Abstract
Accurate control of gene expression is essential for normal development and dysregulation of transcription underpins cancer onset and progression. Similar to cell cycle regulation, RNA polymerase II-driven transcription can be considered as a unidirectional multistep cycle, with thousands of unique transcription cycles occurring in concert within each cell. Each transcription cycle comprises recruitment, initiation, pausing, elongation, termination and recycling stages that are tightly controlled by the coordinated action of transcriptional cyclin-dependent kinases and their cognate cyclins as well as the opposing activity of transcriptional phosphatases. Oncogenic dysregulation of transcription can entail defective control of gene expression, either at select loci or more globally, impacting a large proportion of the genome. The resultant dependency on the core-transcriptional machinery is believed to render ‘transcriptionally addicted’ cancers sensitive to perturbation of transcription. Based on these findings, small molecules targeting transcriptional cyclin-dependent kinases and associated proteins hold promise for the treatment of cancer. Here, we utilize the transcription cycles concept to explain how dysregulation of these finely tuned gene expression processes may drive tumorigenesis and how therapeutically beneficial responses may arise from global or selective transcriptional perturbation. This conceptual framework helps to explain tumour-selective transcriptional dependencies and facilitates the rational design of combination therapies.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution
Access options
Access Nature and 54 other Nature Portfolio journals
Get Nature+, our best-value online-access subscription
$29.99 / 30 days
cancel any time
Subscribe to this journal
Receive 12 print issues and online access
$209.00 per year
only $17.42 per issue
Buy this article
- Purchase on Springer Link
- Instant access to full article PDF
Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Bradner, J. E., Hnisz, D. & Young, R. A. Transcriptional addiction in cancer. Cell 168, 629–643 (2017). Important review article detailing the conceptual framework for transcriptional addiction in cancer and how this information might be exploited to develop new therapeutic modalities.
Lee, T. I. & Young, R. A. Transcriptional regulation and its misregulation in disease. Cell 152, 1237–1251 (2013).
Parua, P. K. & Fisher, R. P. Dissecting the Pol II transcription cycle and derailing cancer with CDK inhibitors. Nat. Chem. Biol. 16, 716–724 (2020).
Martin, R. D., Hébert, T. E. & Tanny, J. C. Therapeutic targeting of the general RNA polymerase II transcription machinery. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 21, 3354 (2020).
Schier, A. C. & Taatjes, D. J. Structure and mechanism of the RNA polymerase II transcription machinery. Genes Dev. 34, 465–488 (2020).
Chen, X. et al. Structures of the human mediator and mediator-bound preinitiation complex. Science 372, 52–56 (2021).
Abdella, R. et al. Structure of the human mediator-bound transcription preinitiation complex. Science 372, 52–56 (2021).
Ebmeier, C. C. et al. Human TFIIH Kinase CDK7 regulates transcription-associated chromatin modifications. Cell Rep. 20, 1173–1186 (2017).
Glover-Cutter, K. et al. TFIIH-associated Cdk7 kinase functions in phosphorylation of C-terminal domain Ser7 residues, promoter-proximal pausing, and termination by RNA polymerase II. Mol. Cell Biol. 29, 5455–5464 (2009).
Nilson, K. A. et al. THZ1 reveals roles for Cdk7 in co-transcriptional capping and pausing. Mol. Cell 59, 576–587 (2015).
Noe Gonzalez, M. et al. CTD-dependent and -independent mechanisms govern co-transcriptional capping of Pol II transcripts. Nat. Commun. 9, 3392 (2018).
Fant, C. B. & Taatjes, D. J. Regulatory functions of the mediator kinases CDK8 and CDK19. Transcription 10, 76–90 (2019).
Vos, S. M. et al. Structure of paused transcription complex Pol II-DSIF-NELF. Nature 560, 601–606 (2018).
Chen, F. X., Smith, E. R. & Shilatifard, A. Born to run: control of transcription elongation by RNA polymerase II. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 19, 464–478 (2018).
Booth, G. T. et al. Cdk9 regulates a promoter-proximal checkpoint to modulate RNA polymerase II elongation rate in fission yeast. Nat. Commun. 9, 543 (2018).
Jonkers, I., Kwak, H. & Lis, J. T. Genome-wide dynamics of Pol II elongation and its interplay with promoter proximal pausing, chromatin, and exons. eLife 3, e02407 (2014).
