Essential Role for PU.1 in MEIS1 Activation and MLL Fusion Leukemia,
Authors: Zhou Jing , Li Bo , Wu Jun , He Fuhong , Li Qiang , Yan Xiaomei , Zhang Yue , Zhang Lixia , Zhao Xinghui , Yan Jin , Nobrega Marcelo , Tenen Daniel G. , Huang Gang , Wang Qian-fei 
Published: October 2019

Abstract
Abstract 3466
Down-regulation of transcription factor PU.1, a key regulator of hematopoiesis, induces myeloid leukemia in mice, demonstrating a role of PU.1 as tumor suppressor. Recent studies, however, have also suggested that PU.1 is required for repopulation/self-renewal capacity of normal hematopoietic stem cells (HSCs), and presence of PU.1 activity may be necessary to favor growth of myeloid leukemia stem cells. To explore whether PU.1 could possibly act as an oncogene in the development of certain type of myeloid leukemia, we set to look for differential up-regulation of PU.1 among AML patients with distinct cytogenetic and genetic alterations in public databases. Consistent with recent molecular studies showing suppression of PU.1 expression by AML1-ETO and PML-RARa fusion proteins, PU.1 expresses at a significant lower level in AML patients with t(8;21) and t(15;17) translocations. In contrast, PU.1 expression level in MLL leukemia patients is significantly higher than that of other subgroups of AML. In addition, we found that a set of PU.1 direct target genes, as defined by genome wide location analysis of this factor, expresses at higher level in MLL leukemia patients comparing with those with t(8;21) and t(15;17) translocations, supporting an increased PU.1 activity in this subgroup of leukemia. In our effort to characterize the functional consequence of high expression of PU.1 in AML, we found that PU.1 plays an essential role in activation of MEIS1, an oncogene essential for MLL leukemia stem cell potential, and in development of MLL fusion leukemia. MEIS1, as PU.1, is differentially up-regulated in MLL leukemia patients, and expresses at a significant lower level in AML patients with t(8;21) and t(15;17) translocations. Among AML patients with higher level MEIS1 expression, a positive correlation was observed between expression of PU.1 and that of MEIS1. Using promoter reporter assay, electro mobility shift assay (EMSA) and chromatin immunoprecipiation (ChIP) analysis, we found that PU.1 directly binds to and activates MEIS1 promoter in vitro and in vivo. Analysis of a hypomorphic PU.1 mouse model indicated that PU.1 is required to maintain Meis1 expression in murine HSCs and progenitors, and knockdown of PU.1 in patient-derived MLL leukemia cell lines resulted in lower enrichment of PU.1 protein at MEIS1 promoter, accompanied by down-regulation of MEIS1 expression and decreased proliferation and survival of these cells. We are now examining whether the ability of MLL-AF9 fusion protein to drive leukemia is compromised in PU.1-deficient mouse HSC/HPCs, and whether introduction of exogenous Meis1 can compensate for the loss of PU.1 in the development of MLL-AF9 leukemia in mouse bone marrow transplantation model. Finally, we are also testing knock-down of PU.1 as a therapeutic approach to primary AMLs isolated from MLL leukemia patients. Collectively, our data indicate that PU.1 is required for the pathogenesis of MLL associated leukemia, at least partially, through direct activation of MEIS1. In veiw of the dependency of MEIS1 in MLL leukemic transformation, targeting PU.1 mediated MEIS1 gene activation could be an alternative or synergistic approach for MLL leukemia therapies aimed at inhibition of DOT1L and HOXA9.

Disclosures:
No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.