Research Papers:
Cancer cell line specific co-factors modulate the FOXM1 cistrome
PDF | HTML | Supplementary Files | How to cite
Metrics: PDF 1955 views | HTML 2808 views | ?
Abstract
Yue Wang1,2, Matthew H. Ung2, Tian Xia1, Wenqing Cheng1 and Chao Cheng2,3,4
1School of Electronic Information and Communications, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, Hubei 430074, China
2Department of Molecular and Systems Biology, Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth, Hanover, NH 03755, USA
3Norris Cotton Cancer Center, Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth, Lebanon, NH 03766, USA
4Department of Biomedical Data Sciences, Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth, Lebanon, NH 03766, USA
Correspondence to:
Wenqing Cheng, email: [email protected]
Chao Cheng, email: [email protected]
Keywords: transcription factor, ChIP-seq, FOXM1 reprogramming, genomic binding, breast cancer prognosis
Received: April 12, 2017 Accepted: August 14, 2017 Published: August 24, 2017
ABSTRACT
ChIP-seq has been commonly applied to identify genomic occupation of transcription factors (TFs) in a context-specific manner. It is generally assumed that a TF should have similar binding patterns in cells from the same or closely related tissues. Surprisingly, this assumption has not been carefully examined. To this end, we systematically compared the genomic binding of the cell cycle regulator FOXM1 in eight cell lines from seven different human tissues at binding signal, peaks and target genes levels. We found that FOXM1 binding in ER-positive breast cancer cell line MCF-7 are distinct comparing to those in not only other non-breast cell lines, but also MDA-MB-231, ER-negative breast cancer cell line. However, binding sites in MDA-MB-231 and non-breast cell lines were highly consistent. The recruitment of estrogen receptor alpha (ERα) caused the unique FOXM1 binding patterns in MCF-7. Moreover, the activity of FOXM1 in MCF-7 reflects the regulatory functions of ERα, while in MDA-MB-231 and non-breast cell lines, FOXM1 activities regulate cell proliferation. Our results suggest that tissue similarity, in some specific contexts, does not hold precedence over TF-cofactors interactions in determining transcriptional states and that the genomic binding of a TF can be dramatically affected by a particular co-factor under certain conditions.
All site content, except where otherwise noted, is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
PII: 20405