| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
Molecular Biology, Pathobiology, and Genetics |
1 Oncology Research Institute and 2 Department of Pathology, National University of Singapore; 3 Bioinformatics Institute; 4 Institute of Molecular and Cell Biology, Singapore, Singapore; 5 H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, Tampa, Florida; and 6 Department of Oncology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
Requests for reprints: Saraswati Sukumar, Oncology Research Institute. Phone: 410-614-2479; Fax: 410-614-4073; E-mail: saras{at}jhmi.edu or Yoshiaki Ito, Oncology Research Institute, Clinical Research Centre Level 5, National University of Singapore, 10 Medical Drive, Singapore 117597. Phone: 65-6586-9646; Fax: 65-6779-1117; E-mail: itoy{at}imcb.a-star.edu.sg.
| Abstract |
|---|
|
|
|---|
| Introduction |
|---|
|
|
|---|
250 women die from the disease. In the United States, the incidence rate is 111 cases per 100,000 woman-years and a mortality rate of 24 deaths per 100,000 woman-years (1). Identification of the genetic changes involved in the multiple steps of breast cancer from initiation to progression is critical for early detection and prevention. Transforming growth factor-ß (TGF-ß) regulates cell proliferation, differentiation, motility, and apoptosis in a variety of different cell types (2, 3). It is the most potent known inhibitor of normal human mammary epithelial cell replication in vitro (4). A number of studies provided strong evidence that TGF-ß protects against mammary tumor formation (57) induced either by a relative lack of TGF-ß or inactivation of the TGF-ß signaling pathway. Xie et al. (8) showed that the majority of breast cancer cell lines did not respond to TGF-ß-induced cell cycle arrest although the TGF-ß signaling cascade (involving Smads) was active in these cells. In more than 400 human breast cancer tissues studied, the majority were shown to contain active TGF-ß (Smad) signaling pathways, indicating their ability to proliferate within a microenvironment that contains bioactive TGF-ß (8). Thus, some other factors seem to be impinging on the TGF-ß pathway to cause the relative refractoriness of breast cancer to TGF-ß-induced cell cycle arrest or apoptosis. An emerging body of work has provided evidence that RUNX3 is a likely candidate gene (9). RUNX3 was found to be involved in TGF-ß-induced tumor suppressor pathway (10). In fact, gastric epithelial cells of Runx3-null mice were resistant to the growth-inhibiting and apoptosis-inducing activity of TGF-ß (11).
In 2002, a large body of evidence was presented to support a tumor suppressor role for RUNX3 in gastric cancer (12). Since then, numerous studies have shown loss of RUNX3 expression in many cancer types, usually through allelic loss and epigenetic changes (1319). Among them, two studies, one on gastric (12) and the other on bladder cancer (20), have reported loss-of-function mutations. Because promoter hypermethylation can cause silencing of a wide range of tumor suppressors concomitantly, discovery of mutations in RUNX3 was particularly important to positively identify the gene involved in the development of these cancers (12, 20). Comparison of the effects in in vitro cell growth and xenograft assay in nude mice between wild-type RUNX3 and RUNX3(R122C) identified in gastric cancer suggested that wild-type, but not the mutant form of RUNX3, showed growth inhibitory activity. Furthermore, RUNX3(R122C) bound to DNA and interacted with Smads more weakly than wild-type RUNX3 and attenuated the expression of cyclin/cyclin-dependent kinase inhibitor p21Waf-1 (12, 20). RUNX3 induced the proapoptotic gene Bim whereas inactivation of RUNX3 attenuated apoptosis mediated by RUNX3 (21). These results suggested that RUNX3 is a strong candidate tumor suppressor gene in gastric cancer.
More recently, another mechanism of inactivation of RUNX3 was recognized. In a substantial fraction of gastric cancer cases in which RUNX3 was expressed, the protein was mislocalized in the cytoplasm as an inactive form. It is possible that disruption of machinery that controls nuclear transport of RUNX3 resulted in the sequestration or aberrant localization of RUNX3 in the cytoplasm. TGF-ß was recently identified as one of the signals that control nuclear translocation of RUNX3 in a gastric cancer cell line (22). It is of great interest to examine whether inactivation of RUNX3 by mislocalization occurs in breast cancer as well.
