@article {256, title = {Oncogenic targeting of BRM drives malignancy through C/EBPβ-dependent induction of α5 integrin.}, journal = {Oncogene}, year = {2013}, month = {2013 Jun 17}, abstract = {

Integrin expression and activity are altered in tumors, and aberrant integrin signaling promotes malignancy. However, how integrins become altered in tumors remains poorly understood. We discovered that oncogenic activation of MEK signaling induces cell growth and survival, and promotes the malignant phenotype of mammary epithelial cells (MECs) by increasing α5 integrin expression. We determined that MEK activates c-Myc to reduce the transcription of the SWI/SNF chromatin remodeling enzyme Brahma (BRM). Our studies revealed that reduced BRM expression and/or activity drives the malignant behavior of MECs by epigenetically promoting C/EBPβ expression to directly induce α5 integrin transcription. Consistently, we could show that restoring BRM levels normalized the malignant behavior of transformed MECs in culture and in vivo by preventing C/EBPβ-dependent α5 integrin transcription. Our findings identify a novel mechanism whereby oncogenic signaling promotes malignant transformation by regulating transcription of a key chromatin remodeling molecule that regulates integrin-dependent stromal-epithelial interactions.Oncogene advance online publication, 17 June 2013; doi:10.1038/onc.2013.220.

}, issn = {1476-5594}, doi = {10.1038/onc.2013.220}, author = {Damiano, L and Stewart, K M and Cohet, N and Mouw, J K and Lakins, J N and Debnath, J and Reisman, D and Nickerson, J A and Imbalzano, A N and Weaver, V M} } @article {271, title = {A physical sciences network characterization of non-tumorigenic and metastatic cells.}, journal = {Sci Rep}, volume = {3}, year = {2013}, month = {2013}, pages = {1449}, abstract = {

To investigate the transition from non-cancerous to metastatic from a physical sciences perspective, the Physical Sciences-Oncology Centers (PS-OC) Network performed molecular and biophysical comparative studies of the non-tumorigenic MCF-10A and metastatic MDA-MB-231 breast epithelial cell lines, commonly used as models of cancer metastasis. Experiments were performed in 20 laboratories from 12 PS-OCs. Each laboratory was supplied with identical aliquots and common reagents and culture protocols. Analyses of these measurements revealed dramatic differences in their mechanics, migration, adhesion, oxygen response, and proteomic profiles. Model-based multi-omics approaches identified key differences between these cells\&$\#$39; regulatory networks involved in morphology and survival. These results provide a multifaceted description of cellular parameters of two widely used cell lines and demonstrate the value of the PS-OC Network approach for integration of diverse experimental observations to elucidate the phenotypes associated with cancer metastasis.

}, keywords = {Cell Line, Tumor, Cell Movement, Cell Size, Cell Survival, Computer Simulation, Gene Expression Regulation, Neoplastic, Humans, Models, Biological, Neoplasm Metastasis, Neoplasm Proteins, Tumor Markers, Biological}, issn = {2045-2322}, doi = {10.1038/srep01449}, author = {Agus, David B and Alexander, Jenolyn F and Arap, Wadih and Ashili, Shashanka and Aslan, Joseph E and Austin, Robert H and Backman, Vadim and Bethel, Kelly J and Bonneau, Richard and Chen, Wei-Chiang and Chen-Tanyolac, Chira and Choi, Nathan C and Curley, Steven A and Dallas, Matthew and Damania, Dhwanil and Davies, Paul C W and Decuzzi, Paolo and Dickinson, Laura and Estevez-Salmeron, Luis and Estrella, Veronica and Ferrari, Mauro and Fischbach, Claudia and Foo, Jasmine and Fraley, Stephanie I and Frantz, Christian and Fuhrmann, Alexander and Gascard, Philippe and Gatenby, Robert A and Geng, Yue and Gerecht, Sharon and Gillies, Robert J and Godin, Biana and Grady, William M and Greenfield, Alex and Hemphill, Courtney and Hempstead, Barbara L and Hielscher, Abigail and Hillis, W Daniel and Holland, Eric C and Ibrahim-Hashim, Arig and Jacks, Tyler and Johnson, Roger H and Joo, Ahyoung and Katz, Jonathan E and Kelbauskas, Laimonas and Kesselman, Carl and King, Michael R and Konstantopoulos, Konstantinos and Kraning-Rush, Casey M and Kuhn, Peter and Kung, Kevin and Kwee, Brian and Lakins, Johnathon N and Lambert, Guillaume and Liao, David and Licht, Jonathan D and Liphardt, Jan T and Liu, Liyu and Lloyd, Mark C and Lyubimova, Anna and Mallick, Parag and Marko, John and McCarty, Owen J T and Meldrum, Deirdre R and Michor, Franziska and Mumenthaler, Shannon M and Nandakumar, Vivek and O{\textquoteright}Halloran, Thomas V and Oh, Steve and Pasqualini, Renata and Paszek, Matthew J and Philips, Kevin G and Poultney, Christopher S and Rana, Kuldeepsinh and Reinhart-King, Cynthia A and Ros, Robert and Semenza, Gregg L and Senechal, Patti and Shuler, Michael L and Srinivasan, Srimeenakshi and Staunton, Jack R and Stypula, Yolanda and Subramanian, Hariharan and Tlsty, Thea D and Tormoen, Garth W and Tseng, Yiider and van Oudenaarden, Alexander and Verbridge, Scott S and Wan, Jenny C and Weaver, Valerie M and Widom, Jonathan and Will, Christine and Wirtz, Denis and Wojtkowiak, Jonathan and Wu, Pei-Hsun} } @article {356, title = {SWI/SNF chromatin remodeling enzyme ATPases promote cell proliferation in normal mammary epithelial cells.}, journal = {J Cell Physiol}, volume = {223}, year = {2010}, month = {2010 Jun}, pages = {667-78}, abstract = {

