Facioscapulohumeral muscular dystrophy (FSHD) is a prevalent myopathy, affecting 12/100,000 people (Deenen et al., 2014). Although clinical severity is highly variable, skeletal muscle weakness often appears first in the facial and shoulder girdle muscles, with muscles of the trunk and lower extremities becoming affected as the disease progresses. Distinctive features of FSHD include asymmetric skeletal muscle wasting and scapular winging (Tawil, 2008). Analysis of myoblasts from FSHD patients has revealed direct functional impairments, including increased susceptibility to oxidative stress (Winokur et al., 2003a, 2003b; Celegato et al., 2006; Macaione et al., 2007; Barro et al., 2010), up-regulation of apoptotic markers (Winokur et al., 2003a, 2003b; Sandri et al., 2001; Vanderplanck et al., 2011; Laoudj-Chenivesse et al., 2005) and repression of MYOD and MYOD-target genes (Winokur et al., 2003b; Celegato et al., 2006). Additionally, myogenic differentiation results in myotubes with either an atrophic, or hypertrophic and highly disorganised morphology (Barro et al., 2010; Vanderplanck et al., 2011; Tassin et al., 2012; Ansseau et al., 2009). Defects in myoblast function are likely to result in impaired muscle maintenance, directly contributing to clinical symptoms (Morgan and Zammit, 2010).

FSHD is divided into two clinically indistinguishable disorders. FSHD1 (1A) (OMIM #158900) is associated with the contraction of a macrosatellite repeat named D4Z4 in the subtelomeric region 4q35 (Tawil, 2008; van Deutekom et al., 1993). Embedded within each 3.3 kb D4Z4 repeat unit is an open reading frame (ORF) for Double homeodomain protein 4 (DUX4), an intron-less retrogene (Dixit et al., 2007; Gabriëls et al., 1999). Contraction of D4Z4 units to between 1–10 is associated with de-repression of chromatin (van Deutekom et al., 1993; Zeng et al., 2009; de Greef et al., 2009). If this occurs on a permissive chromosomal 4qA haplotype containing a polyadenylation site within the flanking pLAM region, DUX4 mRNA transcript from the distal D4Z4 repeat is stabilised and DUX4 protein translated (Dixit et al., 2007; Lemmers et al., 2010; Snider et al., 2010). In the rarer FSHD2 (1B) (OMIM #158901), de-repression of the D4Z4 macrosatellite occurs despite the presence of >11 D4Z4 repeats, but still requires the permissive 4qA haplotype containing the polyadenylation signal (de Greef et al., 2009, 2010). FSHD2 has recently been linked to mutations in the Structural maintenance of chromosomes flexible hinge domain containing 1 (SMCHD1) gene, encoding a protein involved in DNA methylation (Lemmers et al., 2012). Recently, mutations in DNA methyltransferase 3B (DNMT3B) have also been implicated in perturbed epigenetic regulation in FSHD (van den Boogaard et al., 2016). Taken together, the consensus is that aberrant DUX4 expression underlies pathogenesis in both FSHD1 and FSHD2 (Tawil et al., 2014).

Two main DUX4 mRNA transcripts can be derived from the ORF in a D4Z4 repeat: DUX4-fl (full length) mainly expressed in germline cells, and the alternatively spliced DUX4-s (short) transcript expressed in some somatic cells. FSHD skeletal muscle expresses DUX4-fl whereas this transcript is not usually found in healthy control muscle (Snider et al., 2010), although very low levels have been reported in some studies (Jones et al., 2012; Tassin et al., 2013). Expression of DUX4 in myoblasts recapitulates the pathogenic phenotype of myoblasts from FSHD patients (Vanderplanck et al., 2011; Yao et al., 2014; Mitsuhashi et al., 2013; Bosnakovski et al., 2008a; Knopp, 2011; Geng et al., 2012; Bosnakovski et al., 2014; Kowaljow et al., 2007; Wallace et al., 2011; Geng et al., 2011; Banerji et al., 2015). Indeed, suppression of DUX4 expression using siRNA or anti-sense oligonucleotides rescues the atrophic phenotype of FSHD myotubes in vitro (Vanderplanck et al., 2011). DUX4 is a potent transcription factor and analysis of DUX4-expressing myoblasts has revealed that major transcriptional pathways such as cell cycle regulation, glutathione redox metabolism, myogenic differentiation and Wnt signalling are disrupted (Bosnakovski et al., 2008a; Geng et al., 2012; Banerji et al., 2015). In addition, many germline and neural genes are upregulated (Banerji et al., 2015; Dandapat et al., 2013). However, DUX4 is at very low levels in FSHD biopsies (Tassin et al., 2013). Despite this, we, and others, have shown that the transcriptional landscape of genes altered by DUX4 is much more prominent in FSHD patient-derived material (Yao et al., 2014; Banerji et al., 2015). Therefore, identification of DUX4-induced pathways that contribute to pathology in FSHD and are targetable with drugs provides a useful route for potential FSHD-specific therapies. We have focussed on the effects of DUX4 on myoblasts, to identify approaches to improve muscle repair and regeneration.

At present, there is no single mammalian animal model that encompasses the genetic and pathophysiological spectrum of FSHD (Lek et al., 2015). To model FSHD, we have used retroviral-mediated expression of DUX4, in conjunction with constitutively active and dominant-negative versions, in primary murine satellite cells cultured ex vivo. Comparing gene expression data from DUX4-expressing murine satellite cell-derived myoblasts to a meta-analysis of published microarrays from FSHD patient biopsies and primary cultures (Banerji et al., 2015), we revealed a significant overlap between DUX4-expressing murine satellite cell-derived myoblasts and human FSHD muscle (Knopp et al., 2016).

We found that the receptor tyrosine kinase (RTK) Rearranged during transfection (RET) is up-regulated in DUX4-expressing myoblasts (Banerji et al., 2015; Dandapat et al., 2013). RET is a transmembrane RTK containing 4 cadherin-like repeats, a cysteine-rich area, a calcium-binding site on the extracellular region and several intracellular tyrosine kinase domains (Santoro et al., 2004; Airaksinen and Saarma, 2002). There are two main RET isoforms; RET9 and RET51, alternatively spliced in the 3’ region, resulting in an additional tyrosine at Y1096 on RET51 (Jain et al., 2006). These two main RET isoforms are differentially expressed, regulated and have diverse roles in development and tissue homeostasis (Yoong et al., 2005; Tsui-Pierchala et al., 2002; Richardson et al., 2012; Jain et al., 2010).

RET is activated by the secreted Glial cell-derived neurotrophic factor (GDNF) family ligands (GFL): GDNF, neurturin (NRTN), artemin (ARTN) and persephin (PSPN). GFLs bind with high affinity to one of four glycosylphosphatidylinositol (GPI)-anchored co-receptors of the GDNF Family Receptor (GFRα) family. GFL:GFRα complexes then recruit two RET molecules, triggering RET dimerisation and trans-phosphorylation of the intracellular region of both molecules. This leads to recruitment of adaptor proteins and activation of downstream signalling cascades such as MAPK, PI3/AKT, JAK/STAT, JNK, ERK5, SRC and PLCγ (Santoro et al., 2004; Airaksinen and Saarma, 2002; Runeberg-Roos and Saarma, 2007; Mulligan, 2014). RET9 and RET51 activate PI3K/AKT and ERK signalling with different dynamics and have distinct abilities to recruit Src or Frs2, suggesting differential activation of downstream targets by the two main RET isoforms (Tsui-Pierchala et al., 2002; Ishiguro et al., 1999; Besset et al., 2000).

Coordinated RET signalling is crucial for development of multiple tissues, including many neuronal cell types, kidneys and the thyroid gland (Runeberg-Roos and Saarma, 2007; Arighi et al., 2005). Indeed, RET knockout mice can be embryonic lethal with a wide range of organ defects (Jain et al., 2010; Schuchardt et al., 1994; de Graaff et al., 2001). RET signalling has also been shown to regulate spermatogonial and haematopoietic stem cell function (Naughton et al., 2006; Fonseca-Pereira et al., 2014). Dysregulated RET signalling is associated with disease: inactivating mutations of RET lead to a form of neurocristopathy called Hirschsprung’s disease (Amiel et al., 2008), whereas mutations of RET resulting in constitutively active isoforms are associated with several forms of inherited and somatic cancers (Arighi et al., 2005; Borrello et al., 2013). For example, mutations at codon 634 of RET are found in approximately 84% of multiple endocrine neoplasia (MEN2A) patients (Santoro et al., 2004; de Graaff et al., 2001; Mulligan et al., 1993).

