Abstract

BackgroundAlthough endocrine therapy impedes estrogen-ER signaling pathway and thus reduces breast cancer mortality, patients remain at continued risk of relapse after tamoxifen or other endocrine therapies. Understanding the mechanisms of endocrine resistance, particularly the role of transcriptional regulation is very important and necessary.MethodsWe propose a two-step workflow based on linear model to investigate the significant differences between MCF7 and OHT cells stimulated by 17β-estradiol (E2) respect to regulatory transcription factors (TFs) and their interactions. We additionally compared predicted regulatory TFs based on RNA polymerase II (PolII) binding quantity data and gene expression data, which were taken from MCF7/MCF7+E2 and OHT/OHT+E2 cell lines following the same analysis workflow. Enrichment analysis concerning diseases and cell functions and regulatory pattern analysis of different motifs of the same TF also were performed.ResultsThe results showed PolII data could provide more information and predict more recognizably important regulatory TFs. Large differences in TF regulatory mode were found between two cell lines. Through verified through GO annotation, enrichment analysis and related literature regarding these TFs, we found some regulatory TFs such as AP-1, C/EBP, FoxA1, GATA1, Oct-1 and NF-κB, maintained OHT cells through molecular interactions or signaling pathways that were different from the surviving MCF7 cells. From TF regulatory interaction network, we identified E2F, E2F-1 and AP-2 as hub-TFs in MCF7 cells; whereas, in addition to E2F and E2F-1, we identified C/EBP and Oct-1 as hub-TFs in OHT cells. Notably, we found the regulatory patterns of different motifs of the same TF were very different from one another sometimes.ConclusionsWe inferred some regulatory TFs, such as AP-1 and NF-κB, cooperated with ER through both genomic action and non-genomic action. The TFs that were involved in both protein-protein interactions and signaling pathways could be one of the key resistant mechanisms of endocrine therapy and thus also could be new treatment targets for endocrine resistance. Our flexible workflow could be integrated into an existing analytical framework and guide biologists to further determine underlying mechanisms in human diseases.

Highlights

  • Endocrine therapy impedes estrogen-endocrine therapy (ER) signaling pathway and reduces breast cancer mortality, patients remain at continued risk of relapse after tamoxifen or other endocrine therapies

  • We manually verified these important regulatory transcription factors (TFs) in breast cancer cells in literature, such as AP-1, AP-2, C/EBP, E2Fs, ER, FoxA1, Oct-1, NF-B and others. All of these findings confirmed that predictions based on polymerase II (PolII) data could provide more recognized important regulatory TFs compared with gene expression data

  • Large differences in regulatory TF groups were found between estrogen-dependent MCF7 and estrogen-independent OHT cells

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Endocrine therapy impedes estrogen-ER signaling pathway and reduces breast cancer mortality, patients remain at continued risk of relapse after tamoxifen or other endocrine therapies. Based on the statistical analysis of TF binding through microarray and TF-DNA interaction data, Ryu et al identified regulatory modules that include all combinations of TFs, plus a number of binding constraints in target genes [8]. He et al presented a method focused on ‘active’ TFs that regulate the real-time expression of genes [9]; they used an enhanced Bayesian classifier to predict pairs of TFs and target genes based on timecourse expression data. Ahmed et al considered the impact of CNV (copy number variation) in gene expression They built a linear model to depict the regulation between regulatory TFs, CNVs in each cell line and genes that were differentially expressed in 305 human cancer cell lines [10]. These studies attempted to improve their predictions’ accuracy regarding transcriptional regulation by a variety of methods based on gene expression data, they have not yet succeeded in eliminating the essential impact of post-transcriptional modification

Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call