RUNX3 belongs to the RUNX family of transcription factors, which consists of RUNX1, RUNX2, and RUNX3. The three mammalian RUNX genes encode a set of closely related DNA binding proteins homologous to Runt, the Drosophila pair-rule gene product. The three RUNX proteins bind DNA as heterodimeric complexes with a common partner protein, CBF-ß. Yet, each RUNX product has a unique role. RUNX1 and RUNX2 are required for hematopoiesis and osteogenesis, respectively, and are genetically altered in leukemia and bone disease (2327). Interestingly, RUNX2 was implicated in the formation of osteolytic lesions by metastatic breast cancer cells (28, 29). In contrast, RUNX3 was shown to be involved in neurogenesis (30, 31) and thymopoiesis (32, 33) and functioned as a tumor suppressor of gastric cancer (12, 13). The CBF-ß gene product seemed to be required for high-affinity DNA binding by its three RUNX cofactors (10, 34). As might be expected from this essential functional role, Cbf-ß knockout mice succumbed to the earliest manifestation of Runx deficiency, which is a failure of definitive hematopoiesis (35). RUNX family members may play a broader role in multistep breast tumorigenesis than currently recognized.
In this study, we report that RUNX3 is frequently underexpressed in breast cancer compared with normal breast epithelium and present evidence for its behavior as a tumor suppressor gene. Loss of RUNX3 function in primary breast cancers was attributed to mislocalized protein expression and promoter hypermethylation. This study contributes to the understanding the function of RUNX3, its family members, and their downstream effector pathways in breast carcinogenesis.
| Materials and Methods |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Tumors. Primary breast tumors with matching adjacent normal tissue from Singapore patients were obtained from the National University of Singapore-National University Hospital Tissue Repository and the Pathology Department, National University of Singapore, after Institutional Review Board approval.
Reverse transcription-PCR. RNA was extracted from cultured cells using RNeasy Kit from Qiagen (Valencia, CA). cDNAs were synthesized from total RNA using Omniscript reverse transcriptase (Qiagen) with oligo-dT primer according to the manual of the manufacturer. PCR amplification of RUNX3, RUNX2, and osteopontin (OPN) was done using primers RUNX3 [Ps-N (Ps-NA, 5'-CGCCACTTGATTCTGGAGGATTTGT-3'; Ps-NB, 5'-TGAAGTGGCTTGTGGTGCTGAGTGA-3') and Ps-C (Ps-CA, 5'-GAGTTTCACCCTGACCATCACTGTG-3'; Ps-CB, 5'-GCCCATCACTGGTCTTGAAGGTTGT-3')]; RUNX2 (R2F, 5'-GCACAGACAGAAGCTTGAT-3'; R2R, 5'-CCCAGTTCTGAAGCACCT-3'), and OPN (OPNF, 5'-ATATGATGGCCGAGGTGATA-3'; OPNR, 5'-GACCTCAGAAGATGCACTAT-3'). To confirm the integrity of the prepared RNA, the same cDNAs were subjected to PCR amplification of Lamin A/C and glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate dehydrogenase (GAPDH) with the primer pairs Lamin (LamF, 5'-ACCTGCAGGAGCTCAATGAT-3'; LamR, 5'-AACTCCTCACGCACTTTGCT-3') and GAPDH (GAPF, 5'-ACCACAGTCCATGCCATCAC-3'; GAPR, 5'-TCCACCACCCTGTTGCTGTA-3').
Real-time PCR. Quantitative PCR was carried out using the ABI PRISM 7000 Sequence Detection Systems (Applied Biosystems, Foster City, CA). cDNA was obtained as described above. The ABI TaqMan Gene Expression system was used for analysis in triplicate of RUNX1, RUNX2, RUNX3, and CBF-ß, with cDNAs obtained from breast cancer cell lines and normal cell lines/strains. The relative expression of each cell line was compared with that of HMEC with the ABI Prism software version 2.1 using GAPDH as normalization control. At least three independent analyses were done.