Vos, S. M. et al. Structure of activated transcription complex Pol II-DSIF-PAF-SPT6. Nature 560, 607–612 (2018). Together with Vos et al. (reference 13), this study presents the structures of the transcriptionally paused and elongating Pol II complexes and demonstrate how CDK9-mediated phosphorylation modulates complex assembly.
Cortazar, M. A. et al. Control of RNA Pol II Speed by PNUTS-PP1 and Spt5 Dephosphorylation Facilitates Termination by a “Sitting Duck Torpedo” Mechanism. Mol. Cell 76, 896–908.e4 (2019). This study demonstrates a role for the PNUTS-PP1 phosphatase complex for the control of Pol II elongation rate and termination through the modulation of Spt5 phosphorylation.
Dubbury, S. J., Boutz, P. L. & Sharp, P. A. CDK12 regulates DNA repair genes by suppressing intronic polyadenylation. Nature 564, 141–145 (2018). This study demonstrates that CDK12 suppresses intronic polyadenylation and is required for the full-length expression of homologous recombination genes.
Fan, Z. et al. CDK13 cooperates with CDK12 to control global RNA polymerase II processivity. Sci. Adv. 6, eaaz5041 (2020). Using a chemical-genetic analogue-sensitive mutant kinase approach, this study demonstrates the molecular redundancy between CDK13 and CDK12 for the control of Pol II processivity and elongation.
Krajewska, M. et al. CDK12 loss in cancer cells affects DNA damage response genes through premature cleavage and polyadenylation. Nat. Commun. 10, 1757 (2019).
Liang, K. et al. Characterization of human cyclin-dependent kinase 12 (CDK12) and CDK13 complexes in C-terminal domain phosphorylation, gene transcription, and RNA processing. Mol. Cell Biol. 35, 928–938 (2015).
Tellier, M. et al. CDK12 globally stimulates RNA polymerase II transcription elongation and carboxyl-terminal domain phosphorylation. Nucleic Acids Res. 48, 7712–7727 (2020).
Fisher, R. P. Cdk7: a kinase at the core of transcription and in the crosshairs of cancer drug discovery. Transcription 10, 47–56 (2019).
Olson, C. M. et al. Development of a selective CDK7 covalent inhibitor reveals predominant cell-cycle phenotype. Cell Chem. Biol. 26, 792–803.e10 (2019).
Schachter, M. M. et al. A Cdk7-Cdk4 T-loop phosphorylation cascade promotes G1 progression. Mol. Cell 50, 250–260 (2013).
Petretti, C. et al. The PITSLRE/CDK11p58 protein kinase promotes centrosome maturation and bipolar spindle formation. EMBO Rep. 7, 418–424 (2006).
Gajdušková, P. et al. CDK11 is required for transcription of replication-dependent histone genes. Nat. Struct. Mol. Biol. 27, 500–510 (2020).
Trembley, J. H. et al. Casein kinase 2 interacts with cyclin-dependent kinase 11 (CDK11) in vivo and phosphorylates both the RNA polymerase II carboxyl-terminal domain and CDK11 in vitro. J. Biol. Chem. 278, 2265–2270 (2003).
Heim, A., Rymarczyk, B. & Mayer, T. U. Regulation of cell division. Adv. Exp. Med. Biol. 953, 83–116 (2017).
Hnisz, D. et al. Convergence of developmental and oncogenic signaling pathways at transcriptional super-enhancers. Mol. Cell 58, 362–370 (2015).
Hnisz, D. et al. Super-enhancers in the control of cell identity and disease. Cell 155, 934–947 (2013).
Lin, C. Y. et al. Transcriptional amplification in tumor cells with elevated c-Myc. Cell 151, 56–67 (2012).
Nie, Z. et al. c-Myc is a universal amplifier of expressed genes in lymphocytes and embryonic stem cells. Cell 151, 68–79 (2012).
Hnisz, D. et al. Activation of proto-oncogenes by disruption of chromosome neighborhoods. Science 351, 1454–1458 (2016).
Lovén, J. et al. Revisiting global gene expression analysis. Cell 151, 476–482 (2012).
Chou, J. et al. Transcription-associated cyclin-dependent kinases as targets and biomarkers for cancer therapy. Cancer Discov. 10, 351–370 (2020).