The ATPase subunits of the SWI/SNF chromatin remodeling enzymes, Brahma (BRM) and Brahma-related gene 1 (BRG1), can induce cell cycle arrest in BRM and BRG1 deficient tumor cell lines, and mice heterozygous for Brg1 are pre-disposed to breast tumors, implicating loss of BRG1 as a mechanism for unregulated cell proliferation. To test the hypothesis that loss of BRG1 can contribute to breast cancer, we utilized RNA interference to reduce the amounts of BRM or BRG1 protein in the nonmalignant mammary epithelial cell line, MCF-10A. When grown in reconstituted basement membrane (rBM), these cells develop into acini that resemble the lobes of normal breast tissue. Contrary to expectations, knockdown of either BRM or BRG1 resulted in an inhibition of cell proliferation in monolayer cultures. This inhibition was strikingly enhanced in three-dimensional rBM culture, although some BRM-depleted cells were later able to resume proliferation. Cells did not arrest in any specific stage of the cell cycle; instead, the cell cycle length increased by approximately 50\%. Thus, SWI/SNF ATPases promote cell cycle progression in nonmalignant mammary epithelial cells.

}, keywords = {Adenosine Triphosphatases, Basement Membrane, Cell Cycle, Cell Line, Cell Proliferation, Chromatin Assembly and Disassembly, DNA Helicases, Doxycycline, Epithelial Cells, Female, Gene Knockdown Techniques, Humans, Mammary Glands, Human, Nuclear Proteins, Protein Subunits, RNA, Small Interfering, RNA, Small Nucleolar, Transcription Factors, Up-Regulation}, issn = {1097-4652}, doi = {10.1002/jcp.22072}, author = {Cohet, Nathalie and Stewart, Kathleen M and Mudhasani, Rajini and Asirvatham, Ananthi J and Mallappa, Chandrashekara and Imbalzano, Karen M and Weaver, Valerie M and Imbalzano, Anthony N and Nickerson, Jeffrey A} } @article {381, title = {CpG island tumor suppressor promoter methylation in non-BRCA-associated early mammary carcinogenesis.}, journal = {Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev}, volume = {18}, year = {2009}, month = {2009 Mar}, pages = {901-14}, abstract = {

BACKGROUND: Only 5\% of all breast cancers are the result of BRCA1/2 mutations. Methylation silencing of tumor suppressor genes is well described in sporadic breast cancer; however, its role in familial breast cancer is not known.

METHODS: CpG island promoter methylation was tested in the initial random periareolar fine-needle aspiration sample from 109 asymptomatic women at high risk for breast cancer. Promoter methylation targets included RARB (M3 and M4), ESR1, INK4a/ARF, BRCA1, PRA, PRB, RASSF1A, HIN-1, and CRBP1.

RESULTS: Although the overall frequency of CpG island promoter methylation events increased with age (P\<0.0001), no specific methylation event was associated with age. In contrast, CpG island methylation of RARB M4 (P=0.051), INK4a/ARF (P=0.042), HIN-1 (P=0.044), and PRA (P=0.032), as well as the overall frequency of methylation events (P=0.004), was associated with abnormal Masood cytology. The association between promoter methylation and familial breast cancer was tested in 40 unaffected premenopausal women in our cohort who underwent BRCA1/2 mutation testing. Women with BRCA1/2 mutations had a low frequency of CpG island promoter methylation (15 of 15 women had

CONCLUSIONS: This is the first evidence of CpG island methylation of tumor suppressor gene promoters in non-BRCA1/2 familial breast cancer.

}, keywords = {Biopsy, Fine-Needle, Breast Neoplasms, Chi-Square Distribution, CpG Islands, Cyclin-Dependent Kinase Inhibitor p16, Cytokines, DNA Methylation, Female, Genes, BRCA1, Genes, BRCA2, Genes, Tumor Suppressor, Humans, Mutation, Polymerase Chain Reaction, Premenopause, Promoter Regions, Genetic, Receptors, Progesterone, Receptors, Retinoic Acid, Risk, Risk Assessment, Statistics, Nonparametric, Tumor Suppressor Proteins}, issn = {1055-9965}, doi = {10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-08-0875}, author = {Vasilatos, Shauna N and Broadwater, Gloria and Barry, William T and Baker, Joseph C and Lem, Siya and Dietze, Eric C and Bean, Gregory R and Bryson, Andrew D and Pilie, Patrick G and Goldenberg, Vanessa and Skaar, David and Paisie, Carolyn and Torres-Hernandez, Alejandro and Grant, Tracey L and Wilke, Lee G and Ibarra-Drendall, Catherine and Ostrander, Julie H and D{\textquoteright}Amato, Nicholas C and Zalles, Carola and Jirtle, Randy and Weaver, Valerie M and Seewaldt, Victoria L} }