Western blot analysis. Western blot was essentially done as described (12) using monoclonal antibodies (mAb) against RUNX3 and RE-6E9 (22) or RUNX2 and 8G5 (MBL, Nagoya, Japan).
DNA extraction. Genomic DNA from cell lines was extracted using the DNeasy Kit (Qiagen, Hilden, Germany). For primary tumors and normal breast tissue, two 4-µm paraffin-embedded sections were first washed with xylene, digested in 100 µL of TNES [10 mmol/L Tris (pH 8.0), 150 mmol/L NaCl, 2 mmol/L EDTA, 0.5% SDS] containing 40 µg proteinase K for 16 hours at 50°C, heat inactivated at 70°C for 10 minutes, and clarified by centrifugation at 14,000 for 10 minutes. Fifty microliters of the supernatant were used directly as a source of DNA for sodium bisulfite treatment.
Sodium bisulfite treatment of DNA. Tissue and cell line DNAs were treated with sodium bisulfite and analyzed using methylation-specific PCR as described by Yang et al. (36). Samples were aliquoted and stored at 80°C.
Methylation-specific PCR and sequencing. Sodium bisulfitetreated DNA was subjected to PCR using the following primers (12): RUNX3 region between 218 and 69 bp upstream of the translation initiation site of the exon 1 was amplified, methylated DNA primers Rx3-5M (5'-TTACGAGGGGCGGTCGTACGCGGG-3') and Rx3-3M (5'-AAAACGACCGACGCGAACGCCTCC-3'), and unmethylated DNA primers Rx3-5U (5'-TTATGAGGGGTGGTTGTATGTGGG-3') and Rx3-3U (5'-AAAACAACCAACACAAACACCTCC-3'). Sequencing of RUNX3 PCR products (264 to +203) of sodium bisulfitetreated DNA was done as previously described (20).
Immunohistochemistry and immunocytochemistry. Both were done as described in ref. 22 using mAb R3-6E9. In each case, normal breast lobules on the same section as well as sections of normal gastric epithelium analyzed in the same run served as positive controls. Mayer's hematoxylin (Sigma-Aldrich, Singapore) was used as counterstain. For immunofluorescence, cells were fixed and stained with mAb to RUNX3 (R3-6E9) or RUNX2 (8G5) and detected with biotinylated antimouse immunoglobulin G (Vector, Burlingame, CA) followed by fluorescein-avidin D (Vector). The cells were stained with 4',6-diamidino-2-phenylindole (DAPI; Sigma) as the nuclear stain.
Retroviral infection. pPal-RUNX3 retrovirus or empty vector was used to infect MDA-MB-231 cells and cells subjected to fluorescence-activated cell sorting to select for green fluorescent proteinpositive cells. Independent clones were screened for RUNX3 expression by real-time PCR. Experiments were done using both single and pooled clones.
Cell invasion assays. A single-cell suspension of pooled 231-RUNX3 cells in serum-free medium was added to the upper compartment of Chemicon (Temecula, CA) Cell Invasion Assay chambers. Ten-percent FCS in the bottom chamber served as chemoattractant. After 24 or 72 hours of incubation at 37°C, filters were rinsed, cells on the lower surface were stained (Chemicon, Temecula, CA) for 20 minutes, filters were washed with distilled water and dried, and images were captured at x200 magnification.
Murine xenografts. Institutional IACUC guidelines were followed for mouse studies. Four- to six-week-old BALB/c nude mice received s.c. injections of pooled 1 x 106 231-RUNX3 or 231-Vec cells. Once detected, tumors were measured every week until they reached 1 cm3 in volume, whereupon mice were euthanized.
