lncRNA requirements for mouse acute myeloid leukemia and normal differentiation

  1. M Joaquina Delás
  2. Leah R Sabin
  3. Egor Dolzhenko
  4. Simon RV Knott
  5. Ester Munera Maravilla
  6. Benjamin T Jackson
  7. Sophia A Wild
  8. Tatjana Kovacevic
  9. Eva Maria Stork
  10. Meng Zhou
  11. Nicolas Erard
  12. Emily Lee
  13. David R Kelley
  14. Mareike Roth
  15. Inês AM Barbosa
  16. Johannes Zuber
  17. John L Rinn
  18. Andrew D Smith  Is a corresponding author
  19. Gregory J Hannon  Is a corresponding author
  1. Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, United States
  2. University of Southern California, United States
  3. University of Cambridge, United Kingdom
  4. Watson School of Biological Sciences, United States
  5. Harvard University, United States
  6. Research Institute of Molecular Pathology (IMP), Vienna Biocenter (VBC), Austria
  7. Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, United Kingdom

Abstract

A substantial fraction of the genome is transcribed in a cell type-specific manner, producing long non-coding RNAs (lncRNAs), rather than protein-coding transcripts. Here we systematically characterize transcriptional dynamics during hematopoiesis and in hematological malignancies. Our analysis of annotated and de novo assembled lncRNAs showed many are regulated during differentiation and mis-regulated in disease. We assessed lncRNA function via an in vivo RNAi screen in a model of acute myeloid leukemia. This identified several lncRNAs essential for leukemia maintenance, and found that a number act by promoting leukemia stem cell signatures. Leukemia blasts show a myeloid differentiation phenotype when these lncRNAs were depleted, and our data indicates that this effect is mediated via effects on the c-MYC oncogene. Bone marrow reconstitutions showed that a lncRNA expressed across all progenitors was required for the myeloid lineage, whereas the other leukemia-induced lncRNAs were dispensable in the normal setting.

Data availability

The following data sets were generated
The following previously published data sets were used

Article and author information

Author details

  1. M Joaquina Delás

    Watson School of Biological Sciences, Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, Cold Spring Harbor, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-9727-9068
  2. Leah R Sabin

    Watson School of Biological Sciences, Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, Cold Spring Harbor, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Egor Dolzhenko

    Molecular and Computational Biology, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Simon RV Knott

    Watson School of Biological Sciences, Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, Cold Spring Harbor, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Ester Munera Maravilla

    Cancer Research UK Cambridge Institute, Li Ka Shing Centre, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Benjamin T Jackson

    Cancer Research UK Cambridge Institute, Li Ka Shing Centre, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Sophia A Wild

    Cancer Research UK Cambridge Institute, Li Ka Shing Centre, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Tatjana Kovacevic

    Cancer Research UK Cambridge Institute, Li Ka Shing Centre, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  9. Eva Maria Stork

    Cancer Research UK Cambridge Institute, Li Ka Shing Centre, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  10. Meng Zhou

    Molecular and Computational Biology, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  11. Nicolas Erard

    Cancer Research UK Cambridge Institute, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  12. Emily Lee

    Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, Watson School of Biological Sciences, Cold Spring Harbor, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  13. David R Kelley

    Department of Stem Cell and Regenerative Biology, Harvard University, Cambridge, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  14. Mareike Roth

    Research Institute of Molecular Pathology (IMP), Vienna Biocenter (VBC), Vienna, Austria
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  15. Inês AM Barbosa

    Research Institute of Molecular Pathology (IMP), Vienna Biocenter (VBC), Vienna, Austria
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  16. Johannes Zuber

    Research Institute of Molecular Pathology (IMP), Vienna Biocenter (VBC), Vienna, Austria
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-8810-6835
  17. John L Rinn

    Department of Stem Cell and Regenerative Biology, Harvard University, Cambridge, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  18. Andrew D Smith

    Molecular and Computational Biology, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, United States
    For correspondence
    andrewds@usc.edu
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  19. Gregory J Hannon

    Watson School of Biological Sciences, Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, Cold Spring Harbor, United Kingdom
    For correspondence
    greg.hannon@cruk.cam.ac.uk
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-4021-3898

Funding

Cancer Research UK

  • Gregory J Hannon

Boehringer Ingelheim Fonds (PhD Fellowship)

  • M Joaquina Delás

Fundación Bancaria Caixa d'Estalvis i Pensions de Barcelona " (Graduate Studies Fellowship)

  • M Joaquina Delás

National Institutes of Health (R01 HG007650)

  • Andrew D Smith

Damon Runyon Cancer Research Foundation (DRG-2016-12)

  • Leah R Sabin

Howard Hughes Medical Institute (Investigator)

  • Gregory J Hannon

Wellcome Trust (Investigator)

  • Gregory J Hannon

The funders had no role in study design, data collection and interpretation, or the decision to submit the work for publication.