Shan, W. et al. Systematic characterization of recurrent genomic alterations in cyclin-dependent kinases reveals potential therapeutic strategies for cancer treatment. Cell Rep. 32, 107884 (2020). This study characterizes genetic alterations in genes encoding cyclin-dependent kinases and cyclins across >10,000 tumours and identifies correlations between CDK-associated mutations and sensitivity to DNA-damaging agents.
Clark, V. E. et al. Recurrent somatic mutations in POLR2A define a distinct subset of meningiomas. Nat. Genet. 48, 1253–1259 (2016).
Li, Y. et al. Heterozygous deletion of chromosome 17p renders prostate cancer vulnerable to inhibition of RNA polymerase II. Nature Commun. 9, 4394 (2018).
Bancerek, J. et al. CDK8 kinase phosphorylates transcription factor STAT1 to selectively regulate the interferon response. Immunity 38, 250–262 (2013).
Nitulescu, I. I. et al. Mediator kinase phosphorylation of STAT1 S727 promotes growth of neoplasms with JAK-STAT activation. EBioMedicine 26, 112–125 (2017).
Tsai, K. L. et al. A conserved mediator-CDK8 kinase module association regulates mediator-RNA polymerase II interaction. Nat. Struct. Mol. Biol. 20, 611–619 (2013).
Firestein, R. et al. CDK8 expression in 470 colorectal cancers in relation to beta-catenin activation, other molecular alterations and patient survival. Int. J. Cancer 126, 2863–2873 (2010).
Martin, E. S. et al. Common and distinct genomic events in sporadic colorectal cancer and diverse cancer types. Cancer Res. 67, 10736–10743 (2007).
Jaeger, M. G. et al. Selective mediator dependence of cell-type-specifying transcription. Nat. Genet. 52, 719–727 (2020).
Pelish, H. E. et al. Mediator kinase inhibition further activates super-enhancer-associated genes in AML. Nature 526, 273–276 (2015).
Philip, S. et al. Cyclin-dependent kinase 8: a new hope in targeted cancer therapy? J. Med. Chem. 61, 5073–5092 (2018).
Morris, E. J. et al. E2F1 represses beta-catenin transcription and is antagonized by both pRB and CDK8. Nature 455, 552–556 (2008).
Zhao, J., Ramos, R. & Demma, M. CDK8 regulates E2F1 transcriptional activity through S375 phosphorylation. Oncogene 32, 3520–3530 (2013).
McCleland, M. L. et al. Cdk8 deletion in the Apc(Min) murine tumour model represses EZH2 activity and accelerates tumourigenesis. J. Pathol. 237, 508–519 (2015).
Kämpjärvi, K. et al. Somatic MED12 mutations in prostate cancer and uterine leiomyomas promote tumorigenesis through distinct mechanisms. Prostate 76, 22–31 (2016).
Mäkinen, N. et al. MED12, the mediator complex subunit 12 gene, is mutated at high frequency in uterine leiomyomas. Science 334, 252–255 (2011).
Turunen, M. et al. Uterine leiomyoma-linked MED12 mutations disrupt mediator-associated CDK activity. Cell Rep. 7, 654–660 (2014).
Barbieri, C. E. et al. Exome sequencing identifies recurrent SPOP, FOXA1 and MED12 mutations in prostate cancer. Nat. Genet. 44, 685–689 (2012).
Klatt, F. et al. A precisely positioned MED12 activation helix stimulates CDK8 kinase activity. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 117, 2894–2905 (2020).
Knuesel, M. T. et al. The human CDK8 subcomplex is a molecular switch that controls Mediator coactivator function. Genes Dev. 23, 439–451 (2009).
Baker, A. et al. The CDK9 inhibitor dinaciclib exerts potent apoptotic and antitumor effects in preclinical models of MLL-rearranged acute myeloid leukemia. Cancer Res. 76, 1158–1169 (2016).
Gregory, G. P. et al. CDK9 inhibition by dinaciclib potently suppresses Mcl-1 to induce durable apoptotic responses in aggressive MYC-driven B-cell lymphoma in vivo. Leukemia 29, 1437–1441 (2015).
Wang, Y. et al. CDK7-dependent transcriptional addiction in triple-negative breast cancer. Cell 163, 174–186 (2015). This study linked therapeutic efficacy of covalent inhibitors of CDK7/12/13 in TNBC to highly selective inhibition of an ‘Achilles cluster’ of super-enhancer-associated genes.
Rahl, P. B. et al. c-Myc regulates transcriptional pause release. Cell 141, 432–445 (2010).
