Compensatory induction of MYC expression by sustained CDK9 inhibition via a BRD4-dependent mechanism

  1. Huasong Lu
  2. Yuahua Xue
  3. Guoying K Yu
  4. Carolina Arias
  5. Julie Lin
  6. Susan Fong
  7. Michel Faure
  8. Ben Weisburd
  9. Xiaodan Ji
  10. Alexandre Mercier
  11. James Sutton
  12. Kunxin Luo
  13. Zhenhai Gao
  14. Qiang Zhou  Is a corresponding author
  1. University of California, Berkeley, United States
  2. Xiamen University, China
  3. Novartis Institute for BioMedical Research, United States

Abstract

CDK9 is the kinase subunit of P-TEFb that enables RNA polymerase (Pol) II's transition from promoter-proximal pausing to productive elongation. Although considerable interest exists in CDK9 as a therapeutic target, little progress has been made due to lack of highly selective inhibitors. Here, we describe the development of i-CDK9 as such an inhibitor that potently suppresses CDK9 phosphorylation of substrates and causes genome-wide Pol II pausing. While most genes experience reduced expression, MYC and other primary response genes increase expression upon sustained i-CDK9 treatment. Essential for this increase, the bromodomain protein BRD4 captures P-TEFb from 7SK snRNP to deliver to target genes and also enhances CDK9's activity and resistance to inhibition. Because the i-CDK9-induced MYC expression and binding to P-TEFb compensate for P-TEFb's loss of activity, only simultaneously inhibiting CDK9 and MYC/BRD4 can efficiently induce growth arrest and apoptosis of cancer cells, suggesting the potential of a combinatorial treatment strategy.

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Huasong Lu

    Department of Molecular and Cell Biology, University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Yuahua Xue

    Innovation Center of Cell Signaling Network, School of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Xiamen University, Xiamen, China
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Guoying K Yu

    Novartis Institute for BioMedical Research, Emeryville, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Carolina Arias

    Novartis Institute for BioMedical Research, Emeryville, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Julie Lin

    Novartis Institute for BioMedical Research, Emeryville, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Susan Fong

    Novartis Institute for BioMedical Research, Emeryville, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Michel Faure

    Novartis Institute for BioMedical Research, Emeryville, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Ben Weisburd

    Novartis Institute for BioMedical Research, Emeryville, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  9. Xiaodan Ji

    Department of Molecular and Cell Biology, University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  10. Alexandre Mercier

    Novartis Institute for BioMedical Research, Emeryville, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  11. James Sutton

    Novartis Institute for BioMedical Research, Emeryville, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  12. Kunxin Luo

    Department of Molecular and Cell Biology, University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  13. Zhenhai Gao

    Novartis Institute for BioMedical Research, Emeryville, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  14. Qiang Zhou

    Department of Molecular and Cell Biology, University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley, United States
    For correspondence
    qzhou@berkeley.edu
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

Reviewing Editor

  1. Kevin Struhl, Harvard Medical School, United States

Version history

  1. Received: January 18, 2015
  2. Accepted: June 16, 2015
  3. Accepted Manuscript published: June 17, 2015 (version 1)
  4. Version of Record published: July 3, 2015 (version 2)

Copyright

© 2015, Lu et al.

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License permitting unrestricted use and redistribution provided that the original author and source are credited.

Metrics

  • 5,928
    views
  • 1,591
    downloads
  • 106
    citations

Views, downloads and citations are aggregated across all versions of this paper published by eLife.

Download links

A two-part list of links to download the article, or parts of the article, in various formats.

Downloads (link to download the article as PDF)

Open citations (links to open the citations from this article in various online reference manager services)

Cite this article (links to download the citations from this article in formats compatible with various reference manager tools)

  1. Huasong Lu
  2. Yuahua Xue
  3. Guoying K Yu
  4. Carolina Arias
  5. Julie Lin
  6. Susan Fong
  7. Michel Faure
  8. Ben Weisburd
  9. Xiaodan Ji
  10. Alexandre Mercier
  11. James Sutton
  12. Kunxin Luo
  13. Zhenhai Gao
  14. Qiang Zhou
(2015)
Compensatory induction of MYC expression by sustained CDK9 inhibition via a BRD4-dependent mechanism
eLife 4:e06535.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.06535

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.06535

Further reading

    1. Biochemistry and Chemical Biology
    2. Cell Biology
    Natalia Dolgova, Eva-Maria E Uhlemann ... Oleg Y Dmitriev
    Research Article

    Mediator of ERBB2-driven Cell Motility 1 (MEMO1) is an evolutionary conserved protein implicated in many biological processes; however, its primary molecular function remains unknown. Importantly, MEMO1 is overexpressed in many types of cancer and was shown to modulate breast cancer metastasis through altered cell motility. To better understand the function of MEMO1 in cancer cells, we analyzed genetic interactions of MEMO1 using gene essentiality data from 1028 cancer cell lines and found multiple iron-related genes exhibiting genetic relationships with MEMO1. We experimentally confirmed several interactions between MEMO1 and iron-related proteins in living cells, most notably, transferrin receptor 2 (TFR2), mitoferrin-2 (SLC25A28), and the global iron response regulator IRP1 (ACO1). These interactions indicate that cells with high MEMO1 expression levels are hypersensitive to the disruptions in iron distribution. Our data also indicate that MEMO1 is involved in ferroptosis and is linked to iron supply to mitochondria. We have found that purified MEMO1 binds iron with high affinity under redox conditions mimicking intracellular environment and solved MEMO1 structures in complex with iron and copper. Our work reveals that the iron coordination mode in MEMO1 is very similar to that of iron-containing extradiol dioxygenases, which also display a similar structural fold. We conclude that MEMO1 is an iron-binding protein that modulates iron homeostasis in cancer cells.