46.
|
Bayarsaihan, D.,
Soto, R. J.,
and Lukens, L. N.
(1998)
Biochem. J.
331,
447-452
|
| 47.
|
Frank-Kamenetskii, M. D.
(1995)
Annu. Rev. Biochem.
64,
65-95[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 48.
|
Thomas, T. J.,
Faaland, C. A.,
Gallo, M. A.,
and Thomas, T.
(1995)
Nucleic Acids Res.
23,
3594-3599[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 49.
|
Lavrovsky, Y.,
Stoltz, R. A.,
Vlassov, V. V.,
and Abraham, N. G.
(1996)
Eur. J. Biochem.
238,
582-590[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 50.
|
Olivas, W. M.,
and Maher, L. J., III
(1996)
Nucleic Acids Res.
24,
1758-1764[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 51.
|
Alunni-Fabbroni, M.,
Pirulli, D.,
Manzini, G.,
and Xodo, L. E.
(1996)
Biochemistry
35,
16361-16369[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 52.
|
Krasilnikov, A. S.,
Panyutin, I. G.,
Samadashwily, G. M.,
Cox, R.,
Lazurkin, Y. S.,
and Merkin, S. M.
(1997)
Nucleic Acids Res.
25,
1339-1346[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
Copyright © 2000 by The American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Inc.

CiteULike Complore Connotea Del.icio.us Digg Reddit Technorati What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:

|
 |

|
 |
 
Y. Gao, A. Howard, K. Ban, and J. Chandra
Oxidative Stress Promotes Transcriptional Up-regulation of Fyn in BCR-ABL1-expressing Cells
J. Biol. Chem.,
March 13, 2009;
284(11):
7114 - 7125.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
B. Cen, H. Li, and I. B. Weinstein
Histidine Triad Nucleotide-binding Protein 1 Up-regulates Cellular Levels of p27KIP1 by Targeting ScfSKP2 Ubiquitin Ligase and Src
J. Biol. Chem.,
February 20, 2009;
284(8):
5265 - 5276.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
K. M. McBride, A. Gazumyan, E. M. Woo, V. M. Barreto, D. F. Robbiani, B. T. Chait, and M. C. Nussenzweig
Regulation of hypermutation by activation-induced cytidine deaminase phosphorylation
PNAS,
June 6, 2006;
103(23):
8798 - 8803.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
D. Sun, K. Guo, J. J. Rusche, and L. H. Hurley
Facilitation of a structural transition in the polypurine/polypyrimidine tract within the proximal promoter region of the human VEGF gene by the presence of potassium and G-quadruplex-interactive agents
Nucleic Acids Res.,
October 20, 2005;
33(18):
6070 - 6080.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
S. M. Dehm, T. L. Hilton, E. H. Wang, and K. Bonham
SRC Proximal and Core Promoter Elements Dictate TAF1 Dependence and Transcriptional Repression by Histone Deacetylase Inhibitors
Mol. Cell. Biol.,
March 15, 2004;
24(6):
2296 - 2307.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
D. Wei, L. Wang, Y. He, H. Q. Xiong, J. L. Abbruzzese, and K. Xie
Celecoxib Inhibits Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor Expression in and Reduces Angiogenesis and Metastasis of Human Pancreatic Cancer via Suppression of Sp1 Transcription Factor Activity
Cancer Res.,
March 15, 2004;
64(6):
2030 - 2038.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
M. Bowmaker, M. Y. Yang, T. Yasukawa, A. Reyes, H. T. Jacobs, J. A. Huberman, and I. J. Holt
Mammalian Mitochondrial DNA Replicates Bidirectionally from an Initiation Zone
J. Biol. Chem.,
December 19, 2003;
278(51):
50961 - 50969.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
T. G. Uil, H. J. Haisma, and M. G. Rots
Therapeutic modulation of endogenous gene function by agents with designed DNA-sequence specificities
Nucleic Acids Res.,
November 1, 2003;
31(21):
6064 - 6078.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
D. M. Schewe, J. H. Leupold, D. D. Boyd, E. R. Lengyel, H. Wang, K. U. Gruetzner, F. W. Schildberg, K. W. Jauch, and H. Allgayer
Tumor-specific Transcription Factor Binding to an Activator Protein-2/Sp1 Element of the Urokinase-type Plasminogen Activator Receptor Promoter in a First Large Series of Resected Gastrointestinal Cancers
Clin. Cancer Res.,
June 1, 2003;
9(6):
2267 - 2276.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
S. A. Ritchie, M. K. Pasha, D. J. P. Batten, R. K. Sharma, D. J. H. Olson, A. R. S. Ross, and K. Bonham
Identification of the SRC pyrimidine-binding protein (SPy) as hnRNP K: implications in the regulation of SRC1A transcription
Nucleic Acids Res.,
March 1, 2003;
31(5):
1502 - 1513.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
G. M. Carbone, E. M. McGuffie, A. Collier, and C. V. Catapano
Selective inhibition of transcription of the Ets2 gene in prostate cancer cells by a triplex-forming oligonucleotide
Nucleic Acids Res.,
February 1, 2003;
31(3):
833 - 843.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
M. K. Rao, S. Maiti, H. N. Ananthaswamy, and M. F. Wilkinson
A Highly Active Homeobox Gene Promoter Regulated by Ets and Sp1 Family Members in Normal Granulosa Cells and Diverse Tumor Cell Types
J. Biol. Chem.,
July 12, 2002;
277(29):
26036 - 26045.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
S. DIVIACCO, V. RAPOZZI, L. XODO, C. HELENE, F. QUADRIFOGLIO, and C. GIOVANNANGELI
Site-directed inhibition of DNA replication by triple helix formation
FASEB J,
December 1, 2001;
15(14):
2660 - 2668.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
P. Aich, T. J. Thomas, and J. S. Lee
The role of polyamines, Na+ and K+ in the formation of triple helices between purine oligonucleotides and the promoter region of the human c-src proto-oncogene
Nucleic Acids Res.,
June 15, 2000;
28(12):
2307 - 2310.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
J. L. Ko and H. H. Loh
Single-stranded DNA-binding Complex Involved in Transcriptional Regulation of Mouse {micro}-Opioid Receptor Gene
J. Biol. Chem.,
January 5, 2001;
276(1):
788 - 795.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
K. Bonham, S. A. Ritchie, S. M. Dehm, K. Snyder, and F. M. Boyd
An Alternative, Human SRC Promoter and Its Regulation by Hepatic Nuclear Factor-1alpha
J. Biol. Chem.,
November 22, 2000;
275(48):
37604 - 37611.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
Y. Yang, C. K. Hwang, E. Junn, G. Lee, and M. M. Mouradian
ZIC2 and Sp3 Repress Sp1-induced Activation of the Human D1ADopamine Receptor Gene
J. Biol. Chem.,
December 1, 2000;
275(49):
38863 - 38869.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|
Copyright © 2000 by the American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology.
|
Advertisement
Advertisement
|