Rahl, P. B. & Young, R. A. MYC and transcription elongation. Cold Spring Harb. Perspect. Med. 4, a020990 (2014).
Eberhardy, S. R. & Farnham, P. J. Myc recruits P-TEFb to mediate the final step in the transcriptional activation of the cad promoter. J. Biol. Chem. 277, 40156–40162 (2002).
Gargano, B. et al. P-TEFb is a crucial co-factor for Myc transactivation. Cell Cycle 6, 2031–2037 (2007).
Kanazawa, S. et al. c-Myc recruits P-TEFb for transcription, cellular proliferation and apoptosis. Oncogene 22, 5707–5711 (2003).
Walz, S. et al. Activation and repression by oncogenic MYC shape tumour-specific gene expression profiles. Nature 511, 483–487 (2014).
Kalkat, M. et al. MYC deregulation in primary human cancers. Genes 8, 151 (2017).
Dalla-Favera, R. et al. Human c-myc onc gene is located on the region of chromosome 8 that is translocated in Burkitt lymphoma cells. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 79, 7824–7827 (1982).
Taub, R. et al. Translocation of the c-myc gene into the immunoglobulin heavy chain locus in human Burkitt lymphoma and murine plasmacytoma cells. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 79, 7837–7841 (1982).
Walker, B. A. et al. Translocations at 8q24 juxtapose MYC with genes that harbor superenhancers resulting in overexpression and poor prognosis in myeloma patients. Blood Cancer J. 4, e191 (2014).
Affer, M. et al. Promiscuous MYC locus rearrangements hijack enhancers but mostly super-enhancers to dysregulate MYC expression in multiple myeloma. Leukemia 28, 1725–1735 (2014).
Zhang, X. et al. Identification of focally amplified lineage-specific super-enhancers in human epithelial cancers. Nat. Genet. 48, 176–182 (2016).
Herranz, D. et al. A NOTCH1-driven MYC enhancer promotes T cell development, transformation and acute lymphoblastic leukemia. Nat. Med. 20, 1130–1137 (2014).
Shi, J. et al. Role of SWI/SNF in acute leukemia maintenance and enhancer-mediated Myc regulation. Genes Dev. 27, 2648–2662 (2013).
Liang, J. et al. Epstein-Barr virus super-enhancer eRNAs are essential for MYC oncogene expression and lymphoblast proliferation. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 113, 14121–14126 (2016).
Sabò, A. et al. Selective transcriptional regulation by Myc in cellular growth control and lymphomagenesis. Nature 511, 488–492 (2014).
Chandriani, S. et al. A core MYC gene expression signature is prominent in basal-like breast cancer but only partially overlaps the core serum response. PLoS ONE 4, e6693 (2009).
Baluapuri, A., Wolf, E. & Eilers, M. Target gene-independent functions of MYC oncoproteins. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 21, 255–267 (2020).
Ji, H. et al. Cell-type independent MYC target genes reveal a primordial signature involved in biomass accumulation. PLoS ONE 6, e26057 (2011).
Lin, C. et al. AFF4, a component of the ELL/P-TEFb elongation complex and a shared subunit of MLL chimeras, can link transcription elongation to leukemia. Mol. Cell 37, 429–437 (2010).
Basu, S., Nandy, A. & Biswas, D. Keeping RNA polymerase II on the run: Functions of MLL fusion partners in transcriptional regulation. Biochim. Biophys. Acta Gene Regul. Mech. 1863, 194563 (2020).
Bolouri, H. et al. The molecular landscape of pediatric acute myeloid leukemia reveals recurrent structural alterations and age-specific mutational interactions. Nat. Med. 24, 103–112 (2018).
Meyer, C. et al. The MLL recombinome of acute leukemias in 2017. Leukemia 32, 273–284 (2018).
Milne, T. A. et al. MLL targets SET domain methyltransferase activity to Hox gene promoters. Mol. Cell 10, 1107–1117 (2002).
Milne, T. A. et al. MLL associates specifically with a subset of transcriptionally active target genes. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 102, 14765–14770 (2005).
Armstrong, S. A. et al. MLL translocations specify a distinct gene expression profile that distinguishes a unique leukemia. Nat. Genet. 30, 41–47 (2002).
Krivtsov, A. V. et al. Transformation from committed progenitor to leukaemia stem cell initiated by MLL-AF9. Nature 442, 818–822 (2006).
