Cancer Research Translational Medicine Conference in Israel
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
This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Blyth, K.
Right arrow Articles by Cameron, E. R.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Blyth, K.
Right arrow Articles by Cameron, E. R.
[Cancer Research 66, 2195-2201, February 15, 2006]
© 2006 American Association for Cancer Research

Cell, Tumor, and Stem Cell Biology

Runx2 and MYC Collaborate in Lymphoma Development by Suppressing Apoptotic and Growth Arrest Pathways In vivo

Karen Blyth, François Vaillant, Linda Hanlon, Nancy Mackay, Margaret Bell, Alma Jenkins, James C. Neil and Ewan R. Cameron

Molecular Oncology Laboratory, Institute of Comparative Medicine, Faculty of Veterinary, Medicine, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, United Kingdom

Requests for reprints: Karen Blyth or Ewan R. Cameron, Molecular Oncology Laboratory, Institute of Comparative Medicine, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, University of Glasgow, Bearsden, Glasgow G61 1QH, United Kingdom. Phone: 44-141-330-5726; Fax: 44-141-330-2271; E-mail: K.Blyth{at}vet.gla.ac.uk.


   Abstract
Top
 Abstract
Introduction
 Materials and Methods
 Results
 Discussion
 References
 
Members of the Runx and MYC families have been implicated as collaborating oncogenes. The mechanism of this potent collaboration is elucidated in this study of Runx2/MYC mice. As shown previously, ectopic expression of Runx2 in the thymus leads to a preneoplastic state defined by an accumulation of cells with an immature phenotype and a low proliferative rate. We now show that c-MYC overexpression is sufficient to rescue proliferation and to release the differentiation block imposed by Runx2. Analysis of Runx2-expressing lymphomas reveals a consistently low rate of apoptosis, in contrast to lymphomas of MYC mice which are often highly apoptotic. The low apoptosis phenotype is dominant in Runx2/MYC tumors, indicating that Runx2 confers a potent survival advantage to MYC-expressing tumor cells. The role of the p53 pathway in Runx2/MYC tumors was explored on a p53 heterozygote background. Surprisingly, functional p53 was retained in vivo, even after transplantation, whereas explanted tumor cells displayed rapid allele loss in vitro. Our results show that Runx2 and MYC overcome distinct "fail-safe" responses and that their selection as collaborating genes is due to their ability to neutralize each other's negative growth effect. Furthermore, the Runx2/MYC combination overcomes the requirement for genetic inactivation of the p53 pathway in vivo. (Cancer Res 2006; 66(4): 2195-201)


   Introduction
Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
Materials and Methods
 Results
 Discussion
 References
 
The three mammalian RUNX (AML/CBF) genes encode a family of transcription factors that play essential gene-specific roles in the development of blood, bone, and neurologic systems, and regulate the expression of a broad range of genes involved in growth control and differentiation (1–7). Paradoxically, the RUNX genes have been implicated both as tumor suppressors and as oncogenes, albeit in tumors of different cell type (8). Evidence for their oncogenic potential stems mainly from murine models where all three Runx genes have been shown to act as targets for insertional activation in retrovirus-induced hematopoietic tumors (9). Runx2 was the first family member to be identified as a common retroviral insertion site (10) and its oncogenic potential was definitively established by the generation of transgenic mice (11) that overexpress a full-length Runx2 cDNA in the T-cell compartment (CD2-Runx2).

Many instances of Runx targeting by retroviruses in T- or B-lymphoid cells have been identified in transgenic models harboring MYC, implicating the Runx genes as MYC collaborating genes in this context (10, 12, 13). Furthermore, a reciprocal experiment in which CD2-Runx2 mice were infected with murine leukemia virus revealed a major bias towards targeting of MYC family genes (c-MYC and N-MYC) in the resultant T-cell lymphomas, again suggesting a preferential relationship in oncogenic collaboration (14). In accord with this hypothesis, mice overexpressing both MYC and Runx2 in the T-cell compartment develop lymphomas with very rapid onset and 100% incidence (11).

Although these studies have confirmed the oncogenic nature of Runx2, the underlying mechanism is poorly understood, as are those aspects of Runx2 function that may act to restrict tumorigenesis. Clues may be inferred from the effects of Runx2 expression in transgenic mice where the preneoplastic thymus displays a greatly expanded population of immature single positive (ISP) CD8 cells (15), a transient stage in T-cell development between CD4–CD8– and CD4+CD8+ stages. Interestingly, the expansion observed in these CD2-Runx2 mice seems to arise due to retarded differentiation rather than increased proliferation; indeed, these cells are significantly less proliferative than the equivalent population in control animals, raising the possibility that the partial block in differentiation is secondary to a proliferation defect. To investigate the oncogenic properties of Runx2 and the basis of its potent collaboration with c-MYC, we have examined the functional consequences of coexpressing these genes in both preneoplastic and lymphoma cells. Our study indicates that MYC and Runx2 oncogenes activate distinct intrinsic resistance or "fail-safe" mechanisms and that they are coselected due to their ability to cross-neutralize these growth inhibitory responses. Moreover, this study provides the first evidence that Runx2 can exert its neoplastic potential by inducing a tumor-specific survival effect.

