Back

Loss of epigenetic regulation disrupts lineage integrity, reactivatesmultipotency and promotes breast cancer

Langille, E.; Al-Zahrani, K. N.; Ma, Z.; Malik, A.; Loganathan, S. K.; Trcka, D.; Liu, J.; Kozma, K.; Tsai, R.; Teng, K.; Espin, R.; Barutcu, S.; Nguyen, T.; Bremner, R.; Jackson, H. W.; Knudsen, E.; Bader, G.; Egan, S.; Pujana, M. A.; Wrana, J.; Wahl, G. M.; Schramek, D.

2021-10-24 cancer biology
10.1101/2021.10.22.465428 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Systematically investigating the scores of genes mutated in cancer and discerning real drivers from inconsequential bystanders is a prerequisite for Precision Medicine, but remains challenging. Here, we developed a somatic CRISPR/Cas9 mutagenesis screen to study 215 recurrent long-tail breast cancer genes, which revealed epigenetic regulation as major tumor suppressive mechanism. We report that core or accessory components of the COMPASS histone methylase complex including KMT2C, KDM6A, BAP1 and ASXL2 ("EpiDrivers") cooperate with PIK3CAH1047R to transform mouse and human breast epithelial cells. Mechanistically, we find that Cre-mediated activation of PIK3CAH1047R elicited an aberrant alveolar lactation program in luminal cells, which was exacerbated upon loss of EpiDrivers. Remarkably, EpiDriver loss in basal cells also triggered an alveolar-like lineage conversion and accelerated formation of luminal-like tumors, suggesting a basal origin for luminal tumors. As EpiDrivers are mutated in 39% of human breast cancers, lineage infidelity and lactation mimicry may significantly contribute to early steps of breast cancer progression. Statement of significanceInfrequently mutated genes comprise most of the mutational burden in breast tumors but are poorly understood. In-vivo CRISPR screening identified functional tumor suppressors that converged on epigenetic regulation. Loss of epigenetic regulators accelerated tumorigenesis and revealed lineage infidelity and aberrant expression of lactation genes as potential early events in tumorigenesis.

Matching journals

The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.