Previous Article | Next Article ![]()
Journal of Virology, August 2006, p. 8133-8144, Vol. 80, No. 16
0022-538X/06/$08.00+0 doi:10.1128/JVI.00278-06
Copyright © 2006, American Society for Microbiology. All Rights Reserved.
-Dependent Pathway
Sinéad M. Smith,1
Brendan N. D'Souza,1,
Sinéad T. Loughran,1
Sabine Maier,3
Bettina Kempkes,3
Paul A. Cahill,2
Matthew J. Simmons,4
Céline Gélinas,4 and
Dermot Walls1*
School of Biotechnology and National Centre for Sensor Research,1 Vascular Health Research Centre, Faculty of Science and Health, Dublin City University, Dublin 9, Ireland,2 Institut fur Klinische Molekularbiologie und Tumorgenetik, GSF-Forschungszentrum fur Umwelt und Gesundheit, Marchioninistrasse 25, D-81377 Munchen, Germany,3 Centre for Advanced Biotechnology and Medicine and Department of Biochemistry, UMDNJ-Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, Piscataway, New Jersey 088544
Received 7 February 2006/ Accepted 18 May 2006
|
|
|---|
B-dependent enhancer element in the
bfl-1 promoter (B. N. D'Souza, L. C.
Edelstein, P. M. Pegman, S. M. Smith, S.
T. Loughran, A. Clarke, A. Mehl, M. Rowe, C. Gélinas, and D.
Walls, J. Virol. 78:1800-1816, 2004). Here we show
that the EBV nuclear antigen 2 (EBNA2) also upregulates bfl-1.
EBNA2 trans-activation of bfl-1 requires CBF1 (or
RBP-J
), a nuclear component of the Notch signaling pathway,
and there is an essential role for a core consensus CBF1-binding site
on the bfl-1 promoter. trans-activation is dependent
on the EBNA2-CBF1 interaction, is modulated by other EBV gene products
known to interact with the CBF1 corepressor complex, and does not
involve activation of NF-
B. bfl-1 expression is
induced and maintained at high levels by the EBV growth program in a
lymphoblastoid cell line, and withdrawal of either EBNA2 or LMP1 does
not lead to a reduction in bfl-1 mRNA levels in this context,
whereas the simultaneous loss of both EBV proteins results in a major
decrease in bfl-1 expression. These findings are relevant to
our understanding of EBV persistence, its role in malignant disease,
and the B-cell developmental
process. |
|
|---|
EBNA2 and EBNA-LP are the earliest
latent-cycle proteins to be detected following EBV infection of primary
B cells (1). EBNA2 is
essential for B-cell immortalization, and its principal role therein is
likely to be as a regulator of transcription, since the domains of this
protein essential for both growth transformation and transcriptional
activation are the same
(8). EBNA2 functions as a
transcriptional trans-activator to regulate the pattern of EBV
latent-gene expression in B cells and to modify cellular gene
expression with a resultant stimulation of G0 to
G1 cell cycle progression. The mechanism by which EBNA2
modulates the expression of its target genes is complex and dependent
on the cell context. EBNA2 does not bind DNA directly but is recruited
to its sites of action through interactions with cellular proteins,
including CBF1 (also known as RBP-J
), Spi-1/PU.1 and
Spi-B-related proteins of the Ets family of transcription factors, and
ATF-CRE (for a review, see reference
71). CBF1 is a
DNA-binding nuclear adaptor protein from the cellular Notch signaling
pathway that interacts directly with the intracellular domain of Notch
proteins, a family of highly conserved transmembrane receptors. The
EBNA2-CBF1 interaction is essential for the immortalization of primary
B cells by EBV (for a review, see reference
20). Upon ligand binding,
the Notch receptor is cleaved, and an intracellular fragment (Notch-IC)
is then translocated to the nucleus, where it binds to CBF1 and
modulates the expression of target genes. EBNA2 may therefore be
considered in part as a functional equivalent of Notch-IC. The
promoters of EBV latent genes (EBNA Cp,
LMP1, LMP-2A, and LMP-2B)
(29,
49,
70) and that of the
cellular gene CD23 (48)
have been shown to contain functional CBF1-binding motifs and to be
targets of EBNA2-CBF1. EBV targets CBF1 by more than one mechanism.
EBNA3A, EBNA3B, and EBNA3C have been shown to limit EBNA2-mediated
transcriptional activation from the LMP2A, LMP1, and Cp promoters by
directly contacting CBF1 and destabilizing its binding to DNA
(20,
71). The EBV gene product
known as RPMS1, which is translated from an EBV complementary strand
transcript (CST) (or Bam A rightward transcripts [BART]), has been
shown to act as a negative regulator of Notch/EBNA2 signaling by
interacting with CBF1 and associated members of a histone deacetylase
repressor complex (60,
67).