We also investigated the role of the p53 pathway in the rapid onset tumors of Runx2/MYC mice. Genetic loss of the p53 pathway has been shown to be strongly selected in the B-cell Eµ-MYC transgenic model (16), presumably due to the activation of p19ARF by overexpressed MYC (17). Moreover, germ-line inactivation of p53 is strongly synergistic with CD2-MYC and CD2-Runx2 transgenes (14, 18), inviting the speculation that genetic loss of p53 function will be even more critical in transgenic mice carrying both oncogenes. In contrast, our evidence suggests that pressure to lose p53 by genetic mechanisms is diminished in these tumors in vivo although rapid loss is invariably observed when tumor cells are cultured in vitro. We suggest a model of oncogene collaboration whereby the combination of Runx2 and MYC in vivo bypasses the need to lose the p53 pathway.


   Materials and Methods
Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Materials and Methods
Results
 Discussion
 References
 
Experimental animals. Transgenic (CD2-MYC; CD2-MYC-ERTM CD2-Runx2) and null (p53–/–; TCR{alpha}–/–) animals were generated and genotyped as previously described (11, 19–22). Where possible, all crosses were carried out with F1 animals in which littermate controls were included. In vivo tamoxifen administration was carried out as previously described (20). Briefly, 4-hydroxytamoxifen (Sigma, Poole, United Kingdom) dissolved in ethanol (100 µg/µL) was mixed with autoclaved sunflower seed oil (Sigma). Animals were given three i.p. injections of 2 mg of 4-hydroxytamoxifen at 48-hour intervals and sacrificed 24 hours after the last treatment. For transplantation experiments, MFI nu/nu female mice (Harlan, Bicester, United Kingdom) at 9 to 12 weeks of age were injected i.p. with 2 x 107 primary tumor cells resuspended in 0.5 mL sterile PBS. Animals were humanely sacrificed when signs of tumor were apparent. All animal work was undertaken in line with the UK Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act of 1986.

Flow cytometric analysis of isolated thymocytes. Thymus/tumor tissue was disaggregated in RPMI (Life Technologies, Paisley, United Kingdom) containing 10% FCS, 2 mmol/L glutamine, 50 µmol/L ß-mercaptoethanol, and penicillin/streptomycin using scalpel blades or by mashing through a 70-µm cell strainer. Ficoll-Paque (Pharmacia, Milton Keynes, United Kingdom) separation of viable lymphocytes at 3,000 rpm for 10 minutes was used in all cases except where assessment of apoptosis by sub-G1 analysis was undertaken. Cells (~2 x 106) were washed in cold PBS containing 0.1% bovine serum albumin (BSA) and 0.01% sodium azide and directly labeled with a combination of rat monoclonal antibodies: FITC-conjugated anti-mouse CD8 (Serotec, Kidlington, United Kingdom); phycoerythrin-conjugated anti-mouse CD4; phycoerythrin-Cy5-conjugated anti-mouse CD4; and CyChrome-conjugated anti-mouse TCR ß-chain (BD PharMingen, Oxford, United Kingdom). Cells were washed thrice in cold PBS/BSA/sodium azide and resuspended in 500 µL of PBS/BSA/sodium azide for immunophenotype analysis. For simultaneous cell cycle analysis, labeled cells were washed sequentially in PBS/BSA/azide and PBS/0.1% azide. The pellet was gently resuspended in 1 part 50% FCS (in PBS/azide) with 3 parts cold 70% ethanol, added dropwise while vortexing, and fixed overnight at 4°C. Cells were washed twice in PBS/0.1% azide and resuspended in 10 µg/mL 7-actinomycin (Calbiochem, Nottingham, United Kingdom), incubated at room temperature for 1 hour, and analyzed by flow cytometry. Cell cycle analysis using propidium iodide was carried out as previously described (20). All flow cytometric analysis was carried out on a Beckman Coulter Epics XL.MCL using Expo32 software package.

Bromodeoxyuridine incorporation. One hour before sacrifice, animals were injected i.p. with 1 mg bromodeoxyuridine (BrdUrd; Sigma) per 10 g weight. Single-cell suspensions were washed in PBS and fixed overnight in 70% ethanol. BrdUrd incorporation was identified using either FITC-conjugated anti-BrdUrd antibody or an In situ Cell Proliferation Kit (Roche, Lewes, United Kingdom) according to the instructions of the manufacturer. Samples were resuspended in PBS containing 10 µg/mL propidium iodide and visualized on a Beckman Coulter Epics XL.

In situ apoptosis detection (terminal deoxyribonucleotidyl transferase–mediated dUTP nick end labeling). Terminal deoxyribonucleotidyl transferase–mediated dUTP nick end labeling (TUNEL) analysis of tumor tissue was carried out as previously described (20). At least 12 different microscopic fields were examined for each tissue section.

Loss of heterozygosity analysis. High molecular weight DNA was isolated from tumor tissue and cells using the Nucleon DNA extraction kit (Tepnel Life Sciences, Manchester, United Kingdom). DNA digestion with BamH1 enzyme (Life Technologies), separation by 0.8% agarose gel electrophoresis, and transfer to Hybond N membrane (Amersham Pharmacia Biotech Ltd., Little Chalfont, United Kingdom) in 20x SSC were carried out following the instructions of the manufacturer. Filters were hybridized in Rapid-hyb (Amersham Biosciences) at 65°C for 2 to 3 hours, washed at high stringency (3 x 20 minutes, 0.1x SSC; 0.5% SDS at 60°C), and exposed to X-ray film. The p53 null allele was detected using a PCR-generated p53 exon 4 probe (primers 5'-CCATCACCTCACTGCATGG-3' and 5'-CGTGCACATAACAGACTTGGC-3'), which also reveals wild-type and pseudogene alleles of p53.