Studies detailing expression of Ret, the GFL’s and GFRα’s in developing or adult rat, mouse and human skeletal muscle report expression of at least some RET signalling components, predominantly during development e.g. (Worby et al., 1998; Naveilhan et al., 1998; Russell et al., 2000; Lindahl et al., 2001; Yang et al., 2006; Mikaels et al., 2000; Golden et al., 1999; Yang and Nelson, 2004). Interestingly, Ret and Gdnf mRNA transcripts have been shown in mesenchymal cells of the second branchial arch in E9-9.5 mouse embryos (Golden et al., 1999; Natarajan et al., 2002), from which some facial muscles develop. We recently reported that ret is important for skeletal muscle development in zebrafish, where ret-gfrα3-artemin signalling is required to regulate myogenic differentiation in a subset of muscle precursors deriving from the first and second brachial arches (Knight et al., 2011).

Here we show that Ret is a novel mediator of satellite cell function, contributing to the regulation of proliferation and initiation of myogenic differentiation. Critically, DUX4-mediated Ret signalling is pathogenic to satellite cells, contributing to impaired differentiation. However, blocking DUX4-mediated Ret signalling using siRNA or the RTK inhibitor Sunitinib, leads to an increase in the myogenic capacity of DUX4-expressing murine satellite cells. Importantly, Sunitinib also improves proliferation and differentiation in FSHD patient-derived myoblasts both in vitro, and in vivo after grafting into regenerating muscle in mice. These observations highlight using RTK inhibitors as a potential therapeutic strategy for FSHD.

We report that Ret is a novel mediator of muscle stem cell function, is regulated by DUX4 and contributes to the pathogenic phenotype of FSHD. We focused on Ret signalling as a potential mediator of DUX4-induced muscle pathology for several reasons. FSHD is characterised by the often asymmetric wasting of facial, shoulder and upper arm muscles (Tawil, 2008), and can be associated with several non-muscle tissue pathologies including sensorineural hearing loss and retinal vasculopathies (Verhagen et al., 1995). Development of the auditory system, retinal patterning and facial muscles have been shown to depend on Ret signalling in a number of species. Ret is expressed in the second pharyngeal arch, from which some facial muscles arise, both in mouse and zebrafish (Knight et al., 2011; Pachnis et al., 1993). Additionally, Ret, GFRα1 and GFRα2 are expressed in the retina and the sensory epithelium of the cochlea, both of which can be affected in FSHD (Golden et al., 1999; Zordan et al., 2006; Yu et al., 1998). Phenotypic analysis of Ret, GFRa (Enomoto et al., 1998; Tomac et al., 2000; Rossi et al., 1999; Honma et al., 2002; Lindahl et al., 2000) and GFL (Honma et al., 2002; Moore et al., 1996; Heuckeroth et al., 1999; Tomac et al., 2002)-mutant mice have not reported a skeletal muscle phenotype, although this may have been overlooked due to the severe phenotype and perinatal lethality of some mutant lines. However, Ret is expressed in the indirect flight muscles of Drosophila, and overexpression of constitutively active Ret (RET^MEN2B) in muscle via a MEF2-GAL4 driver causes increased muscle fibre size, irregular myofibrils and abnormal actin deposits (Klein et al., 2014). Interestingly, irregular myotube morphology is often reported in FSHD patient-derived cultures (Barro et al., 2010; Tassin et al., 2012). As we found that Ret was activated by DUX4 in murine satellite cells, it becomes a potential candidate for contributing to DUX4-induced myopathy.

There has been no description of Ret function during myogenesis in mammals, despite the descriptions of Ret pathway genes expressed in specific muscle cell populations, including facial muscle precursors (Golden et al., 1999; Natarajan et al., 2002; Knight et al., 2011). We found that Ret and three of its co-receptors: Gfrα1, Gfrα2 and Gfrα4 are dynamically expressed in mammalian limb satellite cells. Intriguingly, Ret expression was higher during proliferation, whereas Gfrα1, Gfrα2 and Gfrα4 expression increased upon differentiation. This reciprocal expression pattern between Ret and its co-receptors also occurs in other cell types (Li et al., 2009) and so may regulate Ret signalling by feedback loops. Additionally, the ligands GDNF and PSPN, required to activate Gfrα1 and Gfrα4 (and to a lesser extent Gfrα2), are expressed by muscle fibres (Golden et al., 1999; Yang and Nelson, 2004; Lindahl et al., 2000), suggesting that myofibres may signal to satellite cells via Ret signalling. We also found that RET is expressed at low levels in primary human myoblasts, revealing a conserved expression in vertebrate muscle. Constitutive-expression and knockdown studies revealed that Ret signalling is required to maintain a proliferating myoblast population and prevent premature cell cycle exit and myogenic differentiation. Specifically, constitutively active RET increased satellite cell proliferation but did not affect terminal differentiation. Consistent with this, siRNA-mediated knockdown of Ret reduced Pax7 expression, concomitant with reduced satellite cell proliferation, whilst increasing differentiation. Knockdown of Gfrα1, Gfrα2 or Gfrα4 causes similar, if less severe, defects suggesting that Ret is interacting with its Gfrα co-receptors to control the switch from proliferation to differentiation in myoblasts.

Having shown that Ret is involved in the control of myogenesis, we aimed to understand its role in mediating DUX4 pathology. DUX4 is pathogenic in both myoblasts and differentiated muscle (Vanderplanck et al., 2011; Bosnakovski et al., 2008a, 2014; Kowaljow et al., 2007; Wallace et al., 2011; Dandapat et al., 2014). Recent microarray and ChIP-seq datasets reveal that DUX4 causes wide-ranging transcriptional disruption in myogenic cells (Geng et al., 2012; Banerji et al., 2015; Rahimov et al., 2012; Knopp et al., 2016) , with its potent transcriptional activation through its C-terminal domain (Geng et al., 2012; Clapp et al., 2007; Kawamura-Saito et al., 2006). However, identifying which disrupted pathways directly contribute to DUX4-specific pathology is crucial when considering future drug design to treat FSHD.

Ret is genetically downstream of DUX4 in myoblasts, but does not appear to be a direct transcriptional target. Transgenic analysis has shown that in mouse, 1.9 kb 5’ of the Transcriptional Start Site (TSS) of Ret is sufficient to drive tissue specific expression (Zordan et al., 2006). However, analysing two published ChIP-Seq datasets of DUX4 overexpression in human myoblasts (Geng et al., 2012; Choi et al., 2016), we failed to identify significant peaks within 15 kb 5’ of the Ret TSS. In addition, sequence analysis also failed to find a DUX4 consensus binding site (TAATCTAATCA – [Zhang et al., 2016]) within this same 15 kb region. It is of note however, that the C-terminus of DUX4 can recruit acetyltransferases (p300/CBP) to histones to induce acetylation, hence promoting transcription at sites distant to DUX4 DNA binding (Choi et al., 2016), so DUX4 could still directly controlling Ret in an epigenetic manner. However, also arguing against Ret being a direct transcriptional target of DUX4 is our observation that Ret expression is not only enhanced by DUX4 and the constitutively active tMALDUX4-VP16, but also by our DUX4 dominant-negative tMALDUX4-ERD construct in the microarray analysis. The tMALDUX4-ERD construct contains the two DNA binding homeodomains of DUX4, so should select the same cohort of transcriptional targets as DUX4. However, if DUX4 binds directly to the Ret promoter, tMALDUX4-ERD should suppress transcription and so reduce Ret expression, but this is the opposite to what we observe. Together, these observations indicate that DUX4 affects Ret expression indirectly, via binding to genes that, in turn, control Ret expression.

Blocking Ret expression or signalling increases the probability of DUX4-expressing myoblasts to differentiate into multinucleate myotubes. Despite this, some aspects of DUX4-mediated pathologies were not rescued by Ret inhibition. For example, inhibition of Ret using Sunitinib did not alter DUX4-induced apoptosis. DUX4 transcriptionally dysregulates a large number of pathways, so it is unlikely that one pathway only is responsible for all pathological characteristics (Banerji et al., 2015). For example, we have recently shown that β-catenin signalling is important for DUX4-mediated transcriptional dysregulation in skeletal muscle (Banerji et al., 2015).