A central
component of the overall EBV strategy and its role in the development
of related malignant disease is its capacity to suppress the cellular
apoptotic program. EBV-negative or EBV-positive BL-derived cell lines
which express only EBNA1 (referred to as the EBV "latency
program") can easily be induced to undergo apoptosis; however,
lymphoblastoid cell lines (LCLs) and EBV-positive BL-derived cell lines
expressing a complete set of EBV latent proteins (the "growth
program") display increased resistance to apoptosis induced by
a variety of triggers
(17). The cellular
antiapoptotic bfl-1 gene (also known as A1) is highly
expressed in EBV-positive B-cell lines expressing the growth program
and conferred protection against apoptosis induced by growth factor
deprivation when expressed ectopically in an EBV-positive BL-derived
cell line expressing the latency program
(6,
11). bfl-1
encodes a protein of the Bcl-2 family whose preferential expression in
hematopoietic and endothelial cells is controlled by inflammatory
stimuli such as tumor necrosis factor and interleukin-1
(7,
30,
31). Bfl-1 suppresses
p53-mediated apoptosis and can inhibit the proapoptotic activities of
other Bcl-2 members (9,
10,
64,
66). bfl-1 is an
established transcriptional target of latent membrane protein 1 (LMP1),
the signaling pathway being initiated through interactions of this EBV
protein with components of the cellular tumor necrosis factor
receptor/CD40-signaling pathway and in which there is an essential role
for the transcription factor NF-
B. The bfl-1 promoter
contains a NF-
B-like binding motif that mediates
trans-activation by LMP1, CD40, and the NF-
B subunit
protein p65
(12).
Here we show
that bfl-1 expression is also upregulated by EBNA2 in
EBV-negative BL-derived cell lines and that EBNA2
trans-activates the bfl-1 promoter in this cell
context by a mechanism that is dependent both on the presence of CBF1
and the EBNA2-CBF1 interaction. We demonstrate an essential role for a
novel consensus CBF1-binding site on the bfl-1 promoter and
show that upregulation is inhibited by coexpression of EBNA3A, EBNA3B,
EBNA3C, or RPMS1 or by a dominant-negative mutant of CBF1 and does not
involve activation of NF-
B. bfl-1 expression is
induced and maintained at high levels by EBNA2 in a conditional LCL,
and withdrawal of either EBNA2 or LMP1 does not lead to a decrease in
bfl-1 expression in this context, whereas the simultaneous
loss of both EBV proteins leads to a dramatic decrease in the level of
bfl-1 mRNA. To our knowledge, this is the first report of a
cellular apoptosis-related gene whose expression is transcriptionally
modulated by EBNA2 (and not indirectly via LMP1). These findings are
evidence that EBNA2 may provide a cell survival advantage during B-cell
infection and also contribute to the development of EBV-associated
diseases by driving the expression of a cellular antiapoptotic
gene.
|
|
|---|
RNase protection assays, Northern blotting, and reverse transcription real-time PCR. Total cellular RNA was prepared, using RNA isolator solution (Genosys) according to the manufacturer's specifications. RNase protection assays (RPAs) were performed using the Riboquant multiprobe RNase protection assay system (hAPO-2C template set; Becton Dickinson). RNase protection assays and Northern blotting methods are described elsewhere (11). Following reverse transcription of total RNA, bfl-1- and GAPDH-derived cDNAs were detected by real-time PCR using primers and dual-labeled (FAM/TAMRA) fluorogenic probes (Applied Biosystems assay reagents Hs00187845 and Hs99999905, respectively). The amplification reaction volumes were 25 µl and consisted of 12.5 µl of 2x Taqman Universal Mastermix (Applied Biosystems), 1.25 µl of assay reagent, 9.25 µl of water, and 2 µl of cDNA. Following activation of AmpliTaq Gold (10 min at 95°C), amplification was performed for 40 cycles (15 s at 95°C and 60 s at 60°C), and real-time monitoring of changes in the fluorescence intensity of Taqman probes was done, using an ABI 7500 sequence detection system (Applied Biosystems). Data was analyzed by the comparative cycle threshold method(50).
