Figure 7.
DNA methylation is an epigenetic barrier to enhancer hijacking. (A) Experimental strategy for 5-azaD–mediated DNA demethylation. (B) Expression of TLX3 mRNA following 5-azaD treatment in JurkatWT and JurkatSV cells normalized to GAPDH. Results are mean ± SD (N = 3 biological replicates) and analyzed by two-way ANOVA with Dunnett multiple comparison test. Fold changes and P values represent comparisons between dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO) and 5-azaD treatment in JurkatSV cells. ∗P < .05, ∗∗P < .01. (C) Volcano plot of gene expression changes upon 5-azaD treatment in JurkatWT and JurkatSV cells (N = 3 biological replicates). Red dots indicate genes displaying log2 (fold change) ≥1.5 and an adjusted P value <1 × 10−6. (D) CpG methylation changes at the TLX3 promoter upon 5-azaD treatment in JurkatWT and JurkatSV cells. Average methylation levels were derived from 2 independent biological replicates. Differential methylation analysis was performed by the Fisher exact test. (E) Scatterplot of global methylation changes for all gene promoters in JurkatWT and JurkatSV cells and analyzed by Pearson correlation. Results are averaged methylation differences between 5-azaD and DMSO treatment from 2 replicate RRBS experiments. (F) Boxplots showing the mRNA expression changes of SV-associated genes (N) in SV-containing sample (yes) vs all other samples that do not contain the corresponding SVs (No) for 5 patients with CMML. The overview of treatment and experimental scheme is shown on the left. Boxes show median of the data and quartiles, and whiskers extend up to 1.5× of the interquartile range. P values were calculated by a one-sided paired t test. (G) Model for the cooperation between 3D genome organization and the epigenetic state of target genes as the molecular determinant of enhancer hijacking–mediated oncogenic transcription.