Statistical analysis. The nonparametric Mann-Whitney test or the two-sample t test at 5% significance was done following Levene's test for equality of variance with P < 0.05 considered statistically significant. The
2 association test was done for the presence of an association between RUNX3 methylation and estrogen receptor, progesterone receptor, or lymph node status. The odds ratio for the various factors with its 95% confidence interval was determined. The SPSS version 11.5 statistical software was used.
| Results |
|---|
|
|
|---|
|
Next, Western blot analysis was done on the same panel of breast cancer cells to determine whether alterations in mRNA expression of RUNX2 and RUNX3 were accompanied by corresponding changes at the protein level as well. With a few exceptions such as BT474 and HCC38, levels of RUNX3 mRNA expression correlated with levels of RUNX3 protein (Figs. 1C and 2 ). Concordance between RUNX2 mRNA and protein expression was observed in 14 of 19 cell lines (Figs. 1B and 2). Interestingly, of 13 cell lines that showed low or undetectable expression of RUNX3, 8 had detectable RUNX2 expression. This inverse correlation between RUNX2 and RUNX3, although not statistically significant, is suggestive of regulatory effect of one RUNX gene on the expression of the other.
|
25% of primary breast cancers (18, 19). However, characterization of RUNX3 in breast cancer cell lines that provide valuable model systems has not yet been reported. To determine if decreased expression of RUNX3 correlated with promoter hypermethylation, we did methylation-specific PCR on the panel of breast cancer cell lines (Fig. 3A
). Methylated alleles of RUNX3 were detected in 9 of 19 breast cancer cell lines whereas the unmethylated RUNX3 gene was observed in all 6 HMEC lines. Methylation of the RUNX3 promoter region correlated with low expression of RUNX3 mRNA (Fig. 1C). In 9 of 19 breast cancer cell lines with RUNX3 promoter methylation (Fig. 3A), no detectable or very low RUNX3 expression was observed (Figs. 1C and 2). On the other hand, UACC893 and SKBR3 contained unmethylated RUNX3 but nevertheless displayed low levels of RUNX3 mRNA and protein compared with HMECs. These findings suggest that other mechanisms are also involved in the regulation of RUNX3 expression. Collectively, these data showed that RUNX3 expression correlated strongly with RUNX3 promoter hypermethylation (P < 0.0001) on analysis of all 25 cell lines/strains. To confirm the data shown in Fig. 3, in 19 cancer cell lines the 264 to +203 bp region relative to the translation initiation site, encompassing a dense CpG island in exon 1 of RUNX3, was sequenced using sodium bisulfitetreated, PCR-amplified DNA. Sequencing data reflected that seen in the methylation-specific PCR analysis, indicating that methylation is spread evenly across this region (data not shown). Thus, by methylation-specific PCR analysis, sodium bisulfite sequencing, reverse transcription-PCR (RT-PCR), and Western blot analysis, the results showed that low RUNX3 expression in breast cancer cells lines correlated strongly with hypermethylation of the RUNX3 gene in most cell lines. However, additional, yet undeciphered, mechanisms of silencing of RUNX3 gene exist in breast cancer cells. Our results, thus far, led us to conclude that for many breast cancer cell lines, promoter hypermethylation could be a major underlying mechanism for loss of expression of RUNX3.
|
Because we had previously observed a trend towards an inverse correlation between RUNX3 and RUNX2 expression, we examined RUNX2 levels in the drug-treated cells. Interestingly, in MDA-MB-231 and T47D, and less so in MCF7, reexpression of RUNX3 correlated with reduced levels of RUNX2 mRNA, as measured by real-time PCR (5-fold with 5'-aza-deoxycytidine plus trichostatin A; data not shown) and RT-PCR [Fig. 3B(d)], and of RUNX2 protein [Fig. 3B(b)]. RUNX2 is a known transcriptional regulator controlling osteogenesis (29). OPN is a bone stromal cell gene involved in bone differentiation that is responsive to RUNX2 (29). Interestingly, in drug-treated cells, RUNX3 reexpression [Fig. 3B(a,b)] is accompanied by reduced RUNX2 expression [Fig. 3B(b,d)] and a corresponding striking increase in the mRNA expression of the RUNX2 target gene OPN [Fig. 3B(d)]. These data suggest that RUNX3 is not only reexpressed on demethylation and histone deacetylase inhibition in breast cancer cells but may also be transcriptionally active and functionally competent.