Western blot analysis. Whole-cell extracts were prepared by washing cells in cold PBS followed by lysis in buffer (20 mmol/L HEPES, 5 mmol/L EDTA, 10 mmol/L EGTA, 5 mmol/L NaF, 10% glycerol, 1 mmol/L DTT containing 0.4 mol/L KCl, 0.4% Triton X-100, 0.1 µg/mL okadiac acid, and protease inhibitors, 5 µg/mL leupeptin, 5 µg/mL aprotinin, 5 µg/mL pepstatin A, 1 mmol/L benzamidine, 50 µg/mL phenylmethylsulfonyl fluoride). Twenty micrograms of protein extract were resolved on 12% NuPAGE Novex Bis-Tris gels (Invitrogen, Paisley, United Kingdom) and transferred to Hybond-ECL nitrocellulose membranes (Amersham). Membranes were probed with antibodies to p53 (IC12, Cell Signaling Technology, Hitchin, United Kingdom), p19ARF (ab80, Abcam, Cambridge, United Kingdom), and actin (1-19; Santa Cruz Biotechnology, Santa Cruz, CA).

Statistical methods. All data are expressed as mean ± SD. Data were analyzed for significance using the Student's t test.


   Results
Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Materials and Methods
 Results
Discussion
 References
 
MYC rescues the restrictive effects of Runx2 on proliferation. Enforced expression of Runx2 in the T-cell compartment leads to a preneoplastic state characterized by expansion of ISP cells (15). Although CD2-Runx2 animals are predisposed to lymphoma development, the expanded cell population has a low proliferative index compared with the equivalent cell type in control animals (15). Despite the very rapid tumor development observed in Runx2/MYC transgenics (average life span of 36 days), it is possible to examine preneoplastic cells at 10 days of age, a stage at which clonal outgrowth of transformed cells is not yet detectable (11). Interestingly, double transgenic animals show a highly exaggerated CD8 skew before the development of T-cell lymphoma (Fig. 1A; P = <0.001). One possible explanation is that the proliferative block induced by Runx2 is rescued by MYC. Analysis of Runx2/MYC CD8SP cells revealed that coexpression of MYC induced a significant increase (P < 0.001) in the proportion of CD8SP cells in the S-G2-M phase of the cell cycle, showing that MYC could abrogate the proliferation defect induced by Runx2 (Fig. 1B).


Figure 1
View larger version (19K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		Figure 1. MYC rescues the antiproliferative effects of Runx2 in CD8SP cells. A, flow cytometric analysis of CD4/CD8 surface expression in neonatal thymocytes reveals an increased CD8+ population in Runx2/MYC transgenic animals. The percentage of CD8SP cells in the total population for control (n = 7), CD2-Runx2 (n = 8), and Runx2/MYC (n = 10) animals is shown. Representative of several independent experiments. B, cycling characteristics of CD8SP cells were assessed by analyzing the DNA content of the CD4–CD8+ population as signified by the box in (A). The percentage of CD8SP cells with DNA content of >2n is given for control (n = 4), CD2-Runx2 (n = 6), and Runx2/MYC (n = 9) neonatal animals. C, thymocyte proliferation of Runx2/MYC-ERTM transgenic and control thymocytes was assessed by propidium iodide analysis of thymocytes 24 hours after in vivo tamoxifen induction of the CD2-MYC-ERTM transgene. Representative of three experiments giving similar results. D, the percentage of in vivo BrdUrd (BrdU) incorporation in Runx2/MYC-ERTM thymocytes following tamoxifen treatment. C and D, columns, mean for 6 (Runx2/MYC-ERTM), 15 (CD2-Runx2), 6 (CD2-MYC-ERTM), and 9 (control) mice; bars, SD. 4-OHT, 4-hydroxytamoxifen. P values using Student's t test.

 
To determine whether the rescue of proliferation is a direct effect of MYC, we used an inducible MYC transgenic model (CD2-MYC-ERTM) in which in vivo T-lymphocyte proliferation is induced on MYC activation (20). CD2-Runx2 transgenic animals were crossed with CD2-MYC-ERTM mice and the MYC-ERTM transgene activated by 4-hydroxytamoxifen. Total thymocyte proliferation was measured in 3- to 4-week-old animals, several weeks before the onset of overt lymphoma. A significantly greater proportion of Runx2/MYC-ERTM thymocytes were found to be in S phase compared with CD2-Runx2 transgenics (P < 0.001; Fig. 1C). To confirm that this shift was due to increased cell cycling, we measured in vivo BrdUrd incorporation. Runx2/MYC-ERTM transgenics had significantly more proliferating thymocytes than CD2-Runx2 littermates (P < 0.002; Fig. 1D). Only animals in which the MYC-ERTM transgene is activated by tamoxifen exhibit this effect (20). These results confirm that MYC can overcome the negative growth effects of Runx2 in vivo.