Western blot analysis. To detect EBNA2, protein lysates were prepared by boiling for 10 min in 2% sodium dodecyl sulfate (SDS), 100 mM NaCl, 0.01 M Tris-HCl, 5% ß-mercaptoethanol, 1 mM EDTA, 100 µg/ml phenylmethylsulfonyl fluoride, and 2 µg/ml leupeptin and were then briefly sonicated on ice. The lysates were clarified by centrifugation at 13,000 rpm for 10 min at room temperature. Protein from 5 x 105 cells was separated by 5% to 10% discontinuous SDS-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis (PAGE) and blotted onto nitrocellulose filters. The filters were probed with the anti-EBNA2 antibody PE2 (Dako), diluted to a ratio of 1:50 in BLOTTO (5% skimmed milk-0.1% Tween-20 in Tris-buffered saline), and incubated overnight at 4°C. Immunocomplexes were detected with alkaline-phosphatase-conjugated anti-mouse immunoglobulin G (Promega) and visualized with BCIP/NBT liquid substrate (Sigma). LMP1 was detected as described previously (12). To detect Bfl-1, cell extracts were prepared in lysis buffer {150 mM NaCl, 10 mM HEPES [pH 7.4], 1% 3-[(3-cholamidopropyl)-diamethylammonio]-1-propanesulfonate; Calbiochem} with protease inhibitors and processed as above. Two hundred micrograms of protein extracts was fractionated on 17% SDS-PAGE gels and transferred to 0.2-micron nitrocellulose, using a semidry blotting apparatus. The filters were probed, using a chicken anti-human Bfl-1 antibody preparation (M. J. Simmons and C. Gélinas, unpublished data) overnight at 4°C, followed by horseradish peroxidase-conjugated rabbit anti-chicken immunoglobulin Y (item no. 31401; Pierce Biotechnology) at a ratio of 1:5,000, followed by enhanced chemiluminescent detection.
Apoptosis assays. DG75-tTA-EBNA2 cells, both uninduced and induced to express EBNA2, were seeded at a density of 5 x 104 cells per ml in RPMI medium supplemented with either 10% fetal bovine serum (FBS) or 0.5% FBS plus ionomycin (1 µg per ml) to induce apoptosis. The cell culture medium was changed after 4 days, and cell population analyses were performed by flow cytometry (FacsCalibur; Beckton Dickinson) following staining with Syto 16 (Invitrogen) and propidium iodide (Sigma-Aldrich) as described elsewhere (34). Data for 20,000 cells were collected for each analysis made, and two-dimensional plots of Syto 16 versus propidium iodide were generated (Fig. 2A).
![]() View larger version (24K): [in a new window] |
FIG. 2. Comparative
analysis of the apoptotic response of DG75-tTA-EBNA2 cells uninduced
and induced to express EBNA2. (A) Representative
fluorescence-activated cell sorter profiles of Syto 16 fluorescence
(y axis) versus propidium iodide (PI) fluorescence (x
axis) in DG75-tTA-EBNA2 uninduced (+ tet; left panels) and
induced to express EBNA2 ( tet; right panels) for 2 days,
followed by 0 and 8 days (as indicated on the left) of partial serum
deprivation combined with ionomycin treatment. Viable cells (Syto
16-positive, PI-negative) are represented in each top left quadrant,
apoptotic (Syto 16-negative, PI-negative) cells in the bottom left
quadrants, and necrotic (Syto 16-negative, PI-positive) cells in the
bottom right quadrants. (B) Summary of the average percentage
of apoptotic cells in three repeat experiments, including that shown in
panel A. The times at which samples were taken are indicated (in days)
underneath the graph. Error bars indicate standard
deviations.
|
B elements
upstream of a minimal conalbumin promoter linked to the luciferase gene
(3). The plasmid pSGEBNA2
(pPDL151) expresses EBNA2 from the B95-8 strain of EBV, and its
derivative, pSG5EBNA2ww323sr, expresses an EBNA2 that does not bind to
CBF1 (47). pCMV,
pCMV-EBNA3A, EBNA3B, EBNA3C, and pSGLMP1 have been described elsewhere
(26,
45). Other vectors used
were pGa981-6 (53),
pEFBOSneo-RBP(R218H) (R218H)
(33)
(57), pcDNA3-RPMS-1/FLAG
(60), pCEP4Ets-(DN)
(40),
pSG5-HA-mNotch1IC(1751-2294), and pSG5-HA-mNotch1IC-E2TANLS
(23). |
|
|---|
![]() View larger version (31K): [in a new window] |
FIG. 1. Expression
of EBNA2 leads to increased bfl-1 mRNA and protein levels in
BL-derived cell lines. (A) Western blot of DG75-tTA-EBNA2
cells induced to express EBNA2 by reculturing cells in the absence of
tetracycline. Cells were harvested and analyzed for EBNA2 expression at
various time points (indicated in hours above each lane); also included
is the reference LCL X50-7. (B) RPA autoradiogram in which
mRNA levels from the apoptosis-related genes bcl-x L/S,
bfl-1, bik, bak, bax,
bcl-2, and mcl-1 from the same experiment as that in
panel A were analyzed. Unprotected 32P-labeled antisense
riboprobes (5,000 cpm, lane P) were loaded alongside RPA-processed
samples and are shown linked to their smaller RNase-protected
fragments, which correspond to the steady-state levels of the
corresponding mRNA in the samples. An increase in the steady-state
level of bfl-1 mRNA (open arrow) is seen upon induction of
EBNA2 expression. (C) Northern blot analysis of
bfl-1 mRNA levels from a repeat EBNA2 induction experiment
using DG75-EBNA2-tTA. Thirty-microgram samples of total RNA were loaded
onto the gel, which was then blotted and probed with antisense
bfl-1 riboprobe. The lower panel shows the same blot stripped
and reprobed with a GAPDH antisense riboprobe. (D)
Western blots showing upregulation of Bfl-1 expression in
DG75-tTA-EBNA2 cells in response to EBNA2 induction following
tetracycline withdrawal and in BL41-K3 cells in which ER-EBNA2 function
was activated by addition of ß-estradiol. The times
postinduction/activation of EBNA2 (expressed in hours) are given above
each lane. The lower panel shows the same blots probed with antibody to
ß-actin.