To investigate the relative importance of Ret in mediating DUX4 action, we adopted a pharmacological approach that allowed us to modify Ret signalling in a dose-dependent manner. As the readout, we used the suppression of differentiation caused by constitutive CA RET51 (RET51-MENA) expression in murine C2C12 myoblasts and asked at which doses we could inhibit Ret to rescue differentiation, without causing deleterious side-effects. Comparison of Ret inhibitors Zactima (Vandetanib/ZD6474) (Carlomagno et al., 2002), TG101209 (Pardanani et al., 2007) and Sunitinib (Sutent, SU11248) (Kim et al., 2006) revealed that Suntinib showed the most robust rescue of CA RET51-mediated inhibition of myogenesis. We further tested the ability of Sunitinib to rescue DUX4-mediated phenotypes in murine satellite cells and showed that we could again rescue differentiation, but not proliferation: consistent with the effects of siRNA-mediated knockdown of Ret. Zactima, TG101209 and Sunitinib also inhibit other receptor tyrosine kinases, including VEGFR, EGF and MET (Plaza-Menacho et al., 2014). Of note, Vegfr2 is also a DUX4 target identified in our microarray screen (Banerji et al., 2015), highlighting another potential mediator of DUX4 pathology in myoblasts. Since many of these receptors activate the same intracellular pathways as Ret, it will be important to understand their relative roles and redundancies, when activated in the context of FSHD.

Since DUX4 up-regulates Ret, and Sunitinib can clearly rescue the differentiation block caused by CA-RET51 in C2C12 myoblasts, we investigated intracellular signalling events. ERK and AKT are two key intracellular mediators of Ret signalling e.g. (Mograbi et al., 2001). ERK1/2 phosphorylation was inhibited by Sunitinib in DUX4-expressing iC2C12-DUX4 myoblasts, but not in control myoblasts not expressing DUX4, suggesting a potential mechanism by which DUX4-mediated Ret signalling could inhibit differentiation. In contrast, AKT phosphorylation was unaltered by inducing DUX4. Although Ret can operate through ERK1/2 signalling, it is possible that Sunitinib could also be acting on ERK1/2 phosphorylation activated by other pathways perturbed by, or in response to, DUX4.

To assess whether Sunitinib could be used to ameliorate FSHD pathologies in man, we used human myoblast lines isolated from a mosaic FSHD1 patient (Krom et al., 2012). We assessed whether Sunitinib could rescue cell morphology, proliferation and the differentiation capacity of human myoblasts displaying FSHD pathologies. Using statistical models we showed that Sunitinib could induce the FSHD myoblasts to adopt the phenotype of isogenic myoblasts lacking the D4Z4 contraction. Transplantation assays of FSHD myoblasts into cryodamaged immunodeficient mice showed increased engraftment of FSHD myoblasts occurred in response to daily systemic Sunitinib treatment. Therefore, this pre-clinical model for evaluating modifiers of FSHD pathology identifies Sunitinib as a potential therapeutic agent for FSHD.

In conclusion, we have shown that Ret is a novel regulator of satellite cell function in mammalian muscle, and contributes to the FSHD phenotype. Specifically, blocking DUX4-mediated Ret signalling increases myogenic differentiation, giving further insight into the molecular pathology of DUX4 and highlighting Ret signalling as potential drug target. Crucially, the clinically-approved RET inhibitor Sunitinib (Widmer et al., 2014) rescues cell morphology, proliferation and myogenic differentiation in human FSHD myoblasts both in vitro and in vivo. Given that FSHD is currently incurable, our findings highlight RTK inhibitors as a potential novel therapeutic strategy to treat muscle wasting in FSHD.

1. 1. Agley CC
   2. Rowlerson AM
   3. Velloso CP
   4. Lazarus NL
   5. Harridge SD

   (2015) Isolation and quantitative immunocytochemical characterization of primary myogenic cells and fibroblasts from human skeletal muscle

   Journal of Visualized Experiments 95:52049.

   https://doi.org/10.3791/52049

   • PubMed
   • Google Scholar
2. 1. Airaksinen MS
   2. Saarma M

   (2002) The GDNF family: signalling, biological functions and therapeutic value

   Nature Reviews Neuroscience 3:383–394.

   https://doi.org/10.1038/nrn812

   • PubMed
   • Google Scholar
3. 1. Amiel J
   2. Sproat-Emison E
   3. Garcia-Barcelo M
   4. Lantieri F
   5. Burzynski G
   6. Borrego S
   7. Pelet A
   8. Arnold S
   9. Miao X
   10. Griseri P
   11. Brooks AS
   12. Antinolo G
   13. de Pontual L
   14. Clement-Ziza M
   15. Munnich A
   16. Kashuk C
   17. West K
   18. Wong KK
   19. Lyonnet S
   20. Chakravarti A
   21. Tam PK
   22. Ceccherini I
   23. Hofstra RM
   24. Fernandez R
   25. Hirschsprung Disease Consortium

   (2008) Hirschsprung disease, associated syndromes and genetics: a review

   Journal of Medical Genetics 45:1–14.

   https://doi.org/10.1136/jmg.2007.053959

   • PubMed
   • Google Scholar
4. 1. Ansseau E
   2. Laoudj-Chenivesse D
   3. Marcowycz A
   4. Tassin A
   5. Vanderplanck C
   6. Sauvage S
   7. Barro M
   8. Mahieu I
   9. Leroy A
   10. Leclercq I
   11. Mainfroid V
   12. Figlewicz D
   13. Mouly V
   14. Butler-Browne G
   15. Belayew A
   16. Coppée F

   (2009) DUX4c is up-regulated in FSHD. It induces the MYF5 protein and human myoblast proliferation

   PLoS One 4:e7482.

   https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0007482

   • PubMed
   • Google Scholar
5. 1. Arighi E
   2. Borrello MG
   3. Sariola H

   (2005) RET tyrosine kinase signaling in development and cancer

   Cytokine & Growth Factor Reviews 16:441–467.

   https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cytogfr.2005.05.010

   • PubMed
   • Google Scholar
6. 1. Banerji CR
   2. Knopp P
   3. Moyle LA
   4. Severini S
   5. Orrell RW
   6. Teschendorff AE
   7. Zammit PS

   (2015) β-Catenin is central to DUX4-driven network rewiring in facioscapulohumeral muscular dystrophy

   Journal of the Royal Society, Interface 12:20140797.

   https://doi.org/10.1098/rsif.2014.0797

   • PubMed
   • Google Scholar
7. 1. Barro M
   2. Carnac G
   3. Flavier S
   4. Mercier J
   5. Vassetzky Y
   6. Laoudj-Chenivesse D

   (2010) Myoblasts from affected and non-affected FSHD muscles exhibit morphological differentiation defects

   Journal of Cellular and Molecular Medicine 14:275–289.

   https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1582-4934.2008.00368.x

   • PubMed
   • Google Scholar
8. 1. Besset V
   2. Scott RP
   3. Ibáñez CF

   (2000) Signaling complexes and protein-protein interactions involved in the activation of the Ras and phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase pathways by the c-Ret receptor tyrosine kinase

   Journal of Biological Chemistry 275:39159–39166.

   https://doi.org/10.1074/jbc.M006908200

   • PubMed
   • Google Scholar
9. 1. Borrello MG
   2. Ardini E
   3. Locati LD
   4. Greco A
   5. Licitra L
   6. Pierotti MA

   (2013) RET inhibition: implications in cancer therapy

   Expert Opinion on Therapeutic Targets 17:403–419.

   https://doi.org/10.1517/14728222.2013.758715

   • PubMed
   • Google Scholar
10. 1. Bosnakovski D
    2. Choi SH
    3. Strasser JM
    4. Toso EA
    5. Walters MA
    6. Kyba M

    (2014) High-throughput screening identifies inhibitors of DUX4-induced myoblast toxicity

    Skeletal Muscle 4:4.

    https://doi.org/10.1186/2044-5040-4-4

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
11. 1. Bosnakovski D
    2. Xu Z
    3. Gang EJ
    4. Galindo CL
    5. Liu M
    6. Simsek T
    7. Garner HR
    8. Agha-Mohammadi S
    9. Tassin A
    10. Coppée F
    11. Belayew A
    12. Perlingeiro RR
    13. Kyba M

    (2008a) An isogenetic myoblast expression screen identifies DUX4-mediated FSHD-associated molecular pathologies

    The EMBO Journal 27:2766–2779.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/emboj.2008.201

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
12. 1. Bosnakovski D
    2. Lamb S
    3. Simsek T
    4. Xu Z
    5. Belayew A
    6. Perlingeiro R
    7. Kyba M

    (2008b) DUX4c, an FSHD candidate gene, interferes with myogenic regulators and abolishes myoblast differentiation

    Experimental Neurology 214:87–96.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.expneurol.2008.07.022

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
13. 1. Carlomagno F
    2. Vitagliano D
    3. Guida T
    4. Ciardiello F
    5. Tortora G
    6. Vecchio G
    7. Ryan AJ
    8. Fontanini G
    9. Fusco A
    10. Santoro M

    (2002)

    ZD6474, an orally available inhibitor of KDR tyrosine kinase activity, efficiently blocks oncogenic RET kinases

    Cancer Research 62:7284–7290.