Commitment to cell division seems to be dependent on a critical size threshold (23). It is therefore interesting that there is a significant increase in the proportion of large cells in the thymi of Runx2/MYC-ERTM double transgenic mice compared with CD2-Runx2 mice (Fig. 2A). This effect is also observed in 10-day-old Runx2/MYC mice (Fig. 2B). Analysis of each of the T-cell subpopulations reveals that the shift in cell size is restricted to the expanded population of CD8SP cells (Fig. 2C).


Figure 2
View larger version (18K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		Figure 2. MYC promotes cell growth of Runx2-expressing thymocytes. Single-cell preparations from transgenic thymus were analyzed by flow cytometry for forward light scatter as a measurement of cell size. A, 3- to 4-week-old Runx2/MYC-ERTM (n = 6), CD2-Runx2 (n = 15), MYC-ERTM (n = 9), and control (n = 9) mice were assessed 24 hours after in vivo tamoxifen administration. Cells falling to the right of the dotted line were regarded as having an increase in size as set on control cells, shown in representative histograms. B, overlay histogram showing forward scatter on the total thymocyte population from Runx2/MYC (filled histogram), Runx2 (solid overlaid line), and control (dotted overlaid line) preleukemic thymocytes as observed for at least six animals per genotype. C, overlay histograms gated on each of the T-cell subpopulations showing that only the CD8 population is affected by the shift in cell size. Cells were labeled with phycoerythrin-Cy5-anti-CD4 and FITC-anti-CD8. Histogram key as for (B).

 
MYC releases the T-cell differentiation block conferred by Runx2. Because ectopic Runx2 expression leads to a block in T-cell development at an immature stage, we were prompted to ask whether this is an essential component of the oncogenic program. For example, Runx2 expression might sequester T cells at a stage where they are highly sensitive to further transforming events. However, this notion was not borne out by Runx2/MYC double transgenic animals which showed a greatly increased proportion of total thymocytes expressing high levels of surface TCRß compared with age-matched Runx2 controls (Fig. 3). Moreover, direct analysis of the CD8SP population reveals that preneoplastic Runx2/MYC cells express high levels of TCRß, indicating that MYC overexpression may overcome the differentiation block induced by Runx2 (Fig. 3). This phenotype seems to be retained in tumors of Runx2/MYC compound animals that display high TCRß expression (>6 tumors analyzed). Spontaneous tumors arising in Runx2 transgenic mice are heterogeneous with respect to TCRß expression levels (data not shown). In conclusion, it seems that the differentiation block imposed by Runx2 is reversible and that MYC, and possibly other collaborating genes, can override the block. However, whereas MYC seems to drive T-cell maturation with up-regulation of surface TCR expression, it is interesting to note that TCR{alpha}ß receptor signaling is not essential for the expansion of the CD8 ISP population or rapid tumor development, which also occurs on a Runx2/MYC TCR{alpha} null background (Fig. 3).


Figure 3
View larger version (33K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		Figure 3. Up-regulation of TCRß expression on Runx2/MYC thymocytes. Thymocytes from neonatal transgenic animals were analyzed for CD4, CD8, and TCRß receptor expression. Left and middle, flow cytometry plots show the TCRß and CD4/8 phenotypes of the total cell population, respectively. Right, TCRß population gated on the CD8SP population, depicting increased levels of TCRß in Runx2/MYC compound animals. This analysis has been carried out for 5 (Runx2), 9 (Runx2/MYC), and 5 (Runx2/MYC/TCR{alpha}–/–) mice at 10 to 12 days of age. Numbers on the plots are the frequency of cells in that region (mean ± SD for TCRß). RCN, relative cell number.

 
Runx2 tumors display low apoptotic rates in situ even in the presence of MYC overexpression. The foregoing provides an insight into the selection of MYC as a preferred collaborating gene with Runx2 in tumor development but does not explain the oncogenic properties of Runx2 or its strong synergy with MYC. As MYC is noted for its ability to sensitize cells to apoptosis (24), we explored the possibility that Runx2 collaborates with MYC by inhibiting this process. In support of this hypothesis, Runx2 tumors show remarkably low levels of apoptosis by TUNEL whereas MYC tumors, although heterogeneous, are characterized by high levels of cell death (Fig. 4A), confirming our previous findings that highly proliferative tumors can sustain high levels of apoptosis (18). Significantly, TUNEL examination of tumors arising in compound Runx2/MYC transgenic mice reveals that they exhibit a more homogeneous level of apoptosis characterized by significantly (P = 0.026) reduced rates of cell death (Fig. 4A). MYC tumors exhibit extensive macrophage activity, often with many apoptotic bodies per macrophage (Fig. 4B). Although macrophage activity was also evident in Runx2/MYC tumors, these usually contained fewer apoptotic bodies (Fig. 4C). An independent measurement of apoptosis was carried out where tumor cells were stained with propidium iodide and assessed for a DNA content of <2n (sub-G1). Runx2/MYC tumors had significantly fewer cells in sub-G1 compared with MYC tumors (Fig. 4D; P = 0.025). Taken together, these results suggest that Runx2 is a potent MYC-collaborating gene due to its ability to attenuate apoptosis in T-cell tumors.


Figure 4
View larger version (32K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		Figure 4. Runx2 attenuates apoptosis in lymphomas overexpressing MYC. A, TUNEL analysis of thymic lymphomas from CD2-MYC (n = 6), CD2-Runx2 (n = 5), and Runx2/MYC (n = 6) transgenic animals. Apoptotic cells were scored in 12 fields per tumor (x400 magnification) and average was taken. Representative photomicrographs for CD2-MYC (B) and Runx2/MYC (C) tumors. Apoptotic cells are visualized as single cells and as macrophage engulfment of apoptotic bodies (arrow). Bar, 5 µm. D, sub-G1 analysis of CD2-MYC (n = 11), CD2-Runx2 (n = 16), and Runx2/MYC (n = 21) tumors. Single-cell suspensions were fixed, stained with propidium iodide, and analyzed by flow cytometry. Cells with <2n content were considered sub-G1.

 
Genetic inactivation of the p53-p19ARF pathway is not required for tumor development in vivo. As MYC and Runx2 transgenes each collaborate with germ-line p53 deficiency to induce T-cell lymphomas with short latency (14, 18), it may have been expected that the Runx2/MYC transgenic tumors would be disposed to lose p53 function. To assess this, Western blot analysis was used to examine p53 expression in these tumors. We found that p53 protein was detectable whereas p19ARF, which is usually repressed by functional p53 (25), was either undetectable or present at very low levels in the tumors (Fig. 5A). To test whether p53 was restricting tumor development, we crossed Runx2/MYC transgenics with mice carrying an inactivated p53 allele. It was not possible to derive p53–/– progeny due to the failure of parental strains (MYC/p53–/–; Runx2/MYC) to survive to breeding age. Therefore, Runx2/MYC/p53+/– offspring were monitored and the status of the wild-type allele assessed in tumors arising on this genetic background. Although there was reduced survival on a p53 heterozygote background (P = 0.006; Fig. 5B), no loss of heterozygosity was observed in the p53+/– tumors as assessed by Southern blot analysis (Fig. 5C).


Figure 5
View larger version (33K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		Figure 5. Retention of functional p53 in Runx2/MYC tumors. A, expression analysis of Runx2/MYC tumors. UV-treated wild-type cells are included as a positive control for p53 expression whereas p19 expression is readily detected in p53 null cells. Actin is shown to control for loading. B, lymphoma free survival of Runx2/MYC transgenic mice wild-type ({circ}; n = 42) and heterozygote null for p53 (bullet; n = 36). C, tumors arising in Runx2/MYC/p53+/– animals were assessed by Southern blot analysis for p53 loss of heterozygosity. Tumor (T), kidney (K), and cell line (C) are shown for six representative animals. Control is wild-type DNA. Pseudogene ({psi}), knockout (KO), and wild-type (WT) p53 alleles are indicated. D, expression analysis of tumors and tumor-derived cell lines from Runx2/MYC/p53+/– animals. E, loss of heterozygosity analysis of Runx2/MYC/p53+/– tumors following in vivo transplantation. Primary (1°) and transplanted tumors (2°) with resultant cell lines are shown for two tumor series. Pseudogene, knockout, and wild-type p53 alleles are indicated as are p53 wild-type (p53+/+), heterozygote (p53+/–), and knockout (p53–/–) DNA controls.

 
A contrasting pattern was observed in cell lines established from a subset of these tumors, all of which lost the wild-type p53 allele (Fig. 5C and D) and displayed abundant expression of p19ARF, supporting the conclusion that p53 and its associated feedback loop to p19ARF (25) had not been irreversibly inactivated in the primary tumors. Expression of p19ARF in these cell lines also indicates that Runx2 is not acting to repress ARF. Accelerated lymphoma development in the presence of functional p53 is nonetheless consistent with p53 haploinsufficiency (26).

To establish whether loss of p53 was an emergent tumor progression event or a secondary consequence of in vitro culture, we compared the fate of the wild-type p53 allele in Runx2/MYC/p53+/– tumors passaged in vivo in immunocompromised animals. Although reduced levels of the wild-type allele p53 were evident in a small number, the majority of the transplanted tumors retained the p53 allele (Fig. 5E; Table 1). However, complete loss of heterozygosity was observed in vitro when these tumors were explanted (Table 1). Together, these results provide evidence that genetic inactivation of the p53-p19ARF pathway is not required in Runx2/MYC tumors.


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		Table 1. Retention of the wild-type p53 allele in Runx2/MYC/p53+/– tumors

 

   Discussion
Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Materials and Methods
 Results
 Discussion
References
 
The combination of MYC and Runx2 transgenes induces rapid T-cell tumor development and has provided us with a unique model to understand oncogene cooperation. We show that the potency of this gene combination is due to the ability of MYC and Runx2 to neutralize the growth-suppressive effects specific to each gene. MYC counteracts the antiproliferative effects of Runx2 whereas the latter can suppress the apoptotic effects of MYC in tumor cells.

Preneoplastic CD2-Runx2 thymocytes show a partial block in development at the CD8 ISP stage; however, compared with control animals, this abnormally expanded population has a reduced proliferative index. As oncogenic mutations that impede development represent a recurring theme in human leukemia (27), we considered the possibility that retarded differentiation might itself predispose to lymphomagenesis in CD2-Runx2 mice. However, whereas MYC completely abrogates the antiproliferative effects of Runx2, it also results in dramatic up-regulation of TCRß, suggesting that a block in differentiation at the CD8 ISP stage is not essential for tumor development.

