Table of Contents
Bone Marrow Research
Volume 2014, Article ID 986571, 9 pages
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2014/986571
Research Article

TET2 Inhibits Differentiation of Embryonic Stem Cells but Does Not Overcome Methylation-Induced Gene Silencing

1Medical Research Building, Brighton and Sussex Medical School, Sussex University, Falmer, Brighton BN1 9PS, UK
2Royal Sussex County Hospital, Brighton and Sussex University Hospitals NHS Trust, Brighton BN2 5BE, UK

Received 6 February 2014; Accepted 18 July 2014; Published 25 August 2014

Academic Editor: Issa F. Khouri

Copyright © 2014 Louis Norman et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Linked References

  1. F. Mohr, K. Döhner, C. Buske, and V. P. Rawat, “TET genes: new players in DNA demethylation and important determinants for stemness,” Experimental Hematology, vol. 39, no. 3, pp. 272–281, 2011. View at Google Scholar
  2. R. L. Strausberg, E. A. Feingold, L. H. Grouse et al., “Generation and initial analysis of more than 15,000 full-length human and mouse cDNA sequences,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, vol. 99, no. 26, pp. 16899–16903, 2002. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  3. M. Tahiliani, K. P. Koh, Y. Shen et al., “Conversion of 5-methylcytosine to 5-hydroxymethylcytosine in mammalian DNA by MLL partner TET1,” Science, vol. 324, no. 5929, pp. 930–935, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  4. M. E. Figueroa, O. Abdel-Wahab, C. Lu et al., “Leukemic IDH1 and IDH2 mutations result in a hypermethylation phenotype, disrupt TET2 function, and impair hematopoietic differentiation,” Cancer Cell, vol. 18, no. 6, pp. 553–567, 2010. View at Google Scholar
  5. S. Ito, A. C. Dalessio, O. V. Taranova, K. Hong, L. C. Sowers, and Y. Zhang, “Role of tet proteins in 5mC to 5hmC conversion, ES-cell self-renewal and inner cell mass specification,” Nature, vol. 466, no. 7310, pp. 1129–1133, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  6. M. Ko, Y. Huang, A. M. Jankowska et al., “Impaired hydroxylation of 5-methylcytosine in myeloid cancers with mutant TET2,” Nature, vol. 468, no. 7325, pp. 839–843, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  7. W. Xu, H. Yang, Y. Liu et al., “Oncometabolite 2-hydroxyglutarate is a competitive inhibitor of α-ketoglutarate-dependent dioxygenases,” Cancer Cell, vol. 19, no. 1, pp. 17–30, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  8. C. Loenarz and C. J. Schofield, “Oxygenase catalyzed 5-methylcytosine hydroxylation,” Chemistry and Biology, vol. 16, no. 6, pp. 580–583, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  9. S. Ito, L. Shen, Q. Dai et al., “Tet proteins can convert 5-methylcytosine to 5-formylcytosine and 5-carboxylcytosine,” Science, vol. 333, no. 6047, pp. 1300–1303, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  10. Y. He, B. Li, Z. Li et al., “Tet-mediated formation of 5-carboxylcytosine and its excision by TDG in mammalian DNA,” Science, vol. 333, no. 6047, pp. 1303–1307, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  11. C. Chen, K. Wang, and C.-K. Shen, “The mammalian de novo DNA methyltransferases DNMT3A and DNMT3B are also DNA 5-hydroxymethylcytosine dehydroxymethylases,” Journal of Biological Chemistry, vol. 287, no. 40, pp. 33116–33121, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  12. S. M. C. Langemeijer, R. P. Kuiper, M. Berends et al., “Acquired mutations in TET2 are common in myelodysplastic syndromes,” Nature Genetics, vol. 41, no. 7, pp. 838–842, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  13. E. Hellström-Lindberg, “Significance of JAK2 and TET2 mutations in myelodysplastic syndromes,” Blood Reviews, vol. 24, no. 2, pp. 83–90, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  14. A. M. Jankowska, H. Szpurka, R. V. Tiu et al., “Loss of heterozygosity 4q24 and TET2 mutations associated with myelodysplastic/myeloproliferative neoplasms,” Blood, vol. 113, no. 25, pp. 6403–6410, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  15. O. Abdel-Wahab, A. Mullally, C. Hedvat et al., “Genetic characterization of TET1, TET2, and TET3 alterations in myeloid malignancies,” Blood, vol. 114, no. 1, pp. 144–147, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  16. O. Nibourel, O. Kosmider, M. Cheok et al., “Incidence and prognostic value of TET2 alterations in de novo acute myeloid leukemia achieving complete remission,” Blood, vol. 116, no. 7, pp. 1132–1135, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  17. R. Garzon, M. Garofalo, M. P. Martelli et al., “Distinctive microRNA signature of acute myeloid leukemia bearing cytoplasmic mutated nucleophosmin,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, vol. 105, no. 10, pp. 3945–3950, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  18. O. Kosmider, V. Gelsi-Boyer, M. Cheok et al., “TET2 mutation is an independent favorable prognostic factor in myelodysplastic syndromes (MDSs),” Blood, vol. 114, no. 15, pp. 3285–3291, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  19. A. E. Smith, A. M. Mohamedali, A. Kulasekararaj et al., “Next-generation sequencing of the TET2 gene in 355 MDS and CMMLpatients reveals low-abundance mutant clones with early origins, but indicates no definite prognostic value,” Blood, vol. 116, no. 19, pp. 3923–3932, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  20. S. K. Patra, A. Patra, F. Rizzi, T. C. Ghosh, and S. Bettuzzi, “Demethylation of (Cytosine-5-C-methyl) DNA and regulation of transcription in the epigenetic pathways of cancer development,” Cancer and Metastasis Reviews, vol. 27, no. 2, pp. 315–334, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  21. M. M. Suzuki and A. Bird, “DNA methylation landscapes: provocative insights from epigenomics,” Nature Reviews Genetics, vol. 9, no. 6, pp. 465–476, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  22. R. Lister, M. Pelizzola, R. H. Dowen et al., “Human DNA methylomes at base resolution show widespread epigenomic differences,” Nature, vol. 462, no. 7271, pp. 315–322, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  23. R. S. Illingworth and A. P. Bird, “CpG islands—“a rough guide”,” FEBS Letters, vol. 583, no. 11, pp. 1713–1720, 2009. View at Google Scholar
  24. C. M. Bender, M. L. Gonzalgo, F. A. Gonzales, C. T. Nguyen, K. D. Robertson, and P. A. Jones, “Roles of cell division and gene transcription in the methylation of CpG islands,” Molecular and Cellular Biology, vol. 19, no. 10, pp. 6690–6698, 1999. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  25. C. A. Doege, K. Inoue, T. Yamashita et al., “Early-stage epigenetic modification during somatic cell reprogramming by Parp1 and Tet2,” Nature, vol. 488, no. 7413, pp. 652–655, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  26. K. M. Loh and B. Lim, “Epigenetics: actors in the cell reprogramming drama,” Nature, vol. 488, no. 7413, pp. 599–600, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus