HNRNPM controls circRNA biogenesis and splicing fidelity to sustain cancer cell fitness

  1. Jessica SY Ho
  2. Federico Di Tullio
  3. Megan Schwarz
  4. Diana Low
  5. Danny Incarnato
  6. Florence Gay
  7. Tommaso Tabaglio
  8. JingXian Zhang
  9. Heike Wollmann
  10. Leilei Chen
  11. Omer An
  12. Tim Hon Man Chan
  13. Alexander Hall Hickman
  14. Simin Zheng
  15. Vladimir Roudko
  16. Sujun Chen
  17. Alcida Karz
  18. Musaddeque Ahmed
  19. Housheng Hansen He
  20. Benjamin D Greenbaum
  21. Salvatore Oliviero
  22. Michela Serresi
  23. Gaetano Gargiulo
  24. Karen M Mann
  25. Eva Hernando
  26. David Mulholland
  27. Ivan Marazzi
  28. Dave Keng Boon Wee
  29. Ernesto Guccione  Is a corresponding author
  1. Institute of Molecular and Cell Biology (IMCB), Agency for Science, Technology and Research (A*STAR), Singapore, Singapore
  2. Icahn School of Medicine, United States
  3. Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, United States
  4. IIGM (Italian Institute for Genomic Medicine), Italy
  5. Agency for Science, Technology and Research (A*STAR), Singapore, Singapore
  6. Cancer Science Institute of Singapore, National University of Singapore, Singapore
  7. Institute of Molecular and Cell Biology (IMCB), Agency for Science, Technology and Research (A*STAR), Singapore
  8. School of Biological Sciences, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore, Singapore
  9. University of Toronto, Canada
  10. NYU, United States
  11. Italian Institute for Genomic Medicine, Italy
  12. Max Delbruck Center for Molecular Medicine, Germany
  13. H Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute;, United States
  14. Institute of Molecular and Cell Biology (IMCB), Agency for Science, Technology and Research (A*STAR), Singapore., Singapore

Abstract

High spliceosome activity is a dependency for cancer cells, making them more vulnerable to perturbation of the splicing machinery compared to normal cells. To identify splicing factors important for prostate cancer (PCa) fitness, we performed pooled shRNA screens in vitro and in vivo. Our screens identified HNRNPM as a regulator of PCa cell growth. RNA- and eCLIP-sequencing identified HNRNPM binding to transcripts of key homeostatic genes. HNRNPM binding to its targets prevents aberrant exon inclusion and back-splicing events. In both linear and circular mis-spliced transcripts, HNRNPM preferentially binds to GU-rich elements in long flanking proximal introns. Mimicry of HNRNPM dependent linear splicing events using splice-switching-antisense-oligonucleotides (SSOs) was sufficient to inhibit PCa cell growth. This suggests that PCa dependence on HNRNPM is likely a result of mis-splicing of key homeostatic coding and non-coding genes. Our results have further been confirmed in other solid tumors. Taken together, our data reveal a role for HNRNPM in supporting cancer cell fitness. Inhibition of HNRNPM activity is therefore a potential therapeutic strategy in suppressing growth of PCa and other solid tumors.

Data availability

All data needed to evaluate the conclusions in this study are present in the paper and/or its Supplementary Materials. eCLIP and RNA-Sequencing data supporting the findings of this study have been deposited into the National Center for Biotechnology Information (NCBI) Gene Expression Omnibus under accessions GSE113786.

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

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Jessica SY Ho

    Institute of Molecular and Cell Biology (IMCB), Agency for Science, Technology and Research (A*STAR), Singapore, Singapore, Singapore
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Federico Di Tullio

    Icahn School of Medicine, NY, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Megan Schwarz

    Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Diana Low

    Institute of Molecular and Cell Biology (IMCB), Agency for Science, Technology and Research (A*STAR), Singapore, Singapore, Singapore
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Danny Incarnato

    IIGM (Italian Institute for Genomic Medicine), Torino, Italy
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Florence Gay

    Agency for Science, Technology and Research (A*STAR), Singapore, Singapore, Singapore
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Tommaso Tabaglio

    Agency for Science, Technology and Research (A*STAR), Singapore, Singapore, Singapore
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. JingXian Zhang

    Agency for Science, Technology and Research (A*STAR), Singapore, Singapore, Singapore
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  9. Heike Wollmann

    Institute of Molecular and Cell Biology (IMCB), Agency for Science, Technology and Research (A*STAR), Singapore, Singapore, Singapore
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  10. Leilei Chen

    Cancer Science Institute of Singapore, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  11. Omer An

    Cancer Science Institute of Singapore, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  12. Tim Hon Man Chan

    Cancer Science Institute of Singapore, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  13. Alexander Hall Hickman

    Institute of Molecular and Cell Biology (IMCB), Agency for Science, Technology and Research (A*STAR), Singapore, Singapore
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  14. Simin Zheng

    School of Biological Sciences, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore, Singapore, Singapore
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  15. Vladimir Roudko

    Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  16. Sujun Chen

    University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  17. Alcida Karz

    NYU, NY, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  18. Musaddeque Ahmed

    University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  19. Housheng Hansen He

    University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  20. Benjamin D Greenbaum

    Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  21. Salvatore Oliviero

    Italian Institute for Genomic Medicine, Torino, Italy
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-3405-765X
  22. Michela Serresi