RUNX genes have been implicated in the control of cell cycle in both a positive and negative fashion (28–32). The proliferation defect observed in CD2-Runx2 transgenics parallels observations on preosteoblasts where Runx2 is required for regulating exit from the cell cycle and loss of function results in enhanced proliferation (33, 34). Importantly, the results presented here show that c-MYC can override this effect in thymocytes and thus unleash the oncogenic potential of Runx2. It is tempting to speculate that MYC achieves this effect, in part, by driving cell growth. Whereas there have been conflicting observations on the role of MYC in regulating cell size (35, 36), it is apparent from this study that cell size, at least in this lymphoid compartment, is directly affected by ectopic MYC expression. As there is considerable evidence to suggest that cells must reach a critical size threshold before cell division can occur (23, 37), it is conceivable that this increase in cell growth is important for the rescue of the proliferative deficit in Runx2-expressing T cells.

The most striking finding of this study is the ability of Runx2 to suppress the death of MYC-expressing tumor cells, thus providing an explanation for the oncogenic potential of Runx2. Whereas there are sporadic reports linking the mammalian Runx genes to apoptosis (7, 38, 39), recent studies in model organisms such as sea urchins and Drosophila have suggested that Runx orthologues may have a profound role in cell survival (40, 41). Moreover, a clear survival function for Runx2 was shown by Bellido et al. (42) who reported that the antiapoptotic effect of parathyroid hormone in osteoblastic cells is mediated by Runx2.

The conclusion that Runx2 can provide a strong antiapoptotic signal in T-lymphoma cells is strongly supported by the observation that the p19ARF-p53 pathway is retained in primary and transplanted tumors. Retention of this pathway is somewhat surprising given the expected oncogenic activation of the p19ARF-p53 pathway, especially as previous studies have shown that both MYC (17) and Runx family members (30) are capable of positively regulating p19ARF. However, it is well established that MYC-induced apoptosis can operate in a p53-dependent and p53-independent manner (24). Therefore, a key question arising from this study is whether Runx2 can directly neutralize the p19ARF-p53 pathway or provides an independent survival signal. In this regard, it is worth noting that although the oncogenic combination of MYC and Runx2 relieves the need to lose p53 during T-cell lymphomagenesis in vivo, this event is still required for cell line establishment. These observations indicate that the protective effects of Runx2 are restricted to the microenvironment of the tumor cell in situ; moreover, it suggests that p53 remains functional in these tumors and limits in vitro growth even in the presence of Runx2. These findings are analogous to recent reports where loss of p53-independent apoptotic pathways potently synergizes with MYC in lymphoma development without the need to lose the p19ARF-p53 pathway (43, 44). Taken together, our results indicate that Runx2 exerts a novel tumor protective effect in vivo, which explains its oncogenic action and its potent synergy with MYC.


   Acknowledgments
 
Grant support: Leukaemia Research Fund of Great Britain and Cancer Research UK.

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 Sharon MacKay for excellent technical support and Dr. Anna Kilbey for critical reading of the manuscript.


   Footnotes
 
Note: F. Vaillant is currently at The Walter and Eliza Hall Institute for Medical Research, 1G Royal Parade, Melbourne, Victoria 3050, Australia.

Received 10/ 5/05. Revised 11/30/05. Accepted 12/ 5/05.


   References
Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Materials and Methods
 Results
 Discussion
 References
 