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
14. 1. Celegato B
    2. Capitanio D
    3. Pescatori M
    4. Romualdi C
    5. Pacchioni B
    6. Cagnin S
    7. Viganò A
    8. Colantoni L
    9. Begum S
    10. Ricci E
    11. Wait R
    12. Lanfranchi G
    13. Gelfi C

    (2006) Parallel protein and transcript profiles of FSHD patient muscles correlate to the D4Z4 arrangement and reveal a common impairment of slow to fast fibre differentiation and a general deregulation of MyoD-dependent genes

    Proteomics 6:5303–5321.

    https://doi.org/10.1002/pmic.200600056

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
15. 1. Choi SH
    2. Gearhart MD
    3. Cui Z
    4. Bosnakovski D
    5. Kim M
    6. Schennum N
    7. Kyba M

    (2016) DUX4 recruits p300/CBP through its C-terminus and induces global H3K27 acetylation changes

    Nucleic Acids Research 44:5161–5173.

    https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gkw141

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
16. 1. Clapp J
    2. Mitchell LM
    3. Bolland DJ
    4. Fantes J
    5. Corcoran AE
    6. Scotting PJ
    7. Armour JA
    8. Hewitt JE

    (2007) Evolutionary conservation of a coding function for D4Z4, the tandem DNA repeat mutated in facioscapulohumeral muscular dystrophy

    American Journal of Human Genetics 81:264–279.

    https://doi.org/10.1086/519311

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
17. 1. Collins CA
    2. Gnocchi VF
    3. White RB
    4. Boldrin L
    5. Perez-Ruiz A
    6. Relaix F
    7. Morgan JE
    8. Zammit PS

    (2009) Integrated functions of Pax3 and Pax7 in the regulation of proliferation, cell size and myogenic differentiation

    PLoS One 4:e4475.

    https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0004475

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
18. 1. Dandapat A
    2. Bosnakovski D
    3. Hartweck LM
    4. Arpke RW
    5. Baltgalvis KA
    6. Vang D
    7. Baik J
    8. Darabi R
    9. Perlingeiro RC
    10. Hamra FK
    11. Gupta K
    12. Lowe DA
    13. Kyba M

    (2014) Dominant lethal pathologies in male mice engineered to contain an X-linked DUX4 transgene

    Cell Reports 8:1484–1496.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.celrep.2014.07.056

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
19. 1. Dandapat A
    2. Hartweck LM
    3. Bosnakovski D
    4. Kyba M

    (2013) Expression of the human FSHD-linked DUX4 gene induces neurogenesis during differentiation of murine embryonic stem cells

    Stem Cells and Development 22:2440–2448.

    https://doi.org/10.1089/scd.2012.0643

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
20. 1. de Graaff E
    2. Srinivas S
    3. Kilkenny C
    4. D'Agati V
    5. Mankoo BS
    6. Costantini F
    7. Pachnis V

    (2001) Differential activities of the RET tyrosine kinase receptor isoforms during mammalian embryogenesis

    Genes & Development 15:2433–2444.

    https://doi.org/10.1101/gad.205001

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
21. 1. de Greef JC
    2. Lemmers RJ
    3. Camaño P
    4. Day JW
    5. Sacconi S
    6. Dunand M
    7. van Engelen BG
    8. Kiuru-Enari S
    9. Padberg GW
    10. Rosa AL
    11. Desnuelle C
    12. Spuler S
    13. Tarnopolsky M
    14. Venance SL
    15. Frants RR
    16. van der Maarel SM
    17. Tawil R

    (2010) Clinical features of facioscapulohumeral muscular dystrophy 2

    Neurology 75:1548–1554.

    https://doi.org/10.1212/WNL.0b013e3181f96175

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
22. 1. de Greef JC
    2. Lemmers RJ
    3. van Engelen BG
    4. Sacconi S
    5. Venance SL
    6. Frants RR
    7. Tawil R
    8. van der Maarel SM

    (2009) Common epigenetic changes of D4Z4 in contraction-dependent and contraction-independent FSHD

    Human Mutation 30:1449–1459.

    https://doi.org/10.1002/humu.21091

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
23. 1. Deenen JC
    2. Arnts H
    3. van der Maarel SM
    4. Padberg GW
    5. Verschuuren JJ
    6. Bakker E
    7. Weinreich SS
    8. Verbeek AL
    9. van Engelen BG

    (2014) Population-based incidence and prevalence of facioscapulohumeral dystrophy

    Neurology 83:1056–1059.

    https://doi.org/10.1212/WNL.0000000000000797

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
24. 1. Dixit M
    2. Ansseau E
    3. Tassin A
    4. Winokur S
    5. Shi R
    6. Qian H
    7. Sauvage S
    8. Mattéotti C
    9. van Acker AM
    10. Leo O
    11. Figlewicz D
    12. Barro M
    13. Laoudj-Chenivesse D
    14. Belayew A
    15. Coppée F
    16. Chen YW

    (2007) DUX4, a candidate gene of facioscapulohumeral muscular dystrophy, encodes a transcriptional activator of PITX1

    PNAS 104:18157–18162.

    https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0708659104

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
25. 1. Durante C
    2. Paciaroni A
    3. Plasmati K
    4. Trulli F
    5. Filetti S

    (2013) Vandetanib: opening a new treatment practice in advanced medullary thyroid carcinoma

    Endocrine 44:334–342.

    https://doi.org/10.1007/s12020-013-9943-9

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
26. 1. Enomoto H
    2. Araki T
    3. Jackman A
    4. Heuckeroth RO
    5. Snider WD
    6. Johnson EM
    7. Milbrandt J

    (1998) GFR alpha1-deficient mice have deficits in the enteric nervous system and kidneys

    Neuron 21:317–324.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/s0896-6273(00)80541-3

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
27. 1. Fonseca-Pereira D
    2. Arroz-Madeira S
    3. Rodrigues-Campos M
    4. Barbosa IA
    5. Domingues RG
    6. Bento T
    7. Almeida AR
    8. Ribeiro H
    9. Potocnik AJ
    10. Enomoto H
    11. Veiga-Fernandes H

    (2014) The neurotrophic factor receptor RET drives haematopoietic stem cell survival and function

    Nature 514:98–101.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/nature13498

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
28. 1. Gabriëls J
    2. Beckers MC
    3. Ding H
    4. De Vriese A
    5. Plaisance S
    6. van der Maarel SM
    7. Padberg GW
    8. Frants RR
    9. Hewitt JE
    10. Collen D
    11. Belayew A

    (1999) Nucleotide sequence of the partially deleted D4Z4 locus in a patient with FSHD identifies a putative gene within each 3.3 kb element

    Gene 236:25–32.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-1119(99)00267-X

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
29. 1. Geng LN
    2. Tyler AE
    3. Tapscott SJ

    (2011) Immunodetection of human double homeobox 4

    Hybridoma 30:125–130.

    https://doi.org/10.1089/hyb.2010.0094

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
30. 1. Geng LN
    2. Yao Z
    3. Snider L
    4. Fong AP
    5. Cech JN
    6. Young JM
    7. van der Maarel SM
    8. Ruzzo WL
    9. Gentleman RC
    10. Tawil R
    11. Tapscott SJ

    (2012) DUX4 activates germline genes, retroelements, and immune mediators: implications for facioscapulohumeral dystrophy

    Developmental Cell 22:38–51.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.devcel.2011.11.013

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
31. 1. Gerli MF
    2. Maffioletti SM
    3. Millet Q
    4. Tedesco FS

    (2014) Transplantation of induced pluripotent stem cell-derived mesoangioblast-like myogenic progenitors in mouse models of muscle regeneration

    Journal of Visualized Experiments 83:e50532.

    https://doi.org/10.3791/50532

    • Google Scholar
32. 1. Golden JP
    2. DeMaro JA
    3. Osborne PA
    4. Milbrandt J
    5. Johnson EM

    (1999) Expression of neurturin, GDNF, and GDNF family-receptor mRNA in the developing and mature mouse

    Experimental Neurology 158:504–528.

    https://doi.org/10.1006/exnr.1999.7127

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
33. 1. Graf D
    2. Bode JG
    3. Häussinger D

    (2007) Caspases and receptor cleavage

    Archives of Biochemistry and Biophysics 462:162–170.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.abb.2007.03.029

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
34. 1. Hendzel MJ
    2. Wei Y
    3. Mancini MA
    4. Van Hooser A
    5. Ranalli T
    6. Brinkley BR
    7. Bazett-Jones DP
    8. Allis CD

    (1997) Mitosis-specific phosphorylation of histone H3 initiates primarily within pericentromeric heterochromatin during G2 and spreads in an ordered fashion coincident with mitotic chromosome condensation

    Chromosoma 106:348–360.

