Histone deposition pathways determine the chromatin landscapes of H3.1 and H3.3 K27M oncohistones

  1. Jay F Sarthy
  2. Michael P Meers
  3. Derek H Janssens
  4. Jorja G Henikoff
  5. Heather Feldman
  6. Patrick J Paddison
  7. Christina M Lockwood
  8. Nicholas A Vitanza
  9. James M Olson
  10. Kami Ahmad  Is a corresponding author
  11. Steven Henikoff  Is a corresponding author
  1. Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, United States
  2. University of Washington, United States
  3. Seattle Childrens Hospital, United States

Abstract

Lysine 27-to-methionine (K27M) mutations in the H3.1 or H3.3 histone genes are characteristic of pediatric diffuse midline gliomas (DMGs). These oncohistone mutations dominantly inhibit histone H3K27 trimethylation and silencing, but it is unknown how oncohistone type affects gliomagenesis. We show that the genomic distributions of H3.1 and H3.3 oncohistones in human patient-derived DMG cells are consistent with the DNA replication-coupled deposition of histone H3.1 and the predominant replication-independent deposition of histone H3.3. Although H3K27 trimethylation is reduced for both oncohistone types, H3.3K27M-bearing cells retain some domains, and only H3.1K27M-bearing cells lack H3K27 trimethylation. Neither oncohistone interferes with PRC2 binding. Using Drosophila as a model, we demonstrate that inhibition of H3K27 trimethylation occurs only when H3K27M oncohistones are deposited into chromatin and only when expressed in cycling cells. We propose that oncohistones inhibit the H3K27 methyltransferase as chromatin patterns are being duplicated in proliferating cells, predisposing them to tumorigenesis.

Data availability

Sequencing data have been deposited in GEO under accession code GSE118099

The following data sets were generated

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Jay F Sarthy

    Basic Sciences Division, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Michael P Meers

    Basic Sciences Division, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Derek H Janssens

    Basic Sciences Division, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Jorja G Henikoff

    Basic Sciences Division, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Heather Feldman

    Human Biology Division, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Patrick J Paddison

    Human Biology Division, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Christina M Lockwood

    Department of Laboratory Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Nicholas A Vitanza

    Cancer and Blood Disorders, Seattle Childrens Hospital, Seattle, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  9. James M Olson

    Clinical Research Division, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  10. Kami Ahmad

    Basic Sciences Division, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, United States
    For correspondence
    kahmad@fredhutch.org
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  11. Steven Henikoff

    Basic Sciences Division, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, Seattle, United States
    For correspondence
    steveh@fhcrc.org
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-7621-8685

Funding

Howard Hughes Medical Institute (Henikoff)

  • Steven Henikoff

National Institutes of Health (R01GM108699)

  • Kami Ahmad

Alex's Lemonade Stand Foundation for Childhood Cancer (Sarthy)

  • Jay F Sarthy

Damon Runyon Cancer Research Foundation (Sarthy)

  • Jay F Sarthy

National Institutes of Health (T32 CA009351)

  • Jay F Sarthy

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

Copyright

© 2020, Sarthy 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

  • 4,984
    views
  • 682
    downloads
  • 55
    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. Jay F Sarthy
  2. Michael P Meers
  3. Derek H Janssens
  4. Jorja G Henikoff
  5. Heather Feldman
  6. Patrick J Paddison
  7. Christina M Lockwood
  8. Nicholas A Vitanza
  9. James M Olson
  10. Kami Ahmad
  11. Steven Henikoff
(2020)
Histone deposition pathways determine the chromatin landscapes of H3.1 and H3.3 K27M oncohistones
eLife 9:e61090.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.61090

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.61090

Further reading

    1. Cancer Biology
    Qianqian Ju, Wenjing Sheng ... Cheng Sun
    Research Article

    TAK1 is a serine/threonine protein kinase that is a key regulator in a wide variety of cellular processes. However, the functions and mechanisms involved in cancer metastasis are still not well understood. Here, we found that TAK1 knockdown promoted esophageal squamous cancer carcinoma (ESCC) migration and invasion, whereas TAK1 overexpression resulted in the opposite outcome. These in vitro findings were recapitulated in vivo in a xenograft metastatic mouse model. Mechanistically, co-immunoprecipitation and mass spectrometry demonstrated that TAK1 interacted with phospholipase C epsilon 1 (PLCE1) and phosphorylated PLCE1 at serine 1060 (S1060). Functional studies revealed that phosphorylation at S1060 in PLCE1 resulted in decreased enzyme activity, leading to the repression of phosphatidylinositol 4,5-bisphosphate (PIP2) hydrolysis. As a result, the degradation products of PIP2 including diacylglycerol (DAG) and inositol IP3 were reduced, which thereby suppressed signal transduction in the axis of PKC/GSK-3β/β-Catenin. Consequently, expression of cancer metastasis-related genes was impeded by TAK1. Overall, our data indicate that TAK1 plays a negative role in ESCC metastasis, which depends on the TAK1-induced phosphorylation of PLCE1 at S1060.

    1. Cancer Biology
    2. Cell Biology
    Xiangning Bu, Nathanael Ashby ... Inhee Chung
    Research Article

    Cell crowding is a common microenvironmental factor influencing various disease processes, but its role in promoting cell invasiveness remains unclear. This study investigates the biomechanical changes induced by cell crowding, focusing on pro-invasive cell volume reduction in ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS). Crowding specifically enhanced invasiveness in high-grade DCIS cells through significant volume reduction compared to hyperplasia-mimicking or normal cells. Mass spectrometry revealed that crowding selectively relocated ion channels, including TRPV4, to the plasma membrane in high-grade DCIS cells. TRPV4 inhibition triggered by crowding decreased intracellular calcium levels, reduced cell volume, and increased invasion and motility. During this process, TRPV4 membrane relocation primed the channel for later activation, compensating for calcium loss. Analyses of patient-derived breast cancer tissues confirmed that plasma membrane-associated TRPV4 is specific to high-grade DCIS and indicates the presence of a pro-invasive cell volume reduction mechanotransduction pathway. Hyperosmotic conditions and pharmacologic TRPV4 inhibition mimicked crowding-induced effects, while TRPV4 activation reversed them. Silencing TRPV4 diminished mechanotransduction in high-grade DCIS cells, reducing calcium depletion, volume reduction, and motility. This study uncovers a novel pro-invasive mechanotransduction pathway driven by cell crowding and identifies TRPV4 as a potential biomarker for predicting invasion risk in DCIS patients.