  1. Otto F, Thornell AP, Crompton T, et al. Cbfa1, a candidate gene for cleidocranial dysplasia syndrome, is essential for osteoblast differentiation and bone development. Cell 1997;89:765–71.[CrossRef][Medline]
  2. Otto F, Lubbert M, Stock M. Upstream and downstream targets of RUNX proteins. J Cell Biochem 2003;89:9–18.[CrossRef][Medline]
  3. Komori T, Yagi H, Nomura S, et al. Targeted disruption of Cbfa1 results in a complete lack of bone formation owing to maturational arrest of osteoblasts. Cell 1997;89:755–64.[CrossRef][Medline]
  4. Wang Q, Stacy T, Binder M, et al. Disruption of the Cbfa2 gene causes necrosis and hemorrhaging in the central nervous system and blocks definitive hematopoiesis. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 1996;93:3444–9.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  5. Okuda T, van Deursen J, Hiebert SW, Grosveld G, Downing JR. AML1, the target of multiple chromosomal translocations in human leukemia, is essential for normal fetal liver hematopoiesis. Cell 1996;84:321–30.[CrossRef][Medline]
  6. Inoue K, Ozaki S, Shiga T, et al. Runx3 controls the axonal projection of proprioceptive dorsal root ganglion neurons. Nat Neurosci 2002;5:946–54.[CrossRef][Medline]
  7. Levanon D, Bettoun D, Harris-Cerruti C, et al. The Runx3 transcription factor regulates development and survival of TrkC dorsal root ganglia neurons. EMBO J 2002;21:3454–63.[CrossRef][Medline]
  8. Blyth K, Cameron ER, Neil JC. The RUNX genes: gain or loss of function in cancer. Nat Rev Cancer 2005;5:376–87.[CrossRef][Medline]
  9. Cameron ER, Neil JC. The Runx genes: lineage-specific oncogenes and tumor suppressors. Oncogene 2004;23:4308–14.[CrossRef][Medline]
  10. Stewart M, Terry A, Hu M, et al. Proviral insertions induce the expression of bone-specific isoforms of PEBP2{alpha}A (CBFA1): evidence for a new myc collaborating oncogene. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 1997;94:8646–51.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  11. Vaillant F, Blyth K, Terry A, et al. A full-length Cbfa1 gene product perturbs T-cell development and promotes lymphomagenesis in synergy with myc. Oncogene 1999;18:7124–34.[CrossRef][Medline]
  12. Mikkers H, Allen J, Knipscheer P, et al. High-throughput retroviral tagging to identify components of specific signaling pathways in cancer. Nat Genet 2002;32:153–9.[CrossRef][Medline]
  13. Wotton S, Stewart M, Blyth K, et al. Proviral insertion indicates a dominant oncogenic role for Runx1/AML-1 in T-cell lymphoma. Cancer Res 2002;62:7181–5.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  14. Blyth K, Terry A, Mackay N, et al. Runx2: a novel oncogenic effector revealed by in vivo complementation and retroviral tagging. Oncogene 2001;20:295–302.[CrossRef][Medline]
  15. Vaillant F, Blyth K, Andrew L, Neil JC, Cameron ER. Enforced expression of Runx2 perturbs T cell development at a stage coincident with ß-selection. J Immunol 2002;169:2866–74.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  16. Eischen CM, Weber JD, Roussel MF, Sherr CJ, Cleveland JL. Disruption of the ARF-Mdm2-53 tumor suppressor pathway in Myc-induced lymphomagenesis. Genes Dev 1999;13:2658–69.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  17. Zindy F, Eischen CM, Randle DH, et al. Myc signaling via the ARF tumor suppressor regulates p53-dependent apoptosis and immortalization. Genes Dev 1998;12:2424–33.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  18. Blyth K, Terry A, O'Hara M, et al. Synergy between a human c-myc transgene and p53 null genotype in murine thymic lymphomas: contrasting effects of homozygous and heterozygous p53 loss. Oncogene 1995;10:1717–23.[Medline]
  19. Stewart M, Cameron E, Campbell M, et al. Conditional expression and oncogenicity of c-myc linked to a CD2 gene dominant control region. Int J Cancer 1993;53:1023–30.[Medline]
  20. Blyth K, Stewart M, Bell M, et al. Sensitivity to myc-induced apoptosis is retained in spontaneous and transplanted lymphomas of CD2-mycER mice. Oncogene 2000;19:773–82.[CrossRef][Medline]
  21. Donehower LA, Harvey M, Slagle BL, et al. Mice deficient for p53 are developmentally normal but susceptible to spontaneous tumours. Nature 1992;356:215–21.[CrossRef][Medline]
  22. Philpott KL, Viney JL, Kay G, et al. Lymphoid development in mice congenitally lacking T cell receptor {alpha}ß-expressing cells. Science 1992;256:1448–52.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  23. Jorgensen P, Tyers M. How cells coordinate growth and division. Curr Biol 2004;14:R1014–27.[CrossRef][Medline]
  24. Prendergast GC. Mechanisms of apoptosis by c-Myc. Oncogene 1999;18:2967–87.[CrossRef][Medline]
  25. Stott FJ, Bates S, James MC, et al. The alternative product from the human CDKN2A locus, p14(ARF), participates in a regulatory feedback loop with p53 and MDM2. EMBO J 1998;17:5001–14.[CrossRef][Medline]
  26. Venkatachalam S, Shi YP, Jones SN, et al. Retention of wild-type p53 in tumors from p53 heterozygous mice: reduction of p53 dosage can promote cancer formation. EMBO J 1998;17:4657–67.[CrossRef][Medline]
  27. Gilliland DG, Jordan CT, Felix CA. The molecular basis of leukemia. Hematology (Am Soc Hematol Educ Program) 2004;80–97.
  28. Strom DK, Nip J, Westendorf JJ, et al. Expression of the AML-1 oncogene shortens the G(1) phase of the cell cycle. J Biol Chem 2000;275:3438–45.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  29. Bernardin F, Friedman AD. AML1 stimulates G1 to S progression via its transactivation domain. Oncogene 2002;21:3247–52.[CrossRef][Medline]
  30. Linggi B, Muller-Tidow C, van de LL, et al. The t(8;21) fusion protein, AML1 ETO, specifically represses the transcription of the p14(ARF) tumor suppressor in acute myeloid leukemia. Nat Med 2002;8:743–50.[CrossRef][Medline]
  31. Wotton SF, Blyth K, Kilbey A, et al. RUNX1 transformation of primary embryonic fibroblasts is revealed in the absence of p53. Oncogene 2004;23:5476–86.[CrossRef][Medline]
  32. Fukamachi H, Ito K. Growth regulation of gastric epithelial cells by Runx3. Oncogene 2004;23:4330–5.[CrossRef][Medline]
  33. Galindo M, Pratap J, Young DW, et al. The bone-specific expression of Runx2 oscillates during the cell cycle to support a G1-related antiproliferative function in osteoblasts. J Biol Chem 2005;280:20274–85.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  34. Pratap J, Galindo M, Zaidi SK, et al. Cell growth regulatory role of Runx2 during proliferative expansion of preosteoblasts. Cancer Res 2003;63:5357–62.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  35. Iritani BM, Eisenman RN. c-Myc enhances protein synthesis and cell size during B lymphocyte development. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 1999;96:13180–5.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  36. Trumpp A, Refaeli Y, Oskarsson T, et al. c-Myc regulates mammalian body size by controlling cell number but not cell size. Nature 2001;414:768–73.[CrossRef][Medline]
  37. Dolznig H, Grebien F, Sauer T, Beug H, Mullner EW. Evidence for a size-sensing mechanism in animal cells. Nat Cell Biol 2004;6:899–905.[CrossRef][Medline]
  38. Fujii M, Hayashi K, Niki M, et al. Overexpression of AML1 renders a T hybridoma resistant to T cell receptor-mediated apoptosis. Oncogene 1998;17:1813–20.[CrossRef][Medline]
  39. Li QL, Ito K, Sakakura C, et al. Causal relationship between the loss of RUNX3 expression and gastric cancer. Cell 2002;109:113–24.[CrossRef][Medline]
  40. Boutros M, Kiger AA, Armknecht S, et al. Genome-wide RNAi analysis of growth and viability in Drosophila cells. Science 2004;303:832–5.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  41. Dickey-Sims C, Robertson AJ, Rupp DE, McCarthy JJ, Coffman JA. Runx-dependent expression of PKC is critical for cell survival in the sea urchin embryo. BMC Biol 2005;3:18.[CrossRef][Medline]
  42. Bellido T, Ali AA, Plotkin LI, et al. Proteasomal degradation of Runx2 shortens parathyroid hormone-induced anti-apoptotic signaling in osteoblasts. A putative explanation for why intermittent administration is needed for bone anabolism. J Biol Chem 2003;278:50259–72.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  43. Egle A, Harris AW, Bouillet P, Cory S. Bim is a suppressor of Myc-induced mouse B cell leukemia. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2004;101:6164–9.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  44. Hemann MT, Bric A, Teruya-Feldstein J, et al. Evasion of the p53 tumour surveillance network by tumour-derived MYC mutants. Nature 2005;436:807–11.[CrossRef][Medline]