    https://doi.org/10.1007/s004120050256

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
35. 1. Heuckeroth RO
    2. Enomoto H
    3. Grider JR
    4. Golden JP
    5. Hanke JA
    6. Jackman A
    7. Molliver DC
    8. Bardgett ME
    9. Snider WD
    10. Johnson EM
    11. Milbrandt J

    (1999) Gene targeting reveals a critical role for neurturin in the development and maintenance of enteric, sensory, and parasympathetic neurons

    Neuron 22:253–263.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0896-6273(00)81087-9

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
36. 1. Honma Y
    2. Araki T
    3. Gianino S
    4. Bruce A
    5. Heuckeroth R
    6. Johnson E
    7. Milbrandt J

    (2002) Artemin is a vascular-derived neurotropic factor for developing sympathetic neurons

    Neuron 35:267–282.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0896-6273(02)00774-2

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
37. 1. Ishiguro Y
    2. Iwashita T
    3. Murakami H
    4. Asai N
    5. Iida K
    6. Goto H
    7. Hayakawa T
    8. Takahashi M

    (1999) The role of amino acids surrounding tyrosine 1062 in ret in specific binding of the shc phosphotyrosine-binding domain

    Endocrinology 140:3992–3998.

    https://doi.org/10.1210/endo.140.9.7003

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
38. 1. Jain S
    2. Encinas M
    3. Johnson EM
    4. Milbrandt J

    (2006) Critical and distinct roles for key RET tyrosine docking sites in renal development

    Genes & Development 20:321–333.

    https://doi.org/10.1101/gad.1387206

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
39. 1. Jain S
    2. Knoten A
    3. Hoshi M
    4. Wang H
    5. Vohra B
    6. Heuckeroth RO
    7. Milbrandt J

    (2010) Organotypic specificity of key RET adaptor-docking sites in the pathogenesis of neurocristopathies and renal malformations in mice

    Journal of Clinical Investigation 120:778–790.

    https://doi.org/10.1172/JCI41619

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
40. 1. Jones TI
    2. Chen JC
    3. Rahimov F
    4. Homma S
    5. Arashiro P
    6. Beermann ML
    7. King OD
    8. Miller JB
    9. Kunkel LM
    10. Emerson CP
    11. Wagner KR
    12. Jones PL

    (2012) Facioscapulohumeral muscular dystrophy family studies of DUX4 expression: evidence for disease modifiers and a quantitative model of pathogenesis

    Human Molecular Genetics 21:4419–4430.

    https://doi.org/10.1093/hmg/dds284

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
41. 1. Kawamura-Saito M
    2. Yamazaki Y
    3. Kaneko K
    4. Kawaguchi N
    5. Kanda H
    6. Mukai H
    7. Gotoh T
    8. Motoi T
    9. Fukayama M
    10. Aburatani H
    11. Takizawa T
    12. Nakamura T

    (2006) Fusion between CIC and DUX4 up-regulates PEA3 family genes in Ewing-like sarcomas with t(4;19)(q35;q13) translocation

    Human Molecular Genetics 15:2125–2137.

    https://doi.org/10.1093/hmg/ddl136

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
42. 1. Kim DW
    2. Jo YS
    3. Jung HS
    4. Chung HK
    5. Song JH
    6. Park KC
    7. Park SH
    8. Hwang JH
    9. Rha SY
    10. Kweon GR
    11. Lee SJ
    12. Jo KW
    13. Shong M

    (2006) An orally administered multitarget tyrosine kinase inhibitor, SU11248, is a novel potent inhibitor of thyroid oncogenic RET/papillary thyroid cancer kinases

    Journal of Clinical Endocrinology and Metabolism 91:4070–4076.

    https://doi.org/10.1210/jc.2005-2845

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
43. 1. Klein P
    2. Müller-Rischart AK
    3. Motori E
    4. Schönbauer C
    5. Schnorrer F
    6. Winklhofer KF
    7. Klein R

    (2014) Ret rescues mitochondrial morphology and muscle degeneration of Drosophila Pink1 mutants

    The EMBO Journal 33:341–355.

    https://doi.org/10.1002/embj.201284290

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
44. 1. Knight RD
    2. Mebus K
    3. d'Angelo A
    4. Yokoya K
    5. Heanue T
    6. Roehl H
    7. Tübingen 2000 Screen Consortium

    (2011) Ret signalling integrates a craniofacial muscle module during development

    Development 138:2015–2024.

    https://doi.org/10.1242/dev.061002

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
45. 1. Knopp P
    2. Figeac N
    3. Fortier M
    4. Moyle L
    5. Zammit PS

    (2013) Pitx genes are redeployed in adult myogenesis where they can act to promote myogenic differentiation in muscle satellite cells

    Developmental Biology 377:293–304.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ydbio.2013.02.011

    • Google Scholar
46. 1. Knopp P
    2. Krom YD
    3. Banerji CRS
    4. Panamarova M
    5. Moyle LA
    6. den Hamer B
    7. van der Maarel SM
    8. Zammit PS

    (2016) DUX4 primarily acts as a transcriptional activator, inhibiting myogenesis by inducing a less differentiated transcriptome

    Journal of Cell Science 129:3816–3831.

    https://doi.org/10.1242/jcs.180372

    • Google Scholar
47. Book

    1. Knopp P

    (2011)

    Deciphering the Transcriptional Networks of DUX4: A Candidate Gene for Facioscapulohumeral Muscular Dystrophy

    King's College London.

    • Google Scholar
48. 1. Kowaljow V
    2. Marcowycz A
    3. Ansseau E
    4. Conde CB
    5. Sauvage S
    6. Mattéotti C
    7. Arias C
    8. Corona ED
    9. Nuñez NG
    10. Leo O
    11. Wattiez R
    12. Figlewicz D
    13. Laoudj-Chenivesse D
    14. Belayew A
    15. Coppée F
    16. Rosa AL

    (2007) The DUX4 gene at the FSHD1A locus encodes a pro-apoptotic protein

    Neuromuscular Disorders 17:611–623.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nmd.2007.04.002

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
49. 1. Krom YD
    2. Dumonceaux J
    3. Mamchaoui K
    4. den Hamer B
    5. Mariot V
    6. Negroni E
    7. Geng LN
    8. Martin N
    9. Tawil R
    10. Tapscott SJ
    11. van Engelen BG
    12. Mouly V
    13. Butler-Browne GS
    14. van der Maarel SM

    (2012) Generation of isogenic D4Z4 contracted and noncontracted immortal muscle cell clones from a mosaic patient: a cellular model for FSHD

    The American Journal of Pathology 181:1387–1401.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajpath.2012.07.007

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
50. 1. Laoudj-Chenivesse D
    2. Carnac G
    3. Bisbal C
    4. Hugon G
    5. Bouillot S
    6. Desnuelle C
    7. Vassetzky Y
    8. Fernandez A

    (2005) Increased levels of adenine nucleotide translocator 1 protein and response to oxidative stress are early events in facioscapulohumeral muscular dystrophy muscle

    Journal of Molecular Medicine 83:216–224.

    https://doi.org/10.1007/s00109-004-0583-7

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
51. 1. Lek A
    2. Rahimov F
    3. Jones PL
    4. Kunkel LM

    (2015) Emerging preclinical animal models for FSHD

    Trends in Molecular Medicine 21:295–306.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.molmed.2015.02.011

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
52. 1. Lemmers RJ
    2. Tawil R
    3. Petek LM
    4. Balog J
    5. Block GJ
    6. Santen GW
    7. Amell AM
    8. van der Vliet PJ
    9. Almomani R
    10. Straasheijm KR
    11. Krom YD
    12. Klooster R
    13. Sun Y
    14. den Dunnen JT
    15. Helmer Q
    16. Donlin-Smith CM
    17. Padberg GW
    18. van Engelen BG
    19. de Greef JC
    20. Aartsma-Rus AM
    21. Frants RR
    22. de Visser M
    23. Desnuelle C
    24. Sacconi S
    25. Filippova GN
    26. Bakker B
    27. Bamshad MJ
    28. Tapscott SJ
    29. Miller DG
    30. van der Maarel SM

    (2012) Digenic inheritance of an SMCHD1 mutation and an FSHD-permissive D4Z4 allele causes facioscapulohumeral muscular dystrophy type 2

    Nature Genetics 44:1370–1374.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/ng.2454

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
53. 1. Lemmers RJ
    2. van der Vliet PJ
    3. Klooster R
    4. Sacconi S
    5. Camaño P
    6. Dauwerse JG
    7. Snider L
    8. Straasheijm KR
    9. van Ommen GJ
    10. Padberg GW
    11. Miller DG
    12. Tapscott SJ
    13. Tawil R
    14. Frants RR
    15. van der Maarel SM

    (2010) A unifying genetic model for facioscapulohumeral muscular dystrophy

    Science 329:1650–1653.