Somervaille, T. C. & Cleary, M. L. Identification and characterization of leukemia stem cells in murine MLL-AF9 acute myeloid leukemia. Cancer Cell 10, 257–268 (2006).
Bernt, K. M. et al. MLL-rearranged leukemia is dependent on aberrant H3K79 methylation by DOT1L. Cancer Cell 20, 66–78 (2011).
Nguyen, A. T. et al. DOT1L, the H3K79 methyltransferase, is required for MLL-AF9-mediated leukemogenesis. Blood 117, 6912–6922 (2011).
Okuda, H. et al. Cooperative gene activation by AF4 and DOT1L drives MLL-rearranged leukemia. J. Clin. Invest. 127, 1918–1931 (2017).
Mueller, D. et al. A role for the MLL fusion partner ENL in transcriptional elongation and chromatin modification. Blood 110, 4445–4454 (2007).
Dawson, M. A. et al. Inhibition of BET recruitment to chromatin as an effective treatment for MLL-fusion leukaemia. Nature 478, 529–533 (2011).
Delmore, J. E. et al. BET bromodomain inhibition as a therapeutic strategy to target c-Myc. Cell 146, 904–917 (2011).
Phillips, D. C. et al. A novel CDK9 inhibitor increases the efficacy of venetoclax (ABT-199) in multiple models of hematologic malignancies. Leukemia 34, 1646–1657 (2020).
Luo, Z., Lin, C. & Shilatifard, A. The super elongation complex (SEC) family in transcriptional control. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 13, 543–547 (2012).
Cancer Genome Atlas Research Network. Integrated genomic analyses of ovarian carcinoma. Nature 474, 609–615 (2011).
Cancer Genome Atlas Research Network. The molecular taxonomy of primary prostate cancer. Cell 163, 1011–1025 (2015).
Wu, Y. M. et al. Inactivation of CDK12 delineates a distinct immunogenic class of advanced prostate cancer. Cell 173, 1770–1782.e14 (2018). This study demonstrated increased neoantigen burden and T cell infiltration in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancers characterized by inactivating CDK12 mutations and focal tandem duplications.
Liang, S. et al. CDK12: a potent target and biomarker for human cancer therapy. Cells 9, 1483 (2020).
Joshi, P. M. et al. Ovarian cancer-associated mutations disable catalytic activity of CDK12, a kinase that promotes homologous recombination repair and resistance to cisplatin and poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors. J. Biol. Chem. 289, 9247–9253 (2014).
Ciriello, G. et al. Comprehensive molecular portraits of invasive lobular breast cancer. Cell 163, 506–519 (2015).
Zang, Z. J. et al. Genetic and structural variation in the gastric cancer kinome revealed through targeted deep sequencing. Cancer Res. 71, 29–39 (2011).
Tien, J. F. et al. CDK12 regulates alternative last exon mRNA splicing and promotes breast cancer cell invasion. Nucleic Acids Res. 45, 6698–6716 (2017).
Blazek, D. et al. The Cyclin K/Cdk12 complex maintains genomic stability via regulation of expression of DNA damage response genes. Genes Dev. 25, 2158–2172 (2011).
Menghi, F. et al. The tandem duplicator phenotype is a prevalent genome-wide cancer configuration driven by distinct gene mutations. Cancer Cell 34, 197–210.e5 (2018).
Popova, T. et al. Ovarian cancers harboring inactivating mutations in CDK12 display a distinct genomic instability pattern characterized by large tandem duplications. Cancer Res. 76, 1882–1891 (2016). Together with Menghi et al. (2018), this study identifies genomic instability associated with large tandem duplications in cancers with inactivating CDK12 mutations in ovarian cancers.
Lord, C. J. & Ashworth, A. BRCAness revisited. Nat. Rev. Cancer 16, 110–120 (2016).
Tufegdžić Vidaković, A. et al. Regulation of the RNAPII Pool Is Integral to the DNA damage response. Cell 180, 1245–1261.e21 (2020).
Insco, M. L. et al. Mutations drive melanoma via accumulation of prematurely terminated transcripts. Preprint at bioRxiv https://doi.org/10.1101/824193 (2019).
Dong, X. et al. CDK13 RNA over-editing mediated by ADAR1 associates with poor prognosis of hepatocellular carcinoma patients. Cell Physiol. Biochem. 47, 2602–2612 (2018).