    Max Delbruck Center for Molecular Medicine, Berlin, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  23. Gaetano Gargiulo

    Max Delbruck Center for Molecular Medicine, Berlin, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  24. Karen M Mann

    H Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute;, Tampa, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  25. Eva Hernando

    NYU, NY, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  26. David Mulholland

    Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  27. Ivan Marazzi

    Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  28. Dave Keng Boon Wee

    Institute of Molecular and Cell Biology (IMCB), Agency for Science, Technology and Research (A*STAR), Singapore., Singapore, Singapore
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  29. Ernesto Guccione

    Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, United States
    For correspondence
    ernesto.guccione@mssm.edu
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-7764-5307

Funding

National Cancer Institute (R01CA197910)

  • David Mulholland

National Medical Research Council (NMRC/OFIRG/0032/2017)

  • Dave Keng Boon Wee
  • Ernesto Guccione

National Research Foundation Singapore (NRF-CRP17-2017-06)

  • Dave Keng Boon Wee
  • Ernesto Guccione

National Cancer Institute (R01CA249204)

  • Ernesto Guccione

ISMMS

  • Ernesto Guccione

Melanoma Research Alliance (MRA Team Science Award)

  • Eva Hernando
  • Ernesto Guccione

Lee Kuan Postdoctural Fellowship

  • Simin Zheng

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

Copyright

© 2021, Ho 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

  • 2,429
    views
  • 352
    downloads
  • 38
    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. Jessica SY Ho
  2. Federico Di Tullio
  3. Megan Schwarz
  4. Diana Low
  5. Danny Incarnato
  6. Florence Gay
  7. Tommaso Tabaglio
  8. JingXian Zhang
  9. Heike Wollmann
  10. Leilei Chen
  11. Omer An
  12. Tim Hon Man Chan
  13. Alexander Hall Hickman
  14. Simin Zheng
  15. Vladimir Roudko
  16. Sujun Chen
  17. Alcida Karz
  18. Musaddeque Ahmed
  19. Housheng Hansen He
  20. Benjamin D Greenbaum
  21. Salvatore Oliviero
  22. Michela Serresi
  23. Gaetano Gargiulo
  24. Karen M Mann
  25. Eva Hernando
  26. David Mulholland
  27. Ivan Marazzi
  28. Dave Keng Boon Wee
  29. Ernesto Guccione
(2021)
HNRNPM controls circRNA biogenesis and splicing fidelity to sustain cancer cell fitness
eLife 10:e59654.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.59654

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.59654

Further reading

    1. Genetics and Genomics
    2. Microbiology and Infectious Disease
    Dániel Molnár, Éva Viola Surányi ... Judit Toth
    Research Article

    The sustained success of Mycobacterium tuberculosis as a pathogen arises from its ability to persist within macrophages for extended periods and its limited responsiveness to antibiotics. Furthermore, the high incidence of resistance to the few available antituberculosis drugs is a significant concern, especially since the driving forces of the emergence of drug resistance are not clear. Drug-resistant strains of Mycobacterium tuberculosis can emerge through de novo mutations, however, mycobacterial mutation rates are low. To unravel the effects of antibiotic pressure on genome stability, we determined the genetic variability, phenotypic tolerance, DNA repair system activation, and dNTP pool upon treatment with current antibiotics using Mycobacterium smegmatis. Whole-genome sequencing revealed no significant increase in mutation rates after prolonged exposure to first-line antibiotics. However, the phenotypic fluctuation assay indicated rapid adaptation to antibiotics mediated by non-genetic factors. The upregulation of DNA repair genes, measured using qPCR, suggests that genomic integrity may be maintained through the activation of specific DNA repair pathways. Our results, indicating that antibiotic exposure does not result in de novo adaptive mutagenesis under laboratory conditions, do not lend support to the model suggesting antibiotic resistance development through drug pressure-induced microevolution.

    1. Computational and Systems Biology
    2. Genetics and Genomics
    Sanjarbek Hudaiberdiev, Ivan Ovcharenko
    Research Article

    Enhancers and promoters are classically considered to be bound by a small set of transcription factors (TFs) in a sequence-specific manner. This assumption has come under increasing skepticism as the datasets of ChIP-seq assays of TFs have expanded. In particular, high-occupancy target (HOT) loci attract hundreds of TFs with often no detectable correlation between ChIP-seq peaks and DNA-binding motif presence. Here, we used a set of 1003 TF ChIP-seq datasets (HepG2, K562, H1) to analyze the patterns of ChIP-seq peak co-occurrence in combination with functional genomics datasets. We identified 43,891 HOT loci forming at the promoter (53%) and enhancer (47%) regions. HOT promoters regulate housekeeping genes, whereas HOT enhancers are involved in tissue-specific process regulation. HOT loci form the foundation of human super-enhancers and evolve under strong negative selection, with some of these loci being located in ultraconserved regions. Sequence-based classification analysis of HOT loci suggested that their formation is driven by the sequence features, and the density of mapped ChIP-seq peaks across TF-bound loci correlates with sequence features and the expression level of flanking genes. Based on the affinities to bind to promoters and enhancers we detected five distinct clusters of TFs that form the core of the HOT loci. We report an abundance of HOT loci in the human genome and a commitment of 51% of all TF ChIP-seq binding events to HOT locus formation thus challenging the classical model of enhancer activity and propose a model of HOT locus formation based on the existence of large transcriptional condensates.