    https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1189044

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
54. 1. Li J
    2. Klein C
    3. Liang C
    4. Rauch R
    5. Kawamura K
    6. Hsueh AJ

    (2009) Autocrine regulation of early embryonic development by the artemin-GFRA3 (GDNF family receptor-alpha 3) signaling system in mice

    FEBS Letters 583:2479–2485.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.febslet.2009.06.050

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
55. 1. Lindahl M
    2. Poteryaev D
    3. Yu L
    4. Arumae U
    5. Timmusk T
    6. Bongarzone I
    7. Aiello A
    8. Pierotti MA
    9. Airaksinen MS
    10. Saarma M

    (2001) Human glial cell line-derived neurotrophic factor receptor alpha 4 is the receptor for persephin and is predominantly expressed in normal and malignant thyroid medullary cells

    Journal of Biological Chemistry 276:9344–9351.

    https://doi.org/10.1074/jbc.M008279200

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
56. 1. Lindahl M
    2. Timmusk T
    3. Rossi J
    4. Saarma M
    5. Airaksinen MS

    (2000) Expression and alternative splicing of mouse Gfra4 suggest roles in endocrine cell development

    Molecular and Cellular Neurosciences 15:522–533.

    https://doi.org/10.1006/mcne.2000.0845

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
57. 1. Lu MJ
    2. Dadd CA
    3. Mizzen CA
    4. Perry CA
    5. McLachlan DR
    6. Annunziato AT
    7. Allis CD

    (1994) Generation and characterization of novel antibodies highly selective for phosphorylated linker histone H1 in Tetrahymena and HeLa cells

    Chromosoma 103:111–121.

    https://doi.org/10.1007/s004120050014

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
58. 1. Macaione V
    2. Aguennouz M
    3. Rodolico C
    4. Mazzeo A
    5. Patti A
    6. Cannistraci E
    7. Colantone L
    8. Di Giorgio RM
    9. De Luca G
    10. Vita G

    (2007) RAGE-NF-kappaB pathway activation in response to oxidative stress in facioscapulohumeral muscular dystrophy

    Acta Neurologica Scandinavica 115:115–121.

    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0404.2006.00724.x

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
59. 1. Mikaels A
    2. Livet J
    3. Westphal H
    4. De Lapeyrière O
    5. Ernfors P

    (2000) A dynamic regulation of GDNF-family receptors correlates with a specific trophic dependency of cranial motor neuron subpopulations during development

    European Journal of Neuroscience 12:446–456.

    https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1460-9568.2000.00924.x

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
60. 1. Mitsuhashi H
    2. Mitsuhashi S
    3. Lynn-Jones T
    4. Kawahara G
    5. Kunkel LM

    (2013) Expression of DUX4 in zebrafish development recapitulates facioscapulohumeral muscular dystrophy

    Human Molecular Genetics 22:568–577.

    https://doi.org/10.1093/hmg/dds467

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
61. 1. Mograbi B
    2. Bocciardi R
    3. Bourget I
    4. Busca R
    5. Rochet N
    6. Farahi-Far D
    7. Juhel T
    8. Rossi B

    (2001) Glial cell line-derived neurotrophic factor-stimulated phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase and Akt activities exert opposing effects on the ERK pathway: importance for the rescue of neuroectodermic cells

    Journal of Biological Chemistry 276:45307–45319.

    https://doi.org/10.1074/jbc.M101220200

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
62. 1. Moore MW
    2. Klein RD
    3. Fariñas I
    4. Sauer H
    5. Armanini M
    6. Phillips H
    7. Reichardt LF
    8. Ryan AM
    9. Carver-Moore K
    10. Rosenthal A

    (1996) Renal and neuronal abnormalities in mice lacking GDNF

    Nature 382:76–79.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/382076a0

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
63. 1. Morgan JE
    2. Zammit PS

    (2010) Direct effects of the pathogenic mutation on satellite cell function in muscular dystrophy

    Experimental Cell Research 316:3100–3108.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.yexcr.2010.05.014

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
64. 1. Moyle LA
    2. Zammit PS

    (2014) Isolation, culture and immunostaining of skeletal muscle fibres to study myogenic progression in satellite cells

    Methods in Molecular Biology 1210:63–78.

    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-1435-7_6

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
65. 1. Mulligan LM
    2. Kwok JB
    3. Healey CS
    4. Elsdon MJ
    5. Eng C
    6. Gardner E
    7. Love DR
    8. Mole SE
    9. Moore JK
    10. Papi L

    (1993) Germ-line mutations of the RET proto-oncogene in multiple endocrine neoplasia type 2A

    Nature 363:458–460.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/363458a0

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
66. 1. Mulligan LM

    (2014) RET revisited: expanding the oncogenic portfolio

    Nature Reviews Cancer 14:173–186.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/nrc3680

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
67. 1. Natarajan D
    2. Marcos-Gutierrez C
    3. Pachnis V
    4. de Graaff E

    (2002)

    Requirement of signalling by receptor tyrosine kinase RET for the directed migration of enteric nervous system progenitor cells during mammalian embryogenesis

    Development 129:5151–5160.

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
68. 1. Naughton CK
    2. Jain S
    3. Strickland AM
    4. Gupta A
    5. Milbrandt J

    (2006) Glial cell-line derived neurotrophic factor-mediated RET signaling regulates spermatogonial stem cell fate

    Biology of Reproduction 74:314–321.

    https://doi.org/10.1095/biolreprod.105.047365

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
69. 1. Naveilhan P
    2. Baudet C
    3. Mikaels A
    4. Shen L
    5. Westphal H
    6. Ernfors P

    (1998) Expression and regulation of GFRalpha3, a glial cell line-derived neurotrophic factor family receptor

    PNAS 95:1295–1300.

    https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.95.3.1295

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
70. 1. Pachnis V
    2. Mankoo B
    3. Costantini F

    (1993)

    Expression of the c-ret proto-oncogene during mouse embryogenesis

    Development 119:1005–1017.

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
71. 1. Pardanani A
    2. Hood J
    3. Lasho T
    4. Levine RL
    5. Martin MB
    6. Noronha G
    7. Finke C
    8. Mak CC
    9. Mesa R
    10. Zhu H
    11. Soll R
    12. Gilliland DG
    13. Tefferi A

    (2007) TG101209, a small molecule JAK2-selective kinase inhibitor potently inhibits myeloproliferative disorder-associated JAK2V617F and MPLW515L/K mutations

    Leukemia 21:1658–1668.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.leu.2404750

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
72. 1. Pau G
    2. Fuchs F
    3. Sklyar O
    4. Boutros M
    5. Huber W

    (2010) EBImage--an R package for image processing with applications to cellular phenotypes

    Bioinformatics 26:979–981.

    https://doi.org/10.1093/bioinformatics/btq046

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
73. 1. Plaza-Menacho I
    2. Mologni L
    3. McDonald NQ

    (2014) Mechanisms of RET signaling in cancer: current and future implications for targeted therapy

    Cellular Signalling 26:1743–1752.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cellsig.2014.03.032

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
74. Software

    1. R Core Team

    (2011)

    R: A language and environment for statistical computing

    R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria.
75. 1. Rahimov F
    2. King OD
    3. Leung DG
    4. Bibat GM
    5. Emerson CP
    6. Kunkel LM
    7. Wagner KR

    (2012) Transcriptional profiling in facioscapulohumeral muscular dystrophy to identify candidate biomarkers

    PNAS 109:16234–16239.

    https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1209508109

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
76. 1. Relaix F
    2. Rocancourt D
    3. Mansouri A
    4. Buckingham M

    (2005) A Pax3/Pax7-dependent population of skeletal muscle progenitor cells

    Nature 435:948–953.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/nature03594

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
77. 1. Richardson DS
    2. Rodrigues DM
    3. Hyndman BD
    4. Crupi MJ
    5. Nicolescu AC
    6. Mulligan LM

    (2012) Alternative splicing results in RET isoforms with distinct trafficking properties

    Molecular Biology of the Cell 23:3838–3850.

    https://doi.org/10.1091/mbc.E12-02-0114

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
78. 1. Rossi J
    2. Luukko K
    3. Poteryaev D
    4. Laurikainen A
    5. Sun YF
    6. Laakso T
    7. Eerikäinen S
    8. Tuominen R
    9. Lakso M
    10. Rauvala H
    11. Arumäe U
    12. Pasternack M
    13. Saarma M
    14. Airaksinen MS

    (1999) Retarded growth and deficits in the enteric and parasympathetic nervous system in mice lacking GFR alpha2, a functional neurturin receptor

    Neuron 22:243–252.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0896-6273(00)81086-7

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
79. 1. Runeberg-Roos P
    2. Saarma M

    (2007) Neurotrophic factor receptor RET: structure, cell biology, and inherited diseases

    Annals of Medicine 39:572–580.

    https://doi.org/10.1080/07853890701646256

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
80. 1. Russell FD
    2. Koishi K
    3. Jiang Y
    4. McLennan IS

    (2000) Anterograde axonal transport of glial cell line-derived neurotrophic factor and its receptors in rat hypoglossal nerve

    Neuroscience 97:575–580.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0306-4522(00)00079-8

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
81. 1. Sandri M
    2. El Meslemani AH
    3. Sandri C
    4. Schjerling P
    5. Vissing K
    6. Andersen JL
    7. Rossini K
    8. Carraro U
    9. Angelini C

    (2001) Caspase 3 expression correlates with skeletal muscle apoptosis in Duchenne and facioscapulo human muscular dystrophy. A potential target for pharmacological treatment?

    Journal of Neuropathology & Experimental Neurology 60:302–312.

    https://doi.org/10.1093/jnen/60.3.302

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
82. 1. Santoro M
    2. Melillo RM
    3. Carlomagno F
    4. Vecchio G
    5. Fusco A

    (2004) Minireview: RET: normal and abnormal functions

    Endocrinology 145:5448–5451.

    https://doi.org/10.1210/en.2004-0922

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
83. 1. Schuchardt A
    2. D'Agati V
    3. Larsson-Blomberg L
    4. Costantini F
    5. Pachnis V

    (1994) Defects in the kidney and enteric nervous system of mice lacking the tyrosine kinase receptor Ret

    Nature 367:380–383.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/367380a0

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
84. 1. Snider L
    2. Asawachaicharn A
    3. Tyler AE
    4. Geng LN
    5. Petek LM
    6. Maves L
    7. Miller DG
    8. Lemmers RJ
    9. Winokur ST
    10. Tawil R
    11. van der Maarel SM
    12. Filippova GN
    13. Tapscott SJ

    (2009) RNA transcripts, miRNA-sized fragments and proteins produced from D4Z4 units: new candidates for the pathophysiology of facioscapulohumeral dystrophy

    Human Molecular Genetics 18:2414–2430.

    https://doi.org/10.1093/hmg/ddp180

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
85. 1. Snider L
    2. Geng LN
    3. Lemmers RJ
    4. Kyba M
    5. Ware CB
    6. Nelson AM
    7. Tawil R
    8. Filippova GN
    9. van der Maarel SM
    10. Tapscott SJ
    11. Miller DG

    (2010) Facioscapulohumeral dystrophy: incomplete suppression of a retrotransposed gene

    PLoS Genetics 6:e1001181.

    https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pgen.1001181

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
86. 1. Tassin A
    2. Laoudj-Chenivesse D
    3. Vanderplanck C
    4. Barro M
    5. Charron S
    6. Ansseau E
    7. Chen YW
    8. Mercier J
    9. Coppée F
    10. Belayew A

    (2013) DUX4 expression in FSHD muscle cells: how could such a rare protein cause a myopathy?

    Journal of Cellular and Molecular Medicine 17:76–89.

    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1582-4934.2012.01647.x

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
87. 1. Tassin A
    2. Leroy B
    3. Laoudj-Chenivesse D
    4. Wauters A
    5. Vanderplanck C
    6. Le Bihan MC
    7. Coppée F
    8. Wattiez R
    9. Belayew A

    (2012) FSHD myotubes with different phenotypes exhibit distinct proteomes

    PLoS One 7:e51865.

    https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0051865

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
88. 1. Tawil R
    2. van der Maarel SM
    3. Tapscott SJ

    (2014) Facioscapulohumeral dystrophy: the path to consensus on pathophysiology

    Skeletal Muscle 4:12.

    https://doi.org/10.1186/2044-5040-4-12

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
89. 1. Tawil R

    (2008) Facioscapulohumeral muscular dystrophy

    Neurotherapeutics 5:601–606.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nurt.2008.07.005

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
90. 1. Tomac AC
    2. Agulnick AD
    3. Haughey N
    4. Chang CF
    5. Zhang Y
    6. Bäckman C
    7. Morales M
    8. Mattson MP
    9. Wang Y
    10. Westphal H
    11. Hoffer BJ

    (2002) Effects of cerebral ischemia in mice deficient in Persephin

    PNAS 99:9521–9526.

    https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.152535899

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
91. 1. Tomac AC
    2. Grinberg A
    3. Huang SP
    4. Nosrat C
    5. Wang Y
    6. Borlongan C
    7. Lin SZ
    8. Chiang YH
    9. Olson L
    10. Westphal H
    11. Hoffer BJ

    (2000) Glial cell line-derived neurotrophic factor receptor alpha1 availability regulates glial cell line-derived neurotrophic factor signaling: evidence from mice carrying one or two mutated alleles

    Neuroscience 95:1011–1023.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0306-4522(99)00503-5

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
92. 1. Tsui-Pierchala BA
    2. Ahrens RC
    3. Crowder RJ
    4. Milbrandt J
    5. Johnson EM

    (2002) The long and short isoforms of Ret function as independent signaling complexes

    Journal of Biological Chemistry 277:34618–34625.

    https://doi.org/10.1074/jbc.M203580200

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
93. 1. van den Boogaard ML
    2. Lemmers RJ
    3. Balog J
    4. Wohlgemuth M
    5. Auranen M
    6. Mitsuhashi S
    7. van der Vliet PJ
    8. Straasheijm KR
    9. van den Akker RF
    10. Kriek M
    11. Laurense-Bik ME
    12. Raz V
    13. van Ostaijen-Ten Dam MM
    14. Hansson KB
    15. van der Kooi EL
    16. Kiuru-Enari S
    17. Udd B
    18. van Tol MJ
    19. Nishino I
    20. Tawil R
    21. Tapscott SJ
    22. van Engelen BG
    23. van der Maarel SM

    (2016) Mutations in DNMT3B Modify Epigenetic Repression of the D4Z4 Repeat and the Penetrance of Facioscapulohumeral Dystrophy

    American Journal of Human Genetics 98:1020–1029.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajhg.2016.03.013

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
94. 1. van Deutekom JC
    2. Wijmenga C
    3. van Tienhoven EA
    4. Gruter AM
    5. Hewitt JE
    6. Padberg GW
    7. van Ommen GJ
    8. Hofker MH
    9. Frants RR

    (1993) FSHD associated DNA rearrangements are due to deletions of integral copies of a 3.2 kb tandemly repeated unit

    Human Molecular Genetics 2:2037–2042.

    https://doi.org/10.1093/hmg/2.12.2037

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
95. 1. Vanderplanck C
    2. Ansseau E
    3. Charron S
    4. Stricwant N
    5. Tassin A
    6. Laoudj-Chenivesse D
    7. Wilton SD
    8. Coppée F
    9. Belayew A

    (2011) The FSHD atrophic myotube phenotype is caused by DUX4 expression

    PLoS One 6:e26820.

    https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0026820

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
96. 1. Verhagen WI
    2. Huygen PL
    3. Padberg GW

    (1995) The auditory, vestibular, and oculomotor system in facioscapulohumeral dystrophy

    Acta Oto-Laryngologica 115:140–142.

    https://doi.org/10.3109/00016489509125212

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
97. 1. Wallace LM
    2. Garwick SE
    3. Mei W
    4. Belayew A
    5. Coppee F
    6. Ladner KJ
    7. Guttridge D
    8. Yang J
    9. Harper SQ

    (2011) DUX4, a candidate gene for facioscapulohumeral muscular dystrophy, causes p53-dependent myopathy in vivo

    Annals of Neurology 69:540–552.

    https://doi.org/10.1002/ana.22275

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
98. 1. Wedge SR
    2. Ogilvie DJ
    3. Dukes M
    4. Kendrew J
    5. Chester R
    6. Jackson JA
    7. Boffey SJ
    8. Valentine PJ
    9. Curwen JO
    10. Musgrove HL
    11. Graham GA
    12. Hughes GD
    13. Thomas AP
    14. Stokes ES
    15. Curry B
    16. Richmond GH
    17. Wadsworth PF
    18. Bigley AL
    19. Hennequin LF

    (2002)

    ZD6474 inhibits vascular endothelial growth factor signaling, angiogenesis, and tumor growth following oral administration

    Cancer Research 62:4645–4655.

