PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

J Zwicker

Publications and source records attributed to J Zwicker.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed1999

Interaction of the fork head domain transcription factor MPP2 with the human papilloma virus 16 E7 protein: enhancement of transformation and transactivation.

The high risk human papillomavirus (HPV) type 16 E7 protein affects cell growth control and promotes transformation by interfering with functions of cellular proteins. A key target of E7 is the tumor suppressor protein p105RB. Although this interaction is required for E7-dependent transformation, other cellular molecules must also be involved, because some E7 mutants that have reduced transforming abilities still bind to p105RB. In order to identify additional proteins that interact with E7 and that may be responsible to mediate its transforming function, we have used the C-terminal half of E7 in a yeast two-hybrid screen. We identified the fork head domain transcription factor M phase phosphoprotein 2 (MPP2) as an interaction partner of E7. Specific interaction of the two proteins both in vitro and in vivo in mammalian cells was detected. The interaction of MPP2 with E7 is functionally relevant since MPP2 enhances the E7/Ha-Ras co-transformation of rat embryo fibroblasts. In addition HPV16 E7, but neither non-transforming mutants of HPV16 E7 nor low risk HPV6 E7, was able to stimulate MPP2-specific transcriptional activity. Thus, MPP2 is a potentially important target for E7-mediated transformation.

Animals↗
PubMed1999

The SV40 large T oncoprotein disrupts DNA-binding of the cell cycle-regulated transcriptional repressor CDF.

A hallmark of neoplastic transformation by DNA tumor viruses is the deregulation of cell cycle genes. At least in some genes, this deregulation appears to be due to the oncoprotein-mediated disruption of complexes between E2F and pocket proteins and the ensuing generation of transcriptionally active free E2F. In the present study, we have analysed the effect of the SV40 large T oncoprotein (SV-LT) on the function of a different cell cycle-regulated transcriptional repressor, CDF, which is the principal regulator of the cdc25C, cyclin A and cdc2 genes. As shown by genomic footprinting of sorted G1 and G2 cell populations, transformation by SV-LT completely abrogated protection of the CDF binding site (CDE-CHR) in the cdc25C promoter. In agreement with this observation, expression of the SV-LT in fibroblasts led to a dramatic up-regulation of the cdc25C promoter in cells synchronized in G0. These findings indicate that the oncoprotein-mediated dissociation of the CDF repressor protein from its cognate DNA-binding site is a major mechanism in virus-induced transcriptional deregulation.

3T3 Cells↗
PubMed1999

Functional domains in cyclin D1: pRb-kinase activity is not essential for transformation.

Although cyclin D1 plays a major role during cell cycle progression and is involved in human tumourigenesis, its domain structure is still poorly understood. In the present study, we have generated a series of cyclin D1 N- and C-terminal deletion constructs. These mutants were used to define the domains required for transformation of rat embryonal fibroblasts (REF) in cooperation with activated Ha-ras and and to establish correlations with defined biochemical properties of cyclin D1. Protein binding and REF assays showed that the region of the cyclin box required for the interaction with CDK4 as well as C-terminal sequences determining protein stability were crucial for transformation. Surprisingly, however, the N-terminal deletion of 20 amino acids which impaired pRb kinase activity did not affect the transforming ability of cyclin D1. Likewise, no effect on transformation was observed with mutants defective in p21CIP interaction. These observations argue against a crucial role of pRb inactivation or p21CIP squelching in cyclin D1-mediated transformation.

Animals↗
PubMed1998

TAFII mutations disrupt Dorsal activation in the Drosophila embryo.

In this study, we present evidence that the Dorsal activator interacts with limiting amounts of the TFIID complex in the Drosophila embryo. In vitro transcription reactions and protein binding assays implicate the TAFII110 and TAFII60 subunits of the TFIID complex in contributing to Dorsal-mediated activation. Mutations in TAFII110 and TAFII60 result in altered patterns of snail and twist transcription in embryos derived from dl/+ females. These results suggest that TAFIIs contribute to the activation of transcription in vivo and support the hypothesis that subunits of TFIID may serve as targets of enhancer binding proteins.

Animals↗
PubMed1998

Chromatin, TAFs, and a novel multiprotein coactivator are required for synergistic activation by Sp1 and SREBP-1a in vitro.

