In this task, you are given an abstract of article. Your task is to generate title for this article. Preferred titles are under thirty words.

Ex Input:
Spatial boundaries of homeotic gene expression are initiated and maintained by two sets of transcriptional repressors: the gap gene products and the Polycomb group proteins. Previously, the Hunchback (HB) protein has been implicated in setting the anterior expression limit of the UBX homeotic protein in parasegment 6. Here we investigate DNA elements and trans-acting repressors that control spatial expression of the Abdominal-A (ABD-A) homeotic protein. Analysis of a 1.7-kb enhancer element [iab-2(1.7)] from the iab-2 regulatory region shows that in contrast to Ubx enhancer elements, both HB and Kruppel (KR) are required to set the ABD-A anterior boundary in parasegment 7. DNase I footprinting and site-directed mutagenesis show that HB and KR are direct regulators of this iab-2 enhancer. The single KR site can be moved to a new location 100 bp away and still maintain repressive activity, whereas relocation by 300 bp abolishes activity. These results suggest that KR repression occurs through a local quenching mechanism. We also show that the gap repressor Giant (GT) initially establishes a posterior expression limit at PS9, which shifts posteriorly after the blastoderm stage. Finally, we show that this iab-2 enhancer contains multiple binding sites for the Polycomb group protein Pleiohomeotic (PHO). These iab-2 PHO sites are required in vivo for chromosome pairing-dependent repression of a mini-white reporter. However, the PHO sites are not sufficient to maintain repression of a homeotic reporter gene anterior to PS7. Full maintenance at late embryonic stages requires additional sequences adjacent to the iab-2(1.7) enhancer.

Ex Output:
Functional analysis of repressor binding sites in the iab-2 regulatory region of the abdominal-A homeotic gene.

Ex Input:
CONTEXT In patients with brain metastases, it is unclear whether adding up-front whole-brain radiation therapy (WBRT) to stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) has beneficial effects on mortality or neurologic function compared with SRS alone.
OBJECTIVE To determine if WBRT combined with SRS results in improvements in survival, brain tumor control, functional preservation rate, and frequency of neurologic death.
DESIGN, SETTING, AND PATIENTS Randomized controlled trial of 132 patients with 1 to 4 brain metastases, each less than 3 cm in diameter, enrolled at 11 hospitals in Japan between October 1999 and December 2003.
INTERVENTIONS Patients were randomly assigned to receive WBRT plus SRS (65 patients) or SRS alone (67 patients).
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES The primary end point was overall survival; secondary end points were brain tumor recurrence, salvage brain treatment, functional preservation, toxic effects of radiation, and cause of death.
RESULTS The median survival time and the 1-year actuarial survival rate were 7.5 months and 38.5% (95% confidence interval, 26.7%-50.3%) in the WBRT + SRS group and 8.0 months and 28.4% (95% confidence interval, 17.6%-39.2%) for SRS alone (P = .42). The 12-month brain tumor recurrence rate was 46.8% in the WBRT + SRS group and 76.4% for SRS alone group (P<.001). Salvage brain treatment was less frequently required in the WBRT + SRS group (n = 10) than with SRS alone (n = 29) (P<.001). Death was attributed to neurologic causes in 22.8% of patients in the WBRT + SRS group and in 19.3% of those treated with SRS alone (P = .64). There were no significant differences in systemic and neurologic functional preservation and toxic effects of radiation.
CONCLUSIONS Compared with SRS alone, the use of WBRT plus SRS did not improve survival for patients with 1 to 4 brain metastases, but intracranial relapse occurred considerably more frequently in those who did not receive WBRT. Consequently, salvage treatment is frequently required when up-front WBRT is not used.
TRIAL REGISTRATION umin.ac.jp/ctr Identifier: C000000412.

Ex Output:
Stereotactic radiosurgery plus whole-brain radiation therapy vs stereotactic radiosurgery alone for treatment of brain metastases: a randomized controlled trial.

Ex Input:
BACKGROUND HOX genes are a family of developmental genes that are expressed neither in the developing forebrain nor in the normal brain. Aberrant expression of a HOX-gene dominated stem-cell signature in glioblastoma has been linked with increased resistance to chemo-radiotherapy and sustained proliferation of glioma initiating cells. Here we describe the epigenetic and genetic alterations and their interactions associated with the expression of this signature in glioblastoma.
RESULTS We observe prominent hypermethylation of the HOXA locus 7p15.2 in glioblastoma in contrast to non-tumoral brain. Hypermethylation is associated with a gain of chromosome 7, a hallmark of glioblastoma, and may compensate for tumor-driven enhanced gene dosage as a rescue mechanism by preventing undue gene expression. We identify the CpG island of the HOXA10 alternative promoter that appears to escape hypermethylation in the HOX-high glioblastoma. An additive effect of gene copy gain at 7p15.2 and DNA methylation at key regulatory CpGs in HOXA10 is significantly associated with HOX-signature expression. Additionally, we show concordance between methylation status and presence of active or inactive chromatin marks in glioblastoma-derived spheres that are HOX-high or HOX-low, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS Based on these findings, we propose co-evolution and interaction between gene copy gain, associated with a gain of chromosome 7, and additional epigenetic alterations as key mechanisms triggering a coordinated, but inappropriate, HOX transcriptional program in glioblastoma.

Ex Output:
Chromosome 7 gain and DNA hypermethylation at the HOXA10 locus are associated with expression of a stem cell related HOX-signature in glioblastoma