Loss of RUNX3 protein expression and hypermethylation occurs frequently in primary breast cancer. We examined 44 invasive ductal carcinomas from Singapore for RUNX3 expression by immunohistochemistry using an anti-RUNX3 mAb (10). Representative cases are shown in Fig. 4A . Normal breast tissue adjacent to the tumors in the same section from all 44 patients stained positive for RUNX3 and, in each case, the positive staining was found to be nuclear (a and b). On the other hand, decreased RUNX3 expression was seen in six cases of ductal carcinoma in situ within the invasive carcinoma tissues (c and d). Strikingly, the invasive component of all 44 cases showed negative or weak staining for RUNX3 (e and f). When weakly positive, the staining was not nuclear but was cytoplasmic (c-f). These results strongly suggested that RUNX3 down-regulation and sequestration in the cytoplasm is a frequent event in breast cancer and occurs fairly early in the carcinogenic process.
|
|
RUNX3 has tumor suppressor activity. To determine if RUNX3 behaves as a tumor suppressor gene in breast cancer cells, stable clones of MDA-MB-231 cells (which lack detectable RUNX3 expression) were derived following infection with a RUNX3 retrovirus (231-RUNX3). RUNX3 mRNA and protein expression were verified (Fig. 5A and B ). Unlike previous observations in gastric cancer cells (12, 40), the rate of cell proliferation between parental, 231-Vec, and 231-RUNX3 cells, as determined by growth assays, was not found to be significantly different (data not shown). Interestingly, as seen in 5'-aza-deoxycytidine-treated and trichostatin Atreated cells (Fig. 3B), exogenous expression of RUNX3 in the MDA-MB-231 cells was accompanied by reduced endogenous levels of RUNX2 mRNA (data not shown) and protein (Fig. 5B) and an increase in OPN mRNA levels (Fig. 5A). By immunofluorescence analysis, RUNX3 was localized to the nucleus in 231-RUNX3 cells (Fig. 5C, top). Again, reduced expression of RUNX2 was observed in 231-RUNX3 cells compared with the 231-Vec control cells (Fig. 5C, bottom). Thus, the presence of functional RUNX3 expression was shown in MDA-MB-231 cells stably expressing RUNX3.
|
|
Collectively, these data provide strong evidence for the growth-suppressive effects of RUNX3 in breast cancer cells both in vitro and in vivo and suggest that loss of, or reduced, RUNX3 expression seen commonly in primary breast cancer could have functional consequences that promote tumorigenesis.
| Discussion |
|---|
|
|
|---|
In this study, we found that all the breast cancer tissues (n = 44) have weak or no expression of RUNX3 compared with normal tissues. Moreover, when present, the weak staining was in the cytoplasm, not in the nucleus. These data suggest that, as in gastric cancer, RUNX3 in breast cancer tissues was sequestered in the cytoplasm and, possibly, inactive. In contrast, all the corresponding normal tissues in the same patients showed strong RUNX3 expression and, in each case, localized to the nucleus. Hence, besides methylation, cytoplasmic mislocalization could be another important mechanism whereby RUNX3 is inactivated in breast cancer. Nuclear expression of RUNX3 in normal ductal epithelial cells is quite strong and easy to recognize whereas this strong nuclear staining is almost completely absent in cancer cells. This observation would suggest a potential role of RUNX3 immunohistochemistry for diagnosis of breast cancer. In particular, because nuclear expression of RUNX3 is clearly missing in ductal carcinoma in situ, RUNX3 immunohistochemistry might be an excellent tool for diagnosis of early breast cancer. Future studies will address when RUNX3 is altered in the continuum of breast disease progression and whether RUNX3 inactivation in stages as early as benign breast disease could serve as an indicator of high risk.
Loss of expression and loss of activity due to mislocalization in a large proportion of breast cancers suggested a tumor/growth suppressor role for RUNX3 in breast cancer as well. As predicted, RUNX3 displayed tumor-suppressive effects in breast cancer cells in in vitro change in morphology, growth in Matrigel, and invasion assays without any change in growth rate, and completely suppressed tumorigenicity in mouse xenograft assays. These results examining the gene, its mRNA, and protein propose a key role for RUNX3 in breast cancer and point to its potential value as a marker that is frequently methylated and mislocalized in breast cancer.
How does RUNX3 behave as a tumor suppressor gene in breast cells? One mechanism could be by behaving as an inducer of apoptosis. In a recent publication, it was shown that, to achieve apoptosis, RUNX3 cooperated with FoxO3a/FKHRL1 to directly activate expression of the proapoptotic gene, Bim (21). Another line of evidence (41) showed that RUNX3 formed complexes with receptor-regulated Smads (R-Smads), suggesting that RUNX3 could be a downstream target of the TGF-ß pathway. In the context of breast cancer, it was reported (8) that the majority of breast cancer cells were resistant to the growth-suppressive effects of TGF-ß although the downstream Smad pathway was active. It is possible that lack of RUNX3 function could blunt the effect of TGF-ß despite the presence of an active Smad pathway. As described above, in gastric cancer cells, TGF-ß was shown to be an inducer of nuclear translocation of RUNX3 whereas RUNX3 in the cytoplasm was inactive as a tumor suppressor protein (22). Recently, Javed et al. (29) showed that mutations in RUNX2 could impair its intranuclear trafficking in breast cancer cells and the formation of osteolytic lesions in bone in vivo. However, the extent of such mislocalization in actual breast tumor samples was not examined.
As members of a family of transcription factors, one question that arises is whether RUNX genes are involved in the regulation of other family members or whether they function independently of each other. It has been recently shown that the expression of RUNX1 is regulated by RUNX3 in human B-lymphoid cell lines (42). RUNX3 inhibition by small interfering RNA in lymphoblastoid cells resulted in increased RUNX1 expression, indicating that continuous expression of physiologic levels of RUNX3 is required to maintain repression (42). Frequent down-regulation of RUNX3, RUNX1, and CBF-ß was also observed in gastric cancer (43). In the present study, we observed a trend towards an inverse correlation between RUNX3 expression and that of RUNX2 in breast cancer cell lines. More direct evidence was provided when reactivated expression of RUNX3 in three breast cancer cell lines with 5'-aza-deoxycytidine and trichostatin A resulted in a corresponding decrease in RUNX2 expression (Fig. 3B). Additionally, exogenous expression of RUNX3 in MDA-MB-231 cell lines also resulted in a significant decrease in RUNX2 expression (Fig. 5). These data suggest that RUNX3 might regulate the expression of RUNX2 in breast cancer cells, a concept that needs further investigation. Breast cancer often metastasizes to the bone, and there is evidence for RUNX2 involvement in bone metastasis (28, 29). It is tempting to speculate that loss of RUNX3 expression may be one of the pathways that can lead to an increase in RUNX2 expression, which, in turn, promotes progression of bone metastasis. Whether RUNX3 plays a direct role in up-regulation of OPN in breast cancer cells remains to be studied. It is well known that transcriptional regulators of the RUNX family play critical roles in normal organ development and, when mutated, lead to genetic diseases and cancer (10). Taken together, our study and those of others indicate that interplay between different RUNX family proteins may be important in regulating the development and differentiation of different cell types. Loss of RUNX3 expression could also lead to abnormal expression of other family members of RUNX and thus lead to pathologic changes.