The promoter selectivity factor Sp1 often cooperates with other enhancer-binding proteins to activate transcription. To study the molecular underpinnings of these regulatory events, we have reconstituted in vitro the synergy observed in vivo between Sp1 and the sterol-regulated factor SREBP-1a at the low density lipoprotein receptor (LDLR) promoter. Using a highly purified human transcription system, we found that chromatin, TAFs, and a novel SREBP-binding coactivator activity, which includes CBP, are all required to mediate full synergistic activation by Sp1 and SREBP-1a. The SREBP-binding domain of CBP inhibits activation by SREBP-1a and Sp1 in a dominant-negative fashion that is both chromatin- and activator-specific. Whereas recombinant CBP alone is not sufficient to mediate activation, a human cellular fraction containing CBP can support high levels of chromatin-dependent synergistic activation. Purification of this activity to near homogeneity resulted in the identification of a multiprotein coactivator, including CBP, that selectively binds to the SREBP-1a activation domain and is capable of mediating high levels of synergistic activation by SREBP/Sp1 on chromatin templates. The development of a reconstituted chromatin transcription system has allowed us to isolate a novel coactivator that is recruited by the SREBP-1a activation domain and that functions in concert with TFIID to coordinate the action of multiple activators at complex promoters in the context of chromatin.

Animals↗
PubMed1998

CDF-1 mediated repression of cell cycle genes targets a specific subset of transactivators.

The cdc25C, cyclin A and cdc2 genes are regulated during the cell cycle through two contiguous repressor binding sites, the CDE and CHR, located in the region of transcription initiation and interacting with a factor termed CDF-1. The target of this repression seems to be transcriptional activation of these promoters by transcription factors bound upstream. The majority of these factors falls into the class of glutamine-rich activators, suggesting that CDF-1-mediated repression might be activation domain specific. In the present study we have used chimeric promoter constructs to demonstrate that the cdc25C UAS, but not the core promoter, is crucial for repression. In addition, we show that only specific transcription factors and activation domains are responsive to CDE-CHR-mediated cell cycle regulation. These observations clearly indicate that CDF-1 interferes with activation of transcription by a specific subset of transactivators. The repressible activation domains belong to the same class of glutamine-rich activators, pointing to specific interactions of CDF-1 with components of the transcription machinery. In agreement with this conclusion we find that a simple inversion of the CDF-CHR module completely abrogates cell cycle-regulated repression.

3T3 Cells↗
PubMed1997

CDF-1, a novel E2F-unrelated factor, interacts with cell cycle-regulated repressor elements in multiple promoters.

The cdc25C , cdc2 and cyclin A promoters are controlled by transcriptional repression through two contiguous protein binding sites, termed the CDE and CHR. In the present study we have identified a factor, CDF-1, which interacts with the cdc25C CDE-CHR module. CDF-1 binds to the CDE in the major groove and to the CHR in the minor grove in a cooperative fashion in vitro , in a manner similar to that seen by genomic footprinting. In agreement with in vivo binding data and its putative function as a periodic repressor, DNA binding by CDF-1 in nuclear extracts is down-regulated during cell cycle progression. CDF-1 also binds avidly to the CDE-CHR modules of the cdc2 and cyclin A promoters, but not to the E2F site in the B- myb promoter. Conversely, E2F complexes do not recognize the cdc25C CDE-CHR and CDF-1 is immunologically unrelated to all known E2F and DP family members. This indicates that E2F- and CDF-mediated repression is controlled by different factors acting at different stages during the cell cycle. While E2F-mediated repression seems to be associated with genes that are up-regulated early (around mid G1), such as B- myb , CDE-CHR-controlled genes, such as cdc25C , cdc2 and cyclin A , become derepressed later. Finally, the fractionation of native nuclear extracts on glycerol gradients leads to separation of CDF-1 from both E2F complexes and pocket proteins of the pRb family. This emphasizes the conclusion that CDF-1 is not an E2F family member and points to profound differences in the cell cycle regulation of CDF-1 and E2F.

3T3 Cells↗
PubMed1997

The differential binding of E2F and CDF repressor complexes contributes to the timing of cell cycle-regulated transcription.

B- myb and cdc25C exemplify different groups of genes whose transcription is consecutively up-regulated during the cell cycle. Both promoters are controlled by transcriptional repression via modules consisting of an E2F binding site (E2FBS) or the related CDE plus a contiguous CHR co-repressor element. We now show that the B- myb repressor module, which is derepressed early (mid G1), is preferentially recognized by E2F-DP complexes and that a mutation selectively abolishing E2F binding impairs regulation. In contrast, the cdc25C repressor module, which is derepressed late (S/G2), interacts selectively with CDE-CHR binding factor-1 (CDF-1). E2F binding, but not CDF-1 binding, requires specific nucleotides flanking the E2FBS/CDE core, while CDF-1 binding, but not E2F binding, depends on specific nucleotides in the CHR. Swapping these nucleotides between the two promoters profoundly changes protein binding patterns and alters expression kinetics. Thus predominant CDF-1 binding leads to derepression in late S, predominant E2F binding results in up-regulation in late G1, while promoters binding both E2F and CDF-1 with high efficiency show intermediate kinetics. Our results support a model where the differential binding of E2F and CDF-1 repressor complexes contributes to the timing of promoter activity during the cell cycle.

3T3 Cells↗
PubMed1997

CDF-1-mediated repression of cell cycle genes targets a specific subset of transactivators.

The cdc25C , cyclin A and cdc2 genes are regulated during the cell cycle through two contiguous repressor binding sites, the CDE and CHR, located in the region of transcription initiation and interacting with a factor termed CDF-1. The target of this repression seems to be transcriptional activation of these promoters by transcription factors bound upstream. The majority of these factors falls into the class of glutamine-rich activators, suggesting that CDF-1-mediated repression might be activation domain specific. In the present study we have used chimeric promoter constructs to demonstrate that the cdc25C UAS, but not the core promoter, is crucial for repression. In addition, we show that only specific transcription factors and activation domains are responsive to CDE-CHR-mediated cell cycle regulation. These observations clearly indicate that CDF-1 interferes with activation of transcription by a specific subset of transactivators. The repressible activation domains belong to the same class of glutamine-rich activators, pointing to specific interactions of CDF-1 with components of the transcription machinery. In agreement with this conclusion we find that a simple inversion of the CDE-CHR module completely abrogates cell cycle-regulated repression.

3T3 Cells↗
PubMed1996

Cell cycle-regulated repression of B-myb transcription: cooperation of an E2F site with a contiguous corepressor element.

B-myb belongs to a group of cell cycle genes whose transcription is repressed in G0/early G1 through a binding site for the transcription factor E2F. Here, we show that the B-myb repressor element is specifically recognised by heterodimers consisting of DP-1 and E2F-1, E2F-3 or E2F-4. Surprisingly, E2F-mediated repression is dependent on a contiguous corepressor element that resembles the CHR previously established as a corepressor of the CDE in cell cycle genes derepressed in S/G2, such as cyclin A, cdc2 and cdc25C. A factor binding to the B-myb CHR was identified in fractionated HeLa nuclear extract and found to interact with the minor groove, as previously shown by in vivo footprinting for the cyclin A CHR. The B-myb and cdc25C CHRs are related with respect to protein binding but are functionally clearly distinct. Our results support a model where both E2F- and CDE-mediated repression, acting at different stages in the cell cycle, are dependent on promoter-specific CHR elements.

3T3 Cells↗
PubMed1996

Activation of cyclin-dependent kinases by Myc mediates induction of cyclin A, but not apoptosis.

The activation of conditional alleles of Myc induces both cell proliferation and apoptosis in serum-deprived RAT1 fibroblasts. Entry into S phase and apoptosis are both preceded by increased levels of cyclin E- and cyclin D1-dependent kinase activities. To assess which, if any, cellular responses to Myc depend on active cyclin-dependent kinases (cdks), we have microinjected expression plasmids encoding the cdk inhibitors p16, p21 or p27, and have used a specific inhibitor of cdk2, roscovitine. Expression of cyclin A, which starts late in G1 phase, served as a marker for cell cycle progression. Our data show that active G1 cyclin/cdk complexes are both necessary and sufficient for induction of cyclin A by Myc. In contrast, neither microinjection of cdk inhibitors nor chemical inhibition of cdk2 affected the ability of Myc to induce apoptosis in serum-starved cells. Further, in isoleucine-deprived cells, Myc induces apoptosis without altering cdk activity. We conclude that Myc acts upstream of cdks in stimulating cell proliferation and also that activation of cdks and induction of apoptosis are largely independent events that occur in response to induction of Myc.

3T3 Cells↗
PubMed1996

Cell cycle regulation of E2F site occupation in vivo.

DNA-binding E2F complexes have been identified throughout the mammalian cell cycle, including the transcriptionally inactive complexes with pocket proteins, which occur early in the prereplicative G1 phase of the cycle, and the transactivating free E2F, which increases in late G1. Here, a regulatory B-myb promoter site was shown to bind with high affinity to free E2F and to E2F-pocket protein complexes in an indistinguishable way in vitro. In contrast, in vivo footprinting with NIH 3T3 cells demonstrated E2F site occupation specifically in early G1, when the B-myb promoter is inactive. These observations indicate that a novel mechanism governs E2F-DNA interactions during the cell cycle and emphasize the relevance of E2F site-directed transcriptional repression.