Lovén, J. et al. Selective inhibition of tumor oncogenes by disruption of super-enhancers. Cell 153, 320–334 (2013).
Whyte, W. A. et al. Master transcription factors and mediator establish super-enhancers at key cell identity genes. Cell 153, 307–319 (2013). Together with Loven et al. (2013), this study shows that large enhancer elements, coined super-enhancer elements, drive the expression of key oncogenes, such as MYC and cell identity genes, and are more sensitive to perturbation with BET inhibitors.
Hyde, R. K., Liu, P. & Friedman, A. D. RUNX1 and CBFβ mutations and activities of their wild-type alleles in AML. Adv. Exp. Med. Biol. 962, 265–282 (2017).
Breit, T. M. et al. Site-specific deletions involving the tal-1 and sil genes are restricted to cells of the T cell receptor alpha/beta lineage: T cell receptor delta gene deletion mechanism affects multiple genes. J. Exp. Med. 177, 965–977 (1993).
Mansour, M. R. et al. Oncogene regulation. An oncogenic super-enhancer formed through somatic mutation of a noncoding intergenic element. Science 346, 1373–1377 (2014).
Choi, Y. et al. Erythroid inhibition by the leukemic fusion AML1-ETO is associated with impaired acetylation of the major erythroid transcription factor GATA-1. Cancer Res. 66, 2990–2996 (2006).
Ptasinska, A. et al. Identification of a dynamic core transcriptional network in t(8;21) AML that regulates differentiation block and self-renewal. Cell Rep. 8, 1974–1988 (2014).
Saeed, S. et al. Chromatin accessibility, p300, and histone acetylation define PML-RARα and AML1-ETO binding sites in acute myeloid leukemia. Blood 120, 3058–3068 (2012).
Vangala, R. K. et al. The myeloid master regulator transcription factor PU.1 is inactivated by AML1-ETO in t(8;21) myeloid leukemia. Blood 101, 270–277 (2003).
Saeed, S. et al. Genome-wide functions of PML-RARα in acute promyelocytic leukaemia. Br. J. Cancer 104, 554–558 (2011).
Brooks, A. N. et al. A pan-cancer analysis of transcriptome changes associated with somatic mutations in U2AF1 reveals commonly altered splicing events. PLoS ONE 9, e87361 (2014).
Dalton, W. B. et al. Hotspot SF3B1 mutations induce metabolic reprogramming and vulnerability to serine deprivation. J. Clin. Invest. 129, 4708–4723 (2019).
Darman, R. B. et al. Cancer-associated SF3B1 hotspot mutations induce cryptic 3′ splice site selection through use of a different branch point. Cell Rep. 13, 1033–1045 (2015).
Graubert, T. A. et al. Recurrent mutations in the U2AF1 splicing factor in myelodysplastic syndromes. Nat. Genet. 44, 53–57 (2011).
Kim, E. et al. SRSF2 mutations contribute to myelodysplasia by mutant-specific effects on exon recognition. Cancer Cell 27, 617–630 (2015).
Liang, Y. et al. SRSF2 mutations drive oncogenesis by activating a global program of aberrant alternative splicing in hematopoietic cells. Leukemia 32, 2659–2671 (2018).
Przychodzen, B. et al. Patterns of missplicing due to somatic U2AF1 mutations in myeloid neoplasms. Blood 122, 999–1006 (2013).
Rahman, M. A. et al. Recurrent SRSF2 mutations in MDS affect both splicing and NMD. Genes Dev. 34, 413–427 (2020).
Zhang, J. et al. Disease-causing mutations in SF3B1 alter splicing by disrupting interaction with SUGP1. Mol. Cell 76, 82–95.e7 (2019).
Bartkowiak, B., Yan, C. & Greenleaf, A. L. Engineering an analog-sensitive CDK12 cell line using CRISPR/Cas. Biochim. Biophys. Acta 1849, 1179–1187 (2015).
Rimel, J. K. et al. Selective inhibition of CDK7 reveals high-confidence targets and new models for TFIIH function in transcription. Genes Dev. 34, 1452–1473 (2020).
Thapar, R. Structural basis for regulation of RNA-binding proteins by phosphorylation. ACS Chem. Biol. 10, 652–666 (2015).
Bensaude, O. Inhibiting eukaryotic transcription: Which compound to choose? How to evaluate its activity? Transcription 2, 103–108 (2011).
