4.8 Article

Tuning levels of low-complexity endogenous oncogenic transcription

期刊

MOLECULAR CELL
卷 82, 期 11, 页码 2084-+

出版社

CELL PRESS
DOI: 10.1016/j.molcel.2022.04.007

关键词

-

资金

  1. John D. Baldeschwieler and Marlene R. Kon-nar Foundation
  2. California Institute of Regenerative Medicine grant [LA1-08013]
  3. NIH [UO1-EB021236, U54-DK107980]
  4. Howard Hughes Medical Institute
  5. Jane Coffin Childs Memorial Fund for Medical Research

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study reveals that the quantity and localization of LCD-LCD interactions can influence the transcriptional regulation of genes. Excessive LCD-LCD interactions repress transcription, while confining the transcription factor to a liquid-liquid phase separation compartment also inhibits transcription.
Gene activation by mammalian transcription factors (TFs) requires multivalent interactions of their low complexity domains (LCDs), but how such interactions regulate transcription remains unclear. It has been proposed that extensive LCD-LCD interactions culminating in liquid-liquid phase separation (LLPS) of TFs is the dominant mechanism underlying transactivation. Here, we investigated how tuning the amount and localization of LCD-LCD interactions in vivo affects transcription of endogenous human genes. Quantitative single-cell and single-molecule imaging reveals that the oncogenic TF EWS::FLI1 requires a narrow optimum of LCD-LCD interactions to activate its target genes associated with GGAA microsatellites. Increasing LCD LCD interactions toward putative LLPS represses transcription of these genes in patient-derived cells. Likewise, ectopically creating LCD-LCD interactions to sequester EWS::FLI1 into a well-documented LLPS compartment, the nucleolus, inhibits EWS::FLI1-driven transcription and oncogenic transformation. Our findings show how altering the balance of LCD-LCD interactions can influence transcriptional regulation and suggest a potential therapeutic strategy for targeting disease-causing TFs.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据