dysregulated genes
Download
Report
Transcript dysregulated genes
Journal Club 5/14/15
Dysregulation of Gene Expression as a Cause of Cockayne
Syndrome Neurological Disease.
Wang Y, et al. PNAS. 2014.
Agenda
Background
Cockayne Syndrome
Clinical manifestations
Known pathophysiology
Rationale for the study
Experimental findings
Gene expression in fibroblasts
iPS reprogramming
Neuroblast differentiation
Cerebellar gene expression
Discussion of results
Importance
Further Directions
Cockayne Syndrome (and me)
What causes Cockayne
Syndrome?
Cockayne Syndrome
Autosomal Recessive
Loss of function
Mutations in ERCC6 (CSB) = 80%
Mutations in ERCC8 (CSA) = 20%
What does this do?
UV big,
bulky DNA
damage
CSA & B help
perform
nucleotide
excision repair
Restore ability
of
transcription
Does this make sense?
Problem 1: CS ≠ XP
XP is in fact a broader defect
than CS, but the symptoms
don’t overlap
Relatedly, Problem 2: Lack of skin
cancer
Some aren’t sun sensitive at all
Problem 3: Neurologic disease
How does this fit with UV
exposure?
Non-UV damage requiring NER
< UV damage by 3 orders of
magnitude
Problem 4: Time course
Pre/neonatal onset of
symptoms
Problem 5: sensitivity to other DNA
damage, oxidative stress
So, what else?
Secondary mitochondrial
disease
Free radical generation
Mitochondrial DNA repair
Transcription regulation
effects
Evidence:
Known to interact with
RNAPI, RNAPII
Brooks, PJ. DNA Repair. 2014
Hypothesis: Transcription
regulation is a major feature of
mutations in CSB
Goals
1. Demonstrate change in regulation
2. Determine affected tissues
3. Determine relationship between dysregulation and disease
Genes are dysregulated as a
result of CSB mutation
Hypothesis 1.
Cell lines
Fibroblast line from patient with genetically proven
Cockayne syndrome (CS1AN)
Immortalized with Sv40
Rescued cell line
BAC rescue (BAC-CSB)
Conditional tetra/doxy promotor rescue (CSB-TetON)
Experiment 1: Comparison of
expression
1,200 “dysregulated genes”
Statistically significantly
different between
control v. Bac and
control v. tetON
>1.5 fold difference
What is in common?
Noted mostly neuronal
genes
Confirmed by RT-PCR
Why does this happen
Genome wide CHiP-Seq
for
CSB
RNAPII
Looked at genes that are
downregulated in CSB
Loss of CSB binding
Loss of RNAPII binding
Summary, experiment 1
What have we shown?
There is selective dysregulation of multiple genes
Many of the downregulated genes are neuronal
Downregulation happens because mutant CSB does not
bind to the gene target, and RNAPII subsequently doesn’t
bind
What are the problems
(immortalized with Sv40)
Looking at neuronal genes in fibroblasts
Next step: try to reprogram to NPC
Genes that are dysregulated in
fibroblasts are meaningful for
neuronal function
Hypothesis 2
Experiment 2: reprogramming FCL
•
•
•
•
shRNA knockdown of PTBP1 or
Overexpression of miR-9/124
And introduction of three neuronal transcription regulators
Key event: transition from PTB to nPTB
Unable to transduce mutant cells
32 Genes
Selected for neuronal
function
Consistently upregulated in
WT and not in CSB
Summary, experiment 2
Unable to transduce cells with loss of function of CSB into
neurons
Fibroblast to neuronal transduction is not normal
physiology
Patients with CS obviously have neurons
What meaning does this have for CSB-mutant neurons?
Experiment 3: neuroblast
differentiation
SH-SY5Y
CSB knockdown
Attempted differentiation
Pahlman, et al. Cell diff. 1984
Experiment 4: neuronal maintenance
Knocked down CSB in
differentiated SH-SY5Y
• Loss of long neurites
• Cell death
Summary of experiments 2 & 3
Knockdown of CSB affects
Neuroblast differentiation into neurons
Neuronal maintenance of established neurons
Remaining questions
Why does this happen?
Is this laboratory model applicable to patients with CS?
Defects in neuronal
differentiation and maintenance
are due to genetic dysregulation
Hypothesis 3
Transcriptome analysis of neuronal
differentiation
Is there a difference in CSB k.d.?
Overall, no
Selected by K-means
clustering specific
differences in expression
Genes identified
100 genes
Different at every time
point
P<0.01
Did not do multiple
comparison
adjustment
17 in neuronal ontology
Summary experiment 4
Some evidence that neuronal problems are due to
transcriptional dysregulation
These is pretty weak
Their stats are even weaker
Now what?
Mice with CSB K.O. have no neuronal phenotype
So, turn to human brain
Gene dysregulation will be
demonstrable in human brains
from CS patients
Hypothesis 4
Experiment 5:
Tissue
Human cerebellum
Patients with molecularly
confirmed CS
Does not specify gene
Does not specify
mutation type
“matched” controls
Extracted RNA
Hierarchical, nonsupervised
clustering
Selected genes >2-fold
dysregulated
What are the functions of the
dysregulated genes?
Exocytosis machinery
Synaptotagmins
Voltage dependent
calcium channels
Maybe explains
Brain calcifications
Calcium-dependent
myelination
Preservation of cerebellar
signature
Summary 1
In models of CSB mutation there is genetic dysregulation
Resulting from abnormal CSB binding
Abnormal RNAPII recruitment
Genetic dysregulation specifically targets
Neuronal genes
Important for neuronal secretion, synaptic density and
neuronal differentiation
Evidence supports dysregulation as a major cause of
neuronal dysfunction in Cockayne Syndrome
Generalizing the results
Some side experiments
How similar are the models to each
other?
How similar is CSA?
Does reduce overlap, but
does not change enriched
ontology
But what about mice?
Mice are interesting because they don’t have neuronal dysfunction
Genes differentially regulated between mice and humans with CSB mutations
may be interesting targets for understanding the neuronal disease
Conclusions
There is compelling evidence that CSB is important for
transcriptional regulation
Intriguing identification of models of neuronal dysfunction
in CS
Large dataset with some overlap is best used for
hypothesis generation
Further questions
Mechanism of CSB targeting to genes
CSA transcriptional analysis
Effects in additional tissue types
Understanding of specific genetic dysregulation important in
disease