3T3 Cells↗
PubMed1995

Cell cycle regulation of cdc25C transcription is mediated by the periodic repression of the glutamine-rich activators NF-Y and Sp1.

The late S/G2-specific transcription of the human cdc25C gene is dependent on an initiator-proximal repressor element (CDE) and an upstream activating sequence (UAS) of undefined nature. We now show that these upstream sequences harbour multiple in vivo protein binding sites that interact with transcriptional activators and form separable, context-independent functional modules. Major components of the UAS are a bona fide Sp1 site and three direct sequence repeats (Yc-boxes). The Yc-boxes interact with the CCAAT-box binding protein NF-Y and are critically dependent on synergistic interactions for efficient transcription activation. The NF-Y complexes, as well as Sp1, are constitutive activators, whose activation function is periodically repressed through the CDE. These observations indicate that the cell cycle regulation of cdc25C transcription is mainly due to the CDE-mediated repression of glutamine-rich activators.

3T3 Cells↗
PubMed1995

Cell cycle regulation of the cyclin A, cdc25C and cdc2 genes is based on a common mechanism of transcriptional repression.

The S/G2-specific transcription of the human cdc25C gene is due to the periodic occupation of a repressor element ('cell cycle-dependent element'; CDE) located in the region of the basal promoter. Protein binding to the major groove of the CDE in G0 and G1 results in a phase-specific repression of activated transcription. We now show that CDE-mediated repression is also the major principle underlying the periodic transcription of the human cyclin A and cdc2 genes. A single point mutation within the CDE results in a 10- to 20-fold deregulation in G0 and an almost complete loss of cell cycle regulation of all three genes. In addition, the cdc25C, cyclin A and cdc2 genes share an identical 5 bp region ('cell cycle genes homology region'; CHR) starting at an identical position, six nucleotides 3' to the CDE. Strikingly, mutation of the CHR region in each of the three promoters produces the same phenotype as the mutation of the CDE, i.e. a dramatic deregulation in G0. In agreement with these results, in vivo DMS footprinting showed the periodic occupation of the cyclin A CDE in the major groove, and of the CHR in the minor groove. Finally, all three genes bear conspicuous similarities in their upstream activating sequences (UAS). This applies in particular to the presence of NF-Y and Sp1 binding sites which, in the cdc25C gene, have been shown to be the targets of repression through the CDE.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Base Sequence↗
PubMed1995

Periodic cdc25C transcription is mediated by a novel cell cycle-regulated repressor element (CDE).

We show that the cell cycle-regulated transcription of the TATA-less cdc25C gene in late S/G2 is largely mediated by a novel promoter element (CDE) located directly 5' to one of the two major transcription initiation sites. Genomic dimethylsulfate footprinting experiments, using either synchronized or sorted normally cycling cells, show the formation in vivo of a CDE-protein complex in both G0 and G1 cells and its dissociation in G2. Mutation of the CDE severely impairs cell cycle regulation of the cdc25C promoter and results in high expression in G0/G1, indicating that the CDE functions as a cell cycle-regulated cis-acting repressor element. Cell cycle regulation is also lost upon removal of the enhancer region located immediately upstream of the CDE, but is largely restored when this enhancerless minimal cdc25C promoter fragment is linked to the constitutive SV40 early enhancer. This indicates that the CDE is dependent on the presence of a transcriptional enhancer to effect cell cycle regulation. Our observations suggest that the periodic activation of the cdc25C gene in late S/G2 is brought about, at least in part, by a unique regulatory mechanism involving the cell cycle-regulated dissociation of a repressor from the CDE.

Base Sequence↗
PubMed1995

Cell cycle-regulated transcription in mammalian cells.

The periodic, phase-specific transcription of defined sets of genes is a hallmark of cell cycle progression in all organisms (1-3). In this article, we will summarise our current knowledge and views of the mechanisms governing the cross-coupling of cell cycle control and transcriptional regulation in mammalian cells, with particular emphasis on the transcription factor E2F and the retinoblastoma protein pRb (1-3). Excluded from this review will be the genomic response to mitogenic stimulation, which is part of the mitogen-triggered signal transduction cascades rather than a reflection of cell cycle regulation (4).

Animals↗