This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 J. Biol. Chem.Home page
N. M. Teplyuk, M. Galindo, V. I. Teplyuk, J. Pratap, D. W. Young, D. Lapointe, A. Javed, J. L. Stein, J. B. Lian, G. S. Stein, et al.
Runx2 Regulates G Protein-coupled Signaling Pathways to Control Growth of Osteoblast Progenitors
J. Biol. Chem., October 10, 2008; 283(41): 27585 - 27597.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Cancer Res.Home page
J. Pratap, J. J. Wixted, T. Gaur, S. K. Zaidi, J. Dobson, K. D. Gokul, S. Hussain, A. J. van Wijnen, J. L. Stein, G. S. Stein, et al.
Runx2 Transcriptional Activation of Indian Hedgehog and a Downstream Bone Metastatic Pathway in Breast Cancer Cells
Cancer Res., October 1, 2008; 68(19): 7795 - 7802.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USAHome page
S. K. Zaidi, S. Pande, J. Pratap, T. Gaur, S. Grigoriu, S. A. Ali, J. L. Stein, J. B. Lian, A. J. van Wijnen, and G. S. Stein
Runx2 deficiency and defective subnuclear targeting bypass senescence to promote immortalization and tumorigenic potential
PNAS, December 11, 2007; 104(50): 19861 - 19866.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Cancer Res.Home page
A. Kilbey, K. Blyth, S. Wotton, A. Terry, A. Jenkins, M. Bell, L. Hanlon, E. R. Cameron, and J. C. Neil
Runx2 Disruption Promotes Immortalization and Confers Resistance to Oncogene-Induced Senescence in Primary Murine Fibroblasts
Cancer Res., December 1, 2007; 67(23): 11263 - 11271.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Mol. Cell. Biol.Home page
G. Paroni, A. Fontanini, N. Cernotta, C. Foti, M. P. Gupta, X.-J. Yang, D. Fasino, and C. Brancolini
Dephosphorylation and Caspase Processing Generate Distinct Nuclear Pools of Histone Deacetylase 4
Mol. Cell. Biol., October 1, 2007; 27(19): 6718 - 6732.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Cancer Res.Home page
M. Stewart, N. Mackay, L. Hanlon, K. Blyth, L. Scobie, E. Cameron, and J. C. Neil
Insertional Mutagenesis Reveals Progression Genes and Checkpoints in MYC/Runx2 Lymphomas
Cancer Res., June 1, 2007; 67(11): 5126 - 5133.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Stem CellsHome page
C.-Y. Lien, O. K. Lee, and Y. Su
Cbfb Enhances the Osteogenic Differentiation of Both Human and Mouse Mesenchymal Stem Cells Induced by Cbfa-1 via Reducing Its Ubiquitination-Mediated Degradation
Stem Cells, June 1, 2007; 25(6): 1462 - 1468.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Blyth, K.
Right arrow Articles by Cameron, E. R.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Blyth, K.
Right arrow Articles by Cameron, E. R.

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