Falini, B., Brunetti, L. & Martelli, M. P. Dactinomycin in NPM1-mutated acute myeloid leukemia. N. Engl. J. Med. 373, 1180–1182 (2015).
George, B. et al. A phase I, first-in-human, open-label, dose-escalation, safety, pharmacokinetic, and pharmacodynamic study of oral TP-1287 administered daily to patients with advanced solid tumors. J. Clin. Oncol. 38 (Suppl. 15), 3611–3611 (2020).
Bishop, A. C. et al. A chemical switch for inhibitor-sensitive alleles of any protein kinase. Nature 407, 395–401 (2000). This study presents a chemical-genetic strategy for highly selective protein kinase inhibition through the generation of ATP analogue-sensitive mutant alleles.
Decker, T. M. et al. Analog-sensitive cell line identifies cellular substrates of CDK9. Oncotarget 10, 6934–6943 (2019).
Galbraith, M. D. et al. CDK8 kinase activity promotes glycolysis. Cell Rep. 21, 1495–1506 (2017).
Larochelle, S. et al. Cyclin-dependent kinase control of the initiation-to-elongation switch of RNA polymerase II. Nat. Struct. Mol. Biol. 19, 1108–1115 (2012).
Clarke, P. A. et al. Assessing the mechanism and therapeutic potential of modulators of the human mediator complex-associated protein kinases. eLife 5, e20722. (2016).
Mallinger, A. et al. Discovery of potent, orally bioavailable, small-molecule inhibitors of WNT signaling from a cell-based pathway screen. J. Med. Chem. 58, 1717–1735 (2015).
Czodrowski, P. et al. Structure-based optimization of potent, selective, and orally bioavailable CDK8 inhibitors discovered by high-throughput screening. J. Med. Chem. 59, 9337–9349 (2016).
Dale, T. et al. A selective chemical probe for exploring the role of CDK8 and CDK19 in human disease. Nat. Chem. Biol. 11, 973–980 (2015).
Rzymski, T. et al. SEL120-34A is a novel CDK8 inhibitor active in AML cells with high levels of serine phosphorylation of STAT1 and STAT5 transactivation domains. Oncotarget 8, 33779–33795 (2017).
McDermott, M. S. et al. Inhibition of CDK8 mediator kinase suppresses estrogen dependent transcription and the growth of estrogen receptor positive breast cancer. Oncotarget 8, 12558–12575 (2017).
Zheng, C., Liu, M. & Fan, H. Targeting complexes of super-enhancers is a promising strategy for cancer therapy. Oncol. Lett. 20, 2557–2566 (2020).
Kwiatkowski, N. et al. Targeting transcription regulation in cancer with a covalent CDK7 inhibitor. Nature 511, 616–620 (2014). This study presents the first covalent inhibitor of CDK7 and demonstrates the potent disruption of the core transcriptional regulatory circuitry following targeted inhibition of CDK7 in T-ALL.
Hu, S. et al. Discovery and characterization of SY-1365, a selective, covalent inhibitor of CDK7. Cancer Res. 79, 3479–3491 (2019).
Slobodin, B. et al. Transcription dynamics regulate poly(A) tails and expression of the RNA degradation machinery to balance mRNA Levels. Mol. Cell 78, 434–444.e5 (2020). This study demonstrates the coordination between Pol II-driven mRNA production and mRNA degradation for the control of balanced gene expression.
Robinson, D. R. et al. Activating ESR1 mutations in hormone-resistant metastatic breast cancer. Nat. Genet. 45, 1446–1451 (2013).
Toy, W. et al. ESR1 ligand-binding domain mutations in hormone-resistant breast cancer. Nat. Genet. 45, 1439–1445 (2013).
Chen, D. et al. Activation of estrogen receptor alpha by S118 phosphorylation involves a ligand-dependent interaction with TFIIH and participation of CDK7. Mol. Cell 6, 127–137 (2000).
Harrod, A. et al. Genomic modelling of the ESR1 Y537S mutation for evaluating function and new therapeutic approaches for metastatic breast cancer. Oncogene 36, 2286–2296 (2017).
Jeselsohn, R. et al. Allele-specific chromatin recruitment and therapeutic vulnerabilities of ESR1 activating mutations. Cancer Cell 33, 173–186.e5 (2018).
Patel, H. et al. ICEC0942, an orally bioavailable selective inhibitor of CDK7 for cancer treatment. Mol. Cancer Ther. 17, 1156–1166 (2018).