|
We also investigated whether EBNA2 could activate bfl-1 in DG75 cells in which the CBF1 gene had been inactivated by somatic knockout (51). bfl-1 mRNA levels were therefore examined by reverse transcription real-time PCR in DG75 clones that had been stably transfected with ER-EBNA2 and in which the CBF1 gene had (SM296 D3) or had not (SM295 D6) been inactivated. Addition of ß-estradiol to SM295 cells led to a significant transient increase in the level of bfl-1 mRNA (peaking at 8.7-fold after 6 h) (Table 1), an effect that was not seen upon knockout of the CBF1 gene. The induction of bfl-1 mRNA levels in SM295 was transient, in contrast to that for both DG75-tTA-EBNA2 and BL41-K3, where elevated bfl-1 mRNA levels persisted for at least 48 h postinduction of EBNA2 (Fig. 1) (also by real-time PCR; not shown). This discrepancy might be due to a difference in the expression levels or properties of wild-type EBNA2 (DG75-tTA-EBNA2) versus ER-EBNA2 (SM295) in the DG75 background, clonal variations that arose during the generation of these stably transfected derivatives of DG75, or factors particular to the different induction systems in the DG75 cell context. We did not observe any significant change in the stability of bfl-1 mRNA in DG75-tTA-EBNA2 cells in response to EBNA2 induction (not shown). Together, these experiments demonstrate that EBNA2 upregulates bfl-1 and that CBF1 is required for this effect.
|
View this table: [in a new window] |
TABLE 1. Upregulation
of bfl-1 by EBNA2 requires CBF1
|
24%) in cultures expressing EBNA2 relative to their uninduced
counterparts (
49%) (Fig.
2). Activation of EBNA2 function leads to cytostasis in BL41-K3 cells
(37), but growth
inhibition does not occur in DG75-tTA-EBNA2 cells in response to EBNA2
induction
(14). EBNA2, but not Notch-IC, trans-activates the bfl-1 promoter in EBV-negative BL-derived cell lines. Transient transfections of the EBV-negative BL-derived cell lines DG75, BJAB, and BL41 showed that cotransfection of the bfl-1 promoter reporter construct 1374/+81-luc (12) with 5 µg of EBNA2 expression vector (pSGEBNA2) led to increases of 5.5-, 5.0-, and 4.8-fold, respectively, in luciferase activity at 48 h posttransfection relative to values obtained when pSG5 was used as the cotransfected plasmid (Fig. 3A). The effect of EBNA2 was mediated by the bfl-1 promoter sequence, since EBNA2 expression did not affect basal luciferase levels produced by the corresponding promoterless vector (pGL2basic) (data not shown). In DG75, the use of increasing quantities of EBNA2 plasmid led to a dose-dependent increase in promoter activity up to a maximum of 7.5-fold when 7 µg was used (Fig. 3B). It can also be seen that replacement of pSGEBNA2 with pSGEBNA2ww323sr, which expresses an EBNA2 molecule with amino acid substitutions in residues from conserved region 6 that are critical for binding CBF1 (47), greatly impaired the ability of the protein to trans-activate the bfl-1 promoter (reduced from 7.5- to 1.8-fold) (Fig. 3B). These results indicate that EBNA2 directly trans-activates the bfl-1 promoter in EBV-negative BL-derived cell lines and that the ability of EBNA2 to bind CBF1 is critical for this effect. In contrast, substitution of the EBNA2 expression plasmid with vectors expressing constitutively active Notch-IC fragments did not reveal significant trans-activation of the bfl-1 promoter from the same reporter construct. These included mouse Notch1-IC (mN1-IC), a mouse Notch1-IC chimera in which the trans-activation domain had been substituted with that of EBNA2 (mN1IC-E2TANLS) (23) (Fig. 3C), and human Notch1-IC and Notch2-IC (data not shown). In the same experiments, these effector molecules were seen to drive luciferase expression from pGa981-6, a reporter construct used as a control for CBF-1-driven promoter activity (which contains a hexamerized 50-bp EBNA2 response element from the LMP2A promoter in front of the minimal ß-globin promoter [53]).
![]() View larger version (12K): [in a new window] |
FIG. 3. EBNA2,
but not Notch-IC, trans-activates the bfl-1 promoter
in BL-derived cell lines. (A) DG75, BJAB, and BL41 cells were
cotransfected with 7 µg of either pSG5 or pSGEBNA2 together
with 1 µg of the bfl-1 promoter-reporter construct
1374/+81-luc. Cells were harvested at 24 h
posttransfection and analyzed for luciferase activities, which were
then normalized for transfection efficiency (based on
ß-galactosidase activity measured from acotransfected pCMVlacZ reporter which was included in all
transfections). Luciferase values obtained from cotransfections with
pSG5 were arbitrarily assigned a value of 1.0, and activation
represents the relative normalized luciferase activities
obtained upon cotransfection with
pSGEBNA2. (B) Dose-dependent trans-activation of the bfl-1 promoter
by EBNA2 but not EBNA2ww323sr, a mutant of EBNA2 that cannot bind CBF1.
DG75 cells were cotransfected with increasing amounts of either
pSGEBNA2 or pSGEBNA2ww323sr (effector plasmids; quantities are
indicated underneath) and 1 µg of
1374/+81-luc. Cells were harvested at 24 h
posttransfection and analyzed for luciferase activities, which were
normalized and presented as described for panel A. (C) DG75 cells were
transfected with 1 µg of either 1374/+81-luc
or pGa981-6 and 5 µg of plasmid expressing the effector
molecules indicated underneath each bar. The chimeric
protein mNotch1IC:E2TANLS binds CBF1 via mNotch1IC and contains the
additional trans-activation domain and nuclear localization
sequence of EBNA2. Higher quantities of any of these effector plasmids
(up to 12 µg) did not lead to increased bfl-1 promoter
trans-activation (not shown). Cells were harvested at
24 h posttransfection and analyzed for luciferase activities,
which were normalized and presented as described for panel
A.
|
![]() View larger version (12K): [in a new window] |
FIG. 4. EBNA2-mediated
trans-activation of the bfl-1 promoter is inhibited
by EBNA3A, EBNA3B, EBNA3C, and the EBV latent gene product RPMS1. DG75
cells were cotransfected with 1 µg of
1374/+81-luc together with increasing amounts (in all
cases 1, 3, 5, and 7 µg consecutively) of the expression
vectors pCMV-EBNA3A, pCMV-EBNA3B, pCMV-EBNA3C, or pcDNA3-RPMS1/FLAG.
Cells were harvested at 24 h posttransfection, and normalized
luciferase values were expressed as activation levels (n-fold)
relative to those of the corresponding control transfected
cells in which the effector plasmids were pSGEBNA2 together with either
p7CMV (5 µg) or pcDNA3.1 (5
µg).
|
B.
A direct role
for CBF1 in mediating EBNA2 responsiveness on the bfl-1
promoter was investigated, using a non-DNA-binding mutant of CBF1
[RBP(R218H)]. This protein has been shown to act as a dominant-negative
suppressor of activation of the EBV LMP2A and cellular
HES-1 promoters by Notch-IC and is likely to exert such an
effect by competing with Notch-IC (or EBNA2) or unknown cofactors for
binding to CBF1 (32,
33). Cotransfections were
performed using DG75 with 1374/+81-luc and
various amounts of RBP(R218H) expression vector
[pEFBOSneo-RPB(R218H)]. It can
be seen from this experiment that expression of
RBP(R218H) efficiently inhibited EBNA2-associated bfl-1
promoter trans-activation in DG75 cells in a dose-dependent
manner to a maximum of 70% when 12 µg of pEFBOSneo-RPB(R218H)
was used (Fig.
5A). Coexpression of RBP(R218H) also inhibited EBNA2-driven luciferase
expression from pGa981-6 to a degree similar to that seen with the
bfl-1 promoter (Fig.
5B).
![]() View larger version (20K): [in a new window] |
FIG. 5. trans-activation
of the bfl-1 promoter by EBNA2 is inhibited by coexpression of
a dominant-negative mutant form of CBF1 and does not involve activation
of NF- B. The names of the reporter constructs are given above
each figure. (A and B) Inhibition of EBNA2-mediated
trans-activation of the bfl-1 promoter by a
non-DNA-binding mutant of CBF1 [RBP(R218H)]. DG75 cells were
cotransfected with 1 µg of 1374/+81-luc
(A) or the reporter construct pGa981-6, in which
transcription of the luciferase gene is regulated by CBF1 (B), and 7
µg of pSGEBNA2 together with increasing amounts of
pEF-BOSneo-RBP(R218H) [indicated as RBP(R218H) underneath each bar].
(C) Overexpression of either EBNA2 or RBP(R218H)
does not lead to increased NF- B-dependent transcriptional
activation in DG75 cells. Here, NF- B activation was monitored
by using the established NF- B-dependent reporter construct,
3Enh-luc. (D) Coexpression of an I B mutant
that inhibits activation of NF- B did not significantly affect
trans-activation of the bfl-1 promoter by EBNA2. In
all cases (A to D), cells were harvested at 24 h
posttransfection, and normalized luciferase values were expressed as
activation levels (n-fold) relative to those of the
corresponding control transfected cells with the relevant empty vectors
as appropriate in each
case.
|
B-responsive gene, and there is an
increasing body of evidence to show cell context-specific,
antagonistic, or synergistic connections between the NF-
B and
CBF1-mediated Notch signal transduction pathways
(4,
19,
63). Furthermore, it has
recently been shown that basal expression of I
B
, and
as a consequence NF-
B activity, is under CBF1 control
(55). We therefore used a
known NF-
B-dependent reporter construct (3Enh-luc) in assays
to monitor the relative levels of activated NF-
B in DG75 when
either EBNA2 or RBP(R218H) was expressed (Fig.
5C). It can be seen that a
3.5-fold activation of NF-
B occurred upon cotransfection with
the LMP1 expression vector but that the basal level of activated
NF-
B did not change significantly in response to
cotransfection with expression vectors encoding EBNA2 and/or
RBP(R218H). Further cotransfections were carried out using a vector
that expressed a "super-repressor" mutant form of
I
B
(pEFCX-I
B
DN), in which serine
residues at positions 32 and 36 of that protein have been replaced with
alanines (46). The
resulting I
B
mutant can no longer be phosphorylated
and subsequently proteolyzed, thus effectively retaining NF-
B
in the cytoplasm and blocking its function as a regulator of
transcription. Coexpression of I
B
DN only resulted in
a marginal decrease (<10%) in EBNA2-associated trans-activation
of the bfl-1 promoter, even when up to 12 mg of expression
vector was used (Fig. 4D),
in contrast to its ability to inhibit LMP1-associated
trans-activation of the same promoter
(12). We also observed
that trans-activation of the bfl-1 promoter by EBNA2
occurred just as efficiently when the 52/43 enhancer
element that mediates trans-activation by LMP1/CD40/p65 was
mutated (not shown). These results are further evidence of a role for
CBF1 in the activation of the bfl-1 promoter by EBNA2 and show
that this process does not involve activation of the transcription
factor NF-
B. Identification of a CBF1-like binding site on the bfl-1 promoter that mediates trans-activation by EBNA2. In order to identify DNA sequence elements on the bfl-1 promoter that mediate trans-activation by EBNA2, a series of reporter constructs in which the luciferase gene was driven by bfl-1 promoter fragments of different lengths was used (Fig. 6). It can be seen that in DG75 cells, EBNA2 trans-activated the 1374/+81, 1240/+81, and 367/+81 promoter fragments by 7-, 6.5-, and 5.5-fold, respectively, with a significant decrease to 1.5-fold being observed when only the 129/+81 promoter sequence was retained. This implied that the sequence between 367 and 129 contained DNA sequence element(s) that mediated a high proportion of the observed EBNA2/CBF1-dependent trans-activation. A search of the available bfl-1 upstream transcriptional regulatory region led to the identification of one copy of the sequence motif 5'-GGTGGGAA-3' at position 243 to 250 on the inverse strand. This element is part of the consensus binding sequence for CBF1 (CGTGGGAA), and site-directed mutagenesis was used to introduce base substitutions into the core of this motif in the reporter plasmid 1374/+81-luc so as to eliminate potential binding by CBF1 (Fig. 6) (48, 62). It can be seen that this mutation led to the nearly complete loss of trans-activation by EBNA2. This result correlated with the observation of a similar reduction in EBNA2-associated trans-activation upon deletion of the 367 to 129 region (Fig. 6). Similar results were obtained with this series of reporter constructs when the BL41 cell line was used (data not shown). These experiments show that a consensus CBF1-binding element at 243/250 in the bfl-1 transcription regulatory region is essential for mediating trans-activation by EBNA2.
![]() View larger version (9K): [in a new window] |
FIG. 6. Identification
of a CBF1-like binding site on the bfl-1 promoter that
mediates trans-activation by EBNA2. The figure shows a series
of bfl-1-promoter-reporter constructs in which the promoter
sequence has been progressively deleted from the 5'end (the
coordinate of the 5' end is given to the left of each
construct). They all share a common 3' terminus at 81 bp
downstream from the transcription initiation site (indicated by a bent
arrow), at which point they are joined to the luciferase gene (LUC).