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
99. 1. Widmer N
    2. Bardin C
    3. Chatelut E
    4. Paci A
    5. Beijnen J
    6. Levêque D
    7. Veal G
    8. Astier A

    (2014) Review of therapeutic drug monitoring of anticancer drugs part two--targeted therapies

    European Journal of Cancer 50:2020–2036.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejca.2014.04.015

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
100. 1. Winokur ST
     2. Barrett K
     3. Martin JH
     4. Forrester JR
     5. Simon M
     6. Tawil R
     7. Chung SA
     8. Masny PS
     9. Figlewicz DA

     (2003a) Facioscapulohumeral muscular dystrophy (FSHD) myoblasts demonstrate increased susceptibility to oxidative stress

     Neuromuscular Disorders 13:322–333.

     https://doi.org/10.1016/S0960-8966(02)00284-5

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
101. 1. Winokur ST
     2. Chen YW
     3. Masny PS
     4. Martin JH
     5. Ehmsen JT
     6. Tapscott SJ
     7. van der Maarel SM
     8. Hayashi Y
     9. Flanigan KM

     (2003b) Expression profiling of FSHD muscle supports a defect in specific stages of myogenic differentiation

     Human Molecular Genetics 12:2895–2907.

     https://doi.org/10.1093/hmg/ddg327

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
102. 1. Worby CA
     2. Vega QC
     3. Chao HH
     4. Seasholtz AF
     5. Thompson RC
     6. Dixon JE

     (1998) Identification and characterization of GFRalpha-3, a novel Co-receptor belonging to the glial cell line-derived neurotrophic receptor family

     Journal of Biological Chemistry 273:3502–3508.

     https://doi.org/10.1074/jbc.273.6.3502

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
103. 1. Wuebbles RD
     2. Long SW
     3. Hanel ML
     4. Jones PL

     (2010)

     Testing the effects of FSHD candidate gene expression in vertebrate muscle development

     International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Pathology 3:386–400.

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
104. 1. Xu H
     2. Wang Z
     3. Jin S
     4. Hao H
     5. Zheng L
     6. Zhou B
     7. Zhang W
     8. Lv H
     9. Yuan Y

     (2014) Dux4 induces cell cycle arrest at G1 phase through upregulation of p21 expression

     Biochemical and Biophysical Research Communications 446:235–240.

     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbrc.2014.02.105

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
105. 1. Yaffe D
     2. Saxel O

     (1977) Serial passaging and differentiation of myogenic cells isolated from dystrophic mouse muscle

     Nature 270:725–727.

     https://doi.org/10.1038/270725a0

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
106. 1. Yang C
     2. Hutto D
     3. Sah DW

     (2006) Distribution of GDNF family receptor alpha3 and RET in rat and human non-neural tissues

     Journal of Molecular Histology 37:69–77.

     https://doi.org/10.1007/s10735-006-9035-8

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
107. 1. Yang LX
     2. Nelson PG

     (2004) Glia cell line-derived neurotrophic factor regulates the distribution of acetylcholine receptors in mouse primary skeletal muscle cells

     Neuroscience 128:497–509.

     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroscience.2004.06.067

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
108. 1. Yao Z
     2. Snider L
     3. Balog J
     4. Lemmers RJLF
     5. Van Der Maarel SM
     6. Tawil R
     7. Tapscott SJ

     (2014) DUX4-induced gene expression is the major molecular signature in FSHD skeletal muscle

     Human Molecular Genetics 23:5342–5352.

     https://doi.org/10.1093/hmg/ddu251

     • Google Scholar
109. 1. Yoong LF
     2. Peng ZN
     3. Wan G
     4. Too HP

     (2005) Tissue expression of alternatively spliced GFRalpha1, NCAM and RET isoforms and the distinct functional consequence of ligand-induced activation of GFRalpha1 isoforms

     Molecular Brain Research 139:1–12.

     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.molbrainres.2005.05.016

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
110. 1. Yu T
     2. Scully S
     3. Yu Y
     4. Fox GM
     5. Jing S
     6. Zhou R

     (1998)

     Expression of GDNF family receptor components during development: implications in the mechanisms of interaction

     Journal of Neuroscience 18:4684–4696.

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
111. 1. Zammit PS
     2. Golding JP
     3. Nagata Y
     4. Hudon V
     5. Partridge TA
     6. Beauchamp JR

     (2004) Muscle satellite cells adopt divergent fates: a mechanism for self-renewal?

     Journal of Cell Biology 166:347–357.

     https://doi.org/10.1083/jcb.200312007

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
112. 1. Zammit PS
     2. Relaix F
     3. Nagata Y
     4. Ruiz AP
     5. Collins CA
     6. Partridge TA
     7. Beauchamp JR

     (2006) Pax7 and myogenic progression in skeletal muscle satellite cells

     Journal of Cell Science 119:1824–1832.

     https://doi.org/10.1242/jcs.02908

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
113. 1. Zeng W
     2. de Greef JC
     3. Chen YY
     4. Chien R
     5. Kong X
     6. Gregson HC
     7. Winokur ST
     8. Pyle A
     9. Robertson KD
     10. Schmiesing JA
     11. Kimonis VE
     12. Balog J
     13. Frants RR
     14. Ball AR
     15. Lock LF
     16. Donovan PJ
     17. van der Maarel SM
     18. Yokomori K

     (2009) Specific loss of histone H3 lysine 9 trimethylation and HP1gamma/cohesin binding at D4Z4 repeats is associated with facioscapulohumeral dystrophy (FSHD)

     PLoS Genetics 5:e1000559.

     https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pgen.1000559

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
114. 1. Zhang Y
     2. Lee JK
     3. Toso EA
     4. Lee JS
     5. Choi SH
     6. Slattery M
     7. Aihara H
     8. Kyba M

     (2016) DNA-binding sequence specificity of DUX4

     Skeletal Muscle 6:8.

     https://doi.org/10.1186/s13395-016-0080-z

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
115. 1. Zordan P
     2. Tavella S
     3. Brizzolara A
     4. Biticchi R
     5. Ceccherini I
     6. Garofalo S
     7. Ravazzolo R
     8. Bocciardi R

     (2006) The immediate upstream sequence of the mouse Ret gene controls tissue-specific expression in transgenic mice

     International Journal of Molecular Medicine 18:601–608.

     https://doi.org/10.3892/ijmm.18.4.601

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar

Author details

1. Louise A Moyle

   1. Randall Division of Cell and Molecular Biophysics, King's College London, London, United Kingdom
   2. Department of Cell and Developmental Biology, University College London, London, United Kingdom

   Contribution

   LAM, Conception and design, Acquisition of data, Analysis and interpretation of data, Drafting or revising the article

   Competing interests

   The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

2. Eric Blanc

   1. Randall Division of Cell and Molecular Biophysics, King's College London, London, United Kingdom
   2. Core Unit Bioinformatics, Berlin Institute of Health, Berlin, Germany
   3. Institute of Pathology, Charite Universitatsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany

   Contribution

   EB, Conception and design, Analysis and interpretation of data

   Competing interests

   The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

3. Oihane Jaka

   Centre of Human and Aerospace Physiological Sciences, King's College London, London, United Kingdom

   Contribution

   OJ, Acquisition of data, Analysis and interpretation of data

   Competing interests

   The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

4. Johanna Prueller

   Randall Division of Cell and Molecular Biophysics, King's College London, London, United Kingdom

   Contribution

   JP, Helped design, perform and analyse the Western Blots to examine the effects of Sunitinib on ERK and AKT mediated signalling in response to DUX4, and presented as Figures 7H-J in the revised manuscript

   Competing interests

   The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

5. Christopher RS Banerji

   Randall Division of Cell and Molecular Biophysics, King's College London, London, United Kingdom

   Contribution

   CRSB, Wrote software to analyse cell eccentricity, Acquisition of data, Analysis and interpretation of data

   Competing interests

   The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

6. Francesco Saverio Tedesco

   Department of Cell and Developmental Biology, University College London, London, United Kingdom

   Contribution

   FST, Helped design, perform and analyse the grafting experiments to test the effects of Sunitnib in vivo and presented as Figure 12 in the revised manuscript

   Competing interests

   The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

   "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-5321-7682

7. Stephen DR Harridge

   Centre of Human and Aerospace Physiological Sciences, King's College London, London, United Kingdom

   Contribution

   SDRH, Acquisition of data, Analysis and interpretation of data

   Competing interests

   The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

8. Robert D Knight

   Craniofacial Development and Stem Cell Biology, King's College London, London, United Kingdom

   Contribution

   RDK, Conception and design, Acquisition of data, Analysis and interpretation of data, Drafting or revising the article

   For correspondence

   robert.knight@kcl.ac.uk

   Competing interests

   The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

   "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-9920-836X

9. Peter S Zammit

   Randall Division of Cell and Molecular Biophysics, King's College London, London, United Kingdom

   Contribution

   PSZ, Conception and design, Analysis and interpretation of data, Drafting and revising the article

   For correspondence

   peter.zammit@kcl.ac.uk

   Competing interests

   The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

   "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-9562-3072

• 2,176

  views

• 383

  downloads

• 17

  citations

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