Article

The replication focus targeting sequence (RFTS) domain is a DNA-competitive inhibitor of Dnmt1.

Structural Genomics Consortium and Department of Physiology, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario M5G 1L7, Canada.
Journal of Biological Chemistry (Impact Factor: 4.6). 03/2011; 286(17):15344-51. DOI: 10.1074/jbc.M110.209882
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Dnmt1 (DNA methyltransferase 1) is the principal enzyme responsible for maintenance of cytosine methylation at CpG dinucleotides in the mammalian genome. The N-terminal replication focus targeting sequence (RFTS) domain of Dnmt1 has been implicated in subcellular localization, protein association, and catalytic function. However, progress in understanding its function has been limited by the lack of assays for and a structure of this domain. Here, we show that the naked DNA- and polynucleosome-binding activities of Dnmt1 are inhibited by the RFTS domain, which functions by virtue of binding the catalytic domain to the exclusion of DNA. Kinetic analysis with a fluorogenic DNA substrate established the RFTS domain as a 600-fold inhibitor of Dnmt1 enzymatic activity. The crystal structure of the RFTS domain reveals a novel fold and supports a mechanism in which an RFTS-targeted Dnmt1-binding protein, such as Uhrf1, may activate Dnmt1 for DNA binding.

1 Bookmark
 · 
209 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Among the epigenetic marks, DNA methylation is one of the most studied. It is highly deregulated in numerous diseases, including cancer. Indeed, it has been shown that hypermethylation of tumor suppressor genes promoters is a common feature of cancer cells. Since DNA methylation is reversible, the DNA methyltransferases (DNMTs), responsible for this epigenetic mark, are considered promising therapeutic targets. Several molecules have been identified as DNMT inhibitors and, among the non-nucleoside ones, 4-aminoquinoline-based inhibitors, such as SGI-1027 and its analogs, showed potent inhibitory activity. Here we characterized the in vitro mechanism of action of SGI-1027 and two analogs. Enzymatic competition studies with the DNA substrate and the methyl donor cofactor, S-adenosyl-L-methionine (SAM), displayed SAM non-competitive and DNA competitive behavior. In addition, deviations from the Michaelis-Menten model in DNA competition experiments suggested an interaction with DNA. Thus their ability to interact with DNA was established: while SGI-1027 was a weak DNA ligand, analog 5, the most potent inhibitor, strongly interacted with DNA. Finally, as 5 interacted with DNMT only when the DNA duplex was present, we hypothesize that this class of chemical compounds inhibit DNMTs by interacting with the DNA substrate. Copyright © 2014, The American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology.
    Journal of Biological Chemistry 12/2014; DOI:10.1074/jbc.M114.594671 · 4.60 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Site-specific hypermethylation of tumor suppressor genes accompanied by genome-wide hypomethylation are epigenetic hallmarks of malignancy. However, the molecular mechanisms that drive these linked changes in DNA methylation remain obscure. DNA methyltransferase 1 (DNMT1), the principle enzyme responsible for maintaining methylation patterns is commonly dysregulated in tumors. Replication foci targeting sequence (RFTS) is an N-terminal domain of DNMT1 that inhibits DNA-binding and catalytic activity, suggesting that RFTS deletion would result in a gain of DNMT1 function. However, a substantial body of data suggested that RFTS is required for DNMT1 activity. Here, we demonstrate that deletion of RFTS alters DNMT1-dependent DNA methylation during malignant transformation. Compared to full-length DNMT1, ectopic expression of hyperactive DNMT1-DRFTS caused greater malignant transformation and enhanced promoter methylation with condensed chromatin structure that silenced DAPK and DUOX1 expression. Simultaneously, deletion of RFTS impaired DNMT1 chromatin association with pericentromeric Satellite 2 (SAT2) repeat sequences and produced DNA demethylation at SAT2 repeats and globally. To our knowledge, RFTS-deleted DNMT1 is the first single factor that can reprogram focal hypermethylation and global hypomethylation in parallel during malignant transformation. Our evidence suggests that the RFTS domain of DNMT1 is a target responsible for epigenetic changes in cancer.
    Cell cycle (Georgetown, Tex.) 10/2014; 13(20):3222-3231. DOI:10.4161/15384101.2014.950886 · 5.01 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Objective: Fetal placental mesenchymal stem cells (fPMSCs) have shown promising cell therapy potentials. However, their genetic and epigenetic stability during in vitro propagation has not been well studied. We thus interrogated the methylation alterations and tumorigenicity of fPMSCs after in vitro expansion using serum-free medium. Research design and methods: The properties of fPMSCs cultured in a serum-free medium at passage 3 and passage 8 were ascertained by determining their MSC markers, proliferative capacity, chromosomal stability, activity of global DNA methyltransferases and methylation profile. Their potential of malignant transformation was also evaluated in a severe combined immunodeficiency (SCID) murine model. Results: The fPMSCs could maintain their MSC characteristics but quickly reached a senescent state of proliferation during in vitro expansion. 246 genes with differential DNA methylation of promoters were identified, along with a significantly downregulated global DNA methyltransferase activity. The genes associated with aging and tumorigenesis had a significantly demethylated tendency over in vitro propagation. However, the deposition of epigenetic alterations did not translate into malignant transformation in SCID mice. Conclusion: The fPMSCs cultured in serum-free medium have a tendency to deposit methylation modifications over in vitro expansion, therefore the detection of genetic and/or epigenetic alterations is necessary for fPMSCs before they are employed for clinical uses.
    Expert Opinion on Biological Therapy 09/2014; 15(2):1-18. DOI:10.1517/14712598.2015.960837 · 3.65 Impact Factor

Full-text (2 Sources)

Download
84 Downloads
Available from
Jun 3, 2014