The relative location (black box) and sequence (open box) of a
consensus CBF1-binding site is indicated, and the base changes made to
this motif by site-directed mutagenesis to generate
1374/+81-luc(mCBF1) are underlined. DG75 cells were
transfected with 7 µg of either pSG5 or pSGEBNA2 together with
2 µg of the individual reporter constructs (the names are given
on the right). Cells were harvested at 24 h posttransfection
and assayed for luciferase activity as previously described. Each
normalized luciferase value was expressed as the activation level
(n-fold) relative to the corresponding value obtained for each
reporter construct when cotransfected with control
pSG5.
|
![]() View larger version (12K): [in a new window] |
FIG. 7. A
role for Ets-family transcription factors in bfl-1 promoter
trans-activation by EBNA2. (A) Sequence of the
301 to 111 region of the bfl-1 promoter
showing the locations and sequences of candidate binding sites for
relevant transcription factors. Three further reporter constructs were
made by introducing base changes (underlined) to these sequences in
367/+81-Luc, thus eliminating each motif in turn.
(B) DG75 cells were transfected with 7 µg of either
pSGEBNA2 or pSG5, together with 2 µg of a reporter construct
(indicated underneath). Cells were harvested 24 h
posttransfection and assayed for luciferase activity as previously
described. Each normalized luciferase value was expressed as
an activation level (n-fold) relative to the corresponding
value obtained for each reporter construct when cotransfected with
control pSG5. (C) DG75 cells were cotransfected with 7
µg of pSGEBNA2 and 2 µg of either
1374/+81-luc or 367/+81-luc plus
increasing quantities of pCEP4Ets-DN.
Each normalized
luciferase value was expressed as an activation level (n-fold)
relative to the corresponding value obtained for each reporter
construct when cotransfected with control pSG5 and pCEP4 (5 and 7
µg,
respectively).
|
![]() View larger version (27K): [in a new window] |
FIG. 8. bfl-1
is driven by EBV latent proteins in an LCL context, and the loss of
both EBNA2 and LMP1 is required before bfl-1 mRNA levels
decline significantly. Estrogen-starved EREB2.5 cells (A) and
LCL 1480.4 cells (B) were treated with ß-estradiol
and sampled for RNA and protein analysis at the time points indicated
above each panel. bfl-1, L32, and GAPDH mRNA
levels were assayed by RPA (upper panels); levels of ER-EBNA2 and LMP1
were determined by Western blotting (lower panels). (C) LCL
1852.4 cells were treated with tetracycline and processed for RNA and
protein analysis at the time points
indicated.
|
|
|
|---|
Several observations pointed to
a key role for CBF1 in this process. CBF1 is a repressor that recruits
histone deacetylases to the chromatin of target genes
(24). Here we observed
that the somatic knockout of CBF1 in DG75 cells did not lead to
increased endogenous bfl-1 mRNA levels, indicating that this
gene is not repressed by CBF1 in the absence of EBNA2. Coexpression of
EBNA3A, EBNA3B, EBNA3C, or RPMS1 inhibited EBNA2-associated
bfl-1 promoter trans-activation, and in the absence
of EBNA2 they all showed some small degree of inhibition of its basal
level of activity (data not shown). trans-activation of the
bfl-1 promoter by EBNA2 is mechanistically different from that
of LMP1, with neither NF-
B activation nor a crucial enhancer
motif at 52/43 that mediates
trans-activation by p65 being required
(12). Furthermore, EBNA2
failed to mediate trans-activation of a heterologous minimal
promoter sequence linked to the LMP-1-dependent enhancer (data not
shown). These experiments do not rule out, however, the possibility
that NF-
B subunit proteins may play a role in mediating
trans-activation of bfl-1 by EBNA2.
Analyses of the bfl-1 5' transcriptional regulatory region showed that CBF1- and Ets-like binding motifs play key roles in trans-activation by EBNA2. Base substitutions in the GGG triplet of the former almost completely eliminated promoter trans-activation by EBNA2, although we have not yet been able to demonstrate a direct interaction between CBF1 and this motif by band shift assays. An Spi-1 binding site in the LMP1 promoter is essential for trans-activation by EBNA2, and EBNA3C has also been shown to activate LMP1 by a cooperative mechanism involving EBNA2 and Spi-1/Spi-B transcription factors (29, 42, 59, 68). Spi-1 and Spi-B play important roles in the development and differentiation of B lymphocytes by regulating the expression of a variety of genes critical for the functions of hematopoietic-lineage cells (reviewed in reference 56). Unlike EBNA2, the failure of Notch-IC proteins to drive the bfl-1 promoter may be due to a requirement for interactions with B-cell-specific factors, as is the case with the LMP1 promoter (22), or to a weaker interaction with the CBF1-binding motif in its context. We did not observe EBNA2 trans-activation of the bfl-1 promoter in several non-B-cell lines, including Jurkat (T cell), C33A (epithelial), or vascular smooth muscle cells (data not shown). Elsewhere, trans-complementation experiments in which estrogen-starved EREB2.5 cells were "rescued" by transduction with a recombinant lentivirus expressing human Notch1-IC showed that when directly compared to EBNA2, Notch1-IC was a far less efficient inducer of LMP1 and CD23 in that LCL (16). In the present study, the lack of significant bfl-1 promoter trans-activation by mN1IC-E2TANLS indicated that the general failure of Notch-IC proteins in this regard was not due solely to the relative weakness of the Notch-IC trans-activation domain compared to that of EBNA2.
An EBNA2 with a double amino acid substitution that abolishes binding to CBF1 almost completely failed to trans-activate the bfl-1 promoter. It has been shown elsewhere that, when incorporated into the viral genome, a mutation within the EBNA2 CBF1-binding motif resulted in a nonimmortalizing EBV (65). A crucial role for the EBNA2/CBF1 interaction is further underscored by the observation that a cell-permeable EBNA2 peptide that blocks EBNA2-CBF1-binding can prevent EBV immortalization of primary B cells in vitro (13). EBNA2 is a key regulator of LMP1 expression, and EBNA2 activity is largely under viral control and at the level of the CBF1 complex. In EREB2.5, activation of EBNA2 mimics the early events that occur in the process of EBV-driven B-cell growth transformation. Here we show that activation of EBNA2 leads to a rapid increase in bfl-1 mRNA, which attains the level typically seen in established LCLs. Although LMP1 appears to be a more-robust transactivator of bfl-1 in the BL cell line induction systems that we have used (a 20-fold induction level with LMP1 [11] versus a 5-fold induction level with EBNA2) (Fig. 1), the elevated levels of bfl-1 mRNA that remain in 1480.4 and 1852.4 cells upon withdrawal of EBNA2 and LMP1, respectively (Fig. 8B and C) indicate that the expression of this gene is maintained to a similar degree in the absence of either EBV protein. Upon withdrawal of ß-estradiol, EREB2.5 cells undergo apoptosis, and this is coincident with a significant decrease in bfl-1 expression. However, the conditional LCLs p1480.4 and 1852.4 both fail to initiate apoptosis in the absence of ß-estradiol and tetracycline (due to the continued presence of EBNA2 and LMP1, respectively). Under these circumstances, however, both cell lines undergo growth arrest, indicating that the maintenance of an elevated bfl-1 mRNA level is not sufficient to maintain cell proliferation in the absence of either one of these EBV proteins.
The majority of EBV-associated tumors do not express EBNA2, presumably due to its immunogenicity and that of the EBNA3s whose expression is under EBNA2 control. EBNA2 is expressed in EBV-associated tumors arising in immunocompromised patients such as posttransplant patients, patients with lymphoproliferative disease, and AIDS patients with primary central nervous system lymphomas (25), and its antiapoptotic activity may be a factor in the development of these malignancies. Overexpression of EBNA2 in transgenic mice has been shown to lead to the formation of kidney adenocarcinomas, which clearly demonstrates the oncogenic potential of EBNA2 (61). Bfl-1 has been shown to possess oncogenic cooperative transforming potential (9), and it will be interesting to determine if bfl-1 is a transcriptional target of EBNA2 in that context.
EBV has been thought to counter
apoptosis during latency through LMP1-mediated activation of
NF-
B-regulated genes
(11,
15,
21). EBNA2 has, however,
been shown to prevent Nur77-mediated cell death by binding via its
conserved region 4 to Nurr77 and preventing the mitochondrial targeting
of that protein (43,
44). The identification
of bfl-1 as a CBF1-dependent transcriptional target of EBNA2
is additional evidence that this viral protein contributes to cell
survival, as well as to the proliferative response that occurs upon
infection.
This work was funded by grants from the Health Research Board (HRB, Ireland) (D.W.) and Cancer Research Ireland (CRI02WAL; D.W. and B.N.D.) and a travel award from Dublin City University Educational Trust (P.M.P.). We also acknowledge support from Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (SFB455 to B.K.), Wilhelm-Sander Stiftung (B.K.), Deutsche Krebshilfe (B.K.), and National Institutes of Health grant CA83937 (C.G.) and partial support from an NIH predoctoral training grant in Biochemistry and Molecular Biology (GM08360 to M.J.S.).
Present address: GlaxoSmithKline Research and Development, South Eden Park Road, Beckenham, Kent BR3 3BS, United Kingdom. ![]()
Present
address: Department of Biological Chemistry, UCLA School of Medicine,
UCLA, Los Angeles, CA 90095-1737. ![]()
|
|
|---|
B-dependent activation of the antiapoptotic bfl-1
gene by the Epstein-Barr virus latent membrane protein 1 and activated
CD40 receptor. J. Virol.
78:1800-1816.
and PU.1. J. Virol.
69:253-262.[Abstract]
CT
method. Methods
25:402-408.[CrossRef][Medline]
. Mol. Cell. Biol.
17:2679-2687.[Abstract]
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Copyright © 2009 by the American Society for Microbiology. For an alternate route to Journals.ASM.org, visit: http://intl-journals.asm.org | More Info»