Two recent studies showed that the frequency of hypermethylated RUNX3 genes in both Caucasian (n = 37) and Korean (n = 25) breast cancers was
25% (18, 19). In Singapore breast cancer among women below the age of 55 years, however, the frequency of methylation was found by us to be significantly higher, at 52%. It is not clear what factors and whether age contributed to this higher frequency. For immediate application, RUNX3 will provide a valuable addition to panels of methylated genes that are being assembled (44) to facilitate early detection of breast cancer DNA in body fluids such as nipple aspirations, fine needle aspirations, and serum.
In summary, we have shown that RUNX3 was expressed at very low levels in breast cancer. RUNX3 promoter hypermethylation and/or protein sequestration in the cytoplasm occurred in nearly all breast cancers, and the dual mechanisms acting together in many cases likely account for loss of function of RUNX3 in breast cancer. If preliminary evidence is confirmed that this loss occurs very early in cancer development, RUNX3 immunohistochemistry on breast biopsies could serve as a sensitive test for distinguishing between benign and malignant lesions. A better understanding on the role of RUNX3 in breast cancer would help us in establishing its function as a tumor suppressor and also gain insight into the biology of breast carcinogenesis.
| Acknowledgments |
|---|
The costs of publication of this article were defrayed in part by the payment of page charges. This article must therefore be hereby marked advertisement in accordance with 18 U.S.C. Section 1734 solely to indicate this fact.
We thank Mary Jo Fackler for providing training and advice, Drs. Alan Rein and Yoon Pin Lim for reviewing the manuscript, National University of Singapore-National University Hospital Tissue Repository and National University Hospital Department of Pathology, and the Oncology Research Institute Translational Interface and National University Medical Institutes Core facility for providing technical support.
Received 1/31/06. Revised 4/ 1/06. Accepted 4/13/06.
| References |
|---|
|
|
|---|
by DNA methyltransferase and histone deacetylase inhibition in human ER-
-negative breast cancer cells. Cancer Res 2001;61:70259.
locus leads to gene silencing in breast cancer. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2000;97:604954.
promoter. J Biol Chem 1999;274:3157782.This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
E. M. Wolff, G. Liang, C. C. Cortez, Y. C. Tsai, J. E. Castelao, V. K. Cortessis, D. D. Tsao-Wei, S. Groshen, and P. A. Jones RUNX3 Methylation Reveals that Bladder Tumors Are Older in Patients with a History of Smoking Cancer Res., August 1, 2008; 68(15): 6208 - 6214. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
D. J. Weisenberger, B. N. Trinh, M. Campan, S. Sharma, T. I. Long, S. Ananthnarayan, G. Liang, F. J. Esteva, G. N. Hortobagyi, F. McCormick, et al. DNA methylation analysis by digital bisulfite genomic sequencing and digital MethyLight Nucleic Acids Res., August 1, 2008; 36(14): 4689 - 4698. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
S. Fujii, K. Ito, Y. Ito, and A. Ochiai Enhancer of Zeste Homologue 2 (EZH2) Down-regulates RUNX3 by Increasing Histone H3 Methylation J. Biol. Chem., June 20, 2008; 283(25): 17324 - 17332. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
A. S.L. Cheng, A. C. Culhane, M. W.Y. Chan, C. R. Venkataramu, M. Ehrich, A. Nasir, B. A.T. Rodriguez, J. Liu, P. S. Yan, J. Quackenbush, et al. Epithelial Progeny of Estrogen-Exposed Breast Progenitor Cells Display a Cancer-like Methylome Cancer Res., March 15, 2008; 68(6): 1786 - 1796. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J. A. Horsfield, S. H. Anagnostou, J. K.-H. Hu, K. H. Y. Cho, R. Geisler, G. Lieschke, K. E. Crosier, and P. S. Crosier Cohesin-dependent regulation of Runx genes Development, July 15, 2007; 134(14): 2639 - 2649. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
| Cancer Research | Clinical Cancer Research |
| Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention | Molecular Cancer Therapeutics |
| Molecular Cancer Research | Cancer Prevention Research |
| Cancer Prevention Journals Portal | Cancer Reviews Online |
| Annual Meeting Education Book | Meeting Abstracts Online |