Ethics

Animal experimentation: For animal experiments conducted at Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, all the animals were handled according to the approved institutional animal care and use committee (IACUC) protocol (#14-11-18). For animal experiments conducted at CRUK Cambridge Institute, all the animals were handled according to project and personal licenses issued under the United Kingdom Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act, 1986 (PPL 70/8391).

Copyright

© 2017, Delás 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

  • 3,266
    views
  • 697
    downloads
  • 56
    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. M Joaquina Delás
  2. Leah R Sabin
  3. Egor Dolzhenko
  4. Simon RV Knott
  5. Ester Munera Maravilla
  6. Benjamin T Jackson
  7. Sophia A Wild
  8. Tatjana Kovacevic
  9. Eva Maria Stork
  10. Meng Zhou
  11. Nicolas Erard
  12. Emily Lee
  13. David R Kelley
  14. Mareike Roth
  15. Inês AM Barbosa
  16. Johannes Zuber
  17. John L Rinn
  18. Andrew D Smith
  19. Gregory J Hannon
(2017)
lncRNA requirements for mouse acute myeloid leukemia and normal differentiation
eLife 6:e25607.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.25607

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.25607

Further reading

    1. Developmental Biology
    Michele Bertacchi, Gwendoline Maharaux ... Michèle Studer
    Research Article Updated

    The morphogen FGF8 establishes graded positional cues imparting regional cellular responses via modulation of early target genes. The roles of FGF signaling and its effector genes remain poorly characterized in human experimental models mimicking early fetal telencephalic development. We used hiPSC-derived cerebral organoids as an in vitro platform to investigate the effect of FGF8 signaling on neural identity and differentiation. We found that FGF8 treatment increases cellular heterogeneity, leading to distinct telencephalic and mesencephalic-like domains that co-develop in multi-regional organoids. Within telencephalic regions, FGF8 affects the anteroposterior and dorsoventral identity of neural progenitors and the balance between GABAergic and glutamatergic neurons, thus impacting spontaneous neuronal network activity. Moreover, FGF8 efficiently modulates key regulators responsible for several human neurodevelopmental disorders. Overall, our results show that FGF8 signaling is directly involved in both regional patterning and cellular diversity in human cerebral organoids and in modulating genes associated with normal and pathological neural development.

    1. Developmental Biology
    Shannon H Carroll, Sogand Schafer ... Eric C Liao
    Research Article

    Wnt signaling plays crucial roles in embryonic patterning including the regulation of convergent extension (CE) during gastrulation, the establishment of the dorsal axis, and later, craniofacial morphogenesis. Further, Wnt signaling is a crucial regulator of craniofacial morphogenesis. The adapter proteins Dact1 and Dact2 modulate the Wnt signaling pathway through binding to Disheveled. However, the distinct relative functions of Dact1 and Dact2 during embryogenesis remain unclear. We found that dact1 and dact2 genes have dynamic spatiotemporal expression domains that are reciprocal to one another suggesting distinct functions during zebrafish embryogenesis. Both dact1 and dact2 contribute to axis extension, with compound mutants exhibiting a similar CE defect and craniofacial phenotype to the wnt11f2 mutant. Utilizing single-cell RNAseq and an established noncanonical Wnt pathway mutant with a shortened axis (gpc4), we identified dact1/2-specific roles during early development. Comparative whole transcriptome analysis between wildtype and gpc4 and wildtype and dact1/2 compound mutants revealed a novel role for dact1/2 in regulating the mRNA expression of the classical calpain capn8. Overexpression of capn8 phenocopies dact1/2 craniofacial dysmorphology. These results identify a previously unappreciated role of capn8 and calcium-dependent proteolysis during embryogenesis. Taken together, our findings highlight the distinct and overlapping roles of dact1 and dact2 in embryonic craniofacial development, providing new insights into the multifaceted regulation of Wnt signaling.