Liang, H. et al. Recent progress in development of cyclin-dependent kinase 7 inhibitors for cancer therapy. Expert Opin. Investig. Drugs 30, 61–76 (2021).
Satyam, L. K. et al. Potent anti-tumor activity of AUR102, a selective covalent inhibitor of CDK7. Eur. J. Cancer 138, S27 (2020).
Kent, L. N. & Leone, G. The broken cycle: E2F dysfunction in cancer. Nat. Rev. Cancer 19, 326–338 (2019).
Zhang, H. et al. CDK7 inhibition potentiates genome instability triggering anti-tumor immunity in small cell lung cancer. Cancer Cell 37, 37–54.e9 (2020).
Zhang, Z. et al. Preclinical efficacy and molecular mechanism of targeting CDK7-dependent transcriptional addiction in ovarian cancer. Mol. Cancer Ther. 16, 1739–1750 (2017).
Christensen, C. L. et al. Targeting transcriptional addictions in small cell lung cancer with a covalent CDK7 inhibitor. Cancer Cell 26, 909–922 (2014).
Hashiguchi, T. et al. Cyclin-dependent kinase-9 is a therapeutic target in MYC-expressing diffuse large B-cell lymphoma. Mol. Cancer Ther. 18, 1520–1532 (2019).
Rahaman, M. H. et al. Targeting CDK9 for treatment of colorectal cancer. Mol. Oncol. 13, 2178–2193 (2019).
Blake, D. R. et al. Application of a MYC degradation screen identifies sensitivity to CDK9 inhibitors in KRAS-mutant pancreatic cancer. Sci. Signal. 12, eaav7259 (2019).
Olson, C. M. et al. Pharmacological perturbation of CDK9 using selective CDK9 inhibition or degradation. Nat. Chem. Biol. 14, 163–170 (2018).
Day, M. A. et al. Abstract 1141: CDK9 inhibition is selective for transcriptionally addicted tumors harboring MYC genomic amplifications. Cancer Res. 81 (Suppl. 13), 1141 (2021).
Scheepstra, M., Hekking, K. F. W., van Hijfte, L. & Folmer, R. H. A. Bivalent ligands for protein degradation in drug discovery. Comput. Struct. Biotechnol. J. 17, 160–176 (2019).
Frame, S. et al. Fadraciclib (CYC065), a novel CDK inhibitor, targets key pro-survival and oncogenic pathways in cancer. PLoS ONE 15, e0234103 (2020).
Garcia-Cuellar, M. P. et al. Efficacy of cyclin-dependent-kinase 9 inhibitors in a murine model of mixed-lineage leukemia. Leukemia 28, 1427–1435 (2014).
Rahaman, M. H. et al. CDKI-73: an orally bioavailable and highly efficacious CDK9 inhibitor against acute myeloid leukemia. Invest. New Drugs 37, 625–635 (2019).
Barlaam, B. et al. Discovery of AZD4573, a potent and selective inhibitor of CDK9 that enables short duration of target engagement for the treatment of hematological malignancies. J. Med. Chem. 63, 15564–15590 (2020).
Vervoort, S. J. et al. The PP2A-Integrator-CDK9 axis fine-tunes transcription and can be targeted therapeutically in cancer. Cell 184, 3143–3162.e32 (2021). This study demonstrates the interplay between CDK9 and PP2A for the control of Pol II-driven transcription and the efficacy of combined CDK9 inhibition and PP2A activation in pre-clinical cancer models.
Brägelmann, J. et al. Systematic kinase inhibitor profiling identifies CDK9 as a synthetic lethal target in NUT midline carcinoma. Cell Rep. 20, 2833–2845 (2017).
Richters, A. et al. Modulating androgen receptor-driven transcription in prostate cancer with selective CDK9 inhibitors. Cell Chem. Biol. 28, 134–147.e14 (2021).
Chen, S. et al. Androgen receptor serine 81 phosphorylation mediates chromatin binding and transcriptional activation. J. Biol. Chem. 287, 8571–8583 (2012).
Gordon, V. et al. CDK9 regulates AR promoter selectivity and cell growth through serine 81 phosphorylation. Mol. Endocrinol. 24, 2267–2280 (2010).
Zhang, T. et al. Covalent targeting of remote cysteine residues to develop CDK12 and CDK13 inhibitