4.8 Article

Non-coding somatic mutations converge on the PAX8 pathway in ovarian cancer

Journal

NATURE COMMUNICATIONS
Volume 11, Issue 1, Pages -

Publisher

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/s41467-020-15951-0

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Tower Cancer Research Foundation Career Development Award
  2. National Cancer Institute (NCI) [1K99CA184415-01]
  3. Ovarian Cancer Research Alliance (OCRA) [599175]
  4. USC Department of Obstetrics Gynecology
  5. NCT Cancer Center Shared Grant [P30 CA014089]
  6. Ovarian Cancer Research Fund Alliance Program Project Development Grant [373356]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The functional consequences of somatic non-coding mutations in ovarian cancer (OC) are unknown. To identify regulatory elements (RE) and genes perturbed by acquired non-coding variants, here we establish epigenomic and transcriptomic landscapes of primary OCs using H3K27ac ChIP-seq and RNA-seq, and then integrate these with whole genome sequencing data from 232 OCs. We identify 25 frequently mutated regulatory elements, including an enhancer at 6p22.1 which associates with differential expression of ZSCAN16 (P=6.6x10-4) and ZSCAN12 (P=0.02). CRISPR/Cas9 knockout of this enhancer induces downregulation of both genes. Globally, there is an enrichment of single nucleotide variants in active binding sites for TEAD4 (P=6x10-11) and its binding partner PAX8 (P=2x10-10), a known lineage-specific transcription factor in OC. In addition, the collection of cis REs associated with PAX8 comprise the most frequently mutated set of enhancers in OC (P=0.003). These data indicate that non-coding somatic mutations disrupt the PAX8 transcriptional network during OC development. The role of non-coding somatic mutations in ovarian cancer is unclear. Here, the authors integrate genomic and epigenomic data from patient samples to show that these mutations frequently converge on the PAX8 transcriptional network.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available