Given a passage with a context and an answer, construct a question on the basis of the information present in the passage. Construct the question in such a way that (i) it is unambiguous, (ii) it is answerable from the passage, (iii) its answer is unique (iv) it answer uses text phrases from the passage. Avoid creating questions that (i) can't be answered correctly without actually understanding the passage and (ii) uses the same words or phrases given in the passage.

[EX Q]: Context: DNA methylation at CpG dinucleotides is modified in tumorigenesis with potential impact on transcriptional activity.', 'We used the Illumina 450 K platform to evaluate DNA methylation patterns of 50 metastatic melanoma tumors, with matched gene expression data.', 'We identified three different methylation groups and validated the groups in independent data from The Cancer Genome Atlas. One group displayed hypermethylation of a developmental promoter set, genome-wide demethylation, increased proliferation and activity of the SWI/SNF complex. A second group had a methylation pattern resembling stromal and leukocyte cells, over-expressed an immune signature and had improved survival rates in metastatic tumors (p < 0.05). A third group had intermediate methylation levels and expressed both proliferative and immune signatures. The methylation groups corresponded to some degree with previously identified gene expression phenotypes.
Answer: Melanoma consists of divergent methylation groups that are distinguished by promoter methylation, proliferation and content of immunological cells.
[EX A]: Are dNA methylation subgroups in melanoma associated with proliferative and immunological processes?

[EX Q]: Context: In streptozotocin-injected rats (STZ-rats), we previously demonstrated a role for angiotensin II (AT-II) in cardiac remodelling and insulin resistance partially counteracted by in vivo treatment with losartan, an AT-II receptor antagonist.We now aimed to investigate the effect of treating diabetic STZ-rats with losartan on diabetes vascular response to vasoconstrictors.', 'Male Wistar rats were randomly divided in four groups, two of them were assigned to receive losartan in the drinking water (20 mg/kg/day) until the experiment ending (3 weeks afterward). After 1 week, two groups, one of which receiving losartan, were injected in the tail vein with citrate buffer (normoglycemic, N and normoglycemic, losartan-treated, NL). The remaining received a single injection of streptozotocin (50 mg/kg in citrate i.v.) thus becoming diabetic (D) and diabetic losartan-treated (DL). Plasma glycaemia and blood pressure were measured in all animals before the sacrifice (15 days after diabetes induction).In aortic strips isolated from N, NL, D and DL rats we evaluated i) the isometric concentration-dependent contractile response to phenylephrine (Phe) and to AT-II; ii) the RhoA-kinase (ROCK1) activity and expression by enzyme-immunoassay and Western blot respectively.', 'The concentration-dependent contractile effect of Phe was similar in aortas from all groups, whereas at all concentrations tested, AT-II contraction efficacy was 2 and half and 1 and half times higher in D and DL respectively in comparison with N and NL. AT-II contracture was similarly reduced in all groups by AT-II receptor antagonists, irbesartan or irbesartan plus PD123319. HA-1077 (10 microM), an inhibitor of ROCK1 activity, reduced AT-II efficacy (Deltamg/mg tissue w.w.) by -3.5 +/- 1.0, -4.6 +/- 1.9, -22.1 +/- 2.2 and -11.4 +/- 1.3 in N, NL, D and DL respectively). ROCK1 activity and expression were higher in D than in N/NL and DL aortas.
Answer: Aortas isolated from STZ-rats present hyper-contracture to AT-II mainly dependent on the up-regulation of ROCK1 expression/activity. In vivo losartan treatment partially corrects AT-II hyper-contracture, limiting the increase in ROCK1 expression/activity. These data offer a new molecular mechanism supporting the rationale for using losartan in the prevention of diabetic vascular complications.
[EX A]: Does losartan counteract the hyper-reactivity to angiotensin II and ROCK1 over-activation in aortas isolated from streptozotocin-injected diabetic rats?

[EX Q]: Context: Genetic abnormalities of the pituitary specific transcription factor, Pit-1, have been reported in several patients with GH, prolactin (PRL) and TSH deficiencies. The most common is a mutation altering an arginine to a tryptophan in codon 271 (R271W) in one allele of the Pit-1 gene. According to the previous in vitro expression study, R271W acted as a dominant negative inhibitor of the wild type to activate the GH promoter. However, healthy carriers with this mutation, who should be affected by the dominant negative effect of R271W, have also been reported. The aim of this study was to clarify in more detail the function of this mutant form of Pit-1.', "Transcriptional activity of R271W for the expression of Pit-1-associated genes was investigated in COS7 cells with the aid of transient transfection assays. The 1.8 kb rat GH, 0.6 kb rat PRL or 1.9 kb rat PRL 5'-flanking regions were inserted upstream of the luciferase reporter gene and were used for functional analysis of R271W. Another reporter gene containing seven Pit-1 responsive elements was also used. The same experiments were also performed using JEG3 and CHO cells.", 'We could not confirm the dominant negative effect of R271W on wild type Pit-1. Furthermore, our expression study revealed that R271W could activate the promoters of GH and PRL genes to levels similar to the wild type.
Answer: Taken together with the evidence that phenotypically normal cases have been reported with this mutation, our results deny the relationship between R271W and combined pituitary hormone deficiency.
[EX A]:
Does the R271W mutant form of Pit-1 act as a dominant inhibitor of Pit-1 action to activate the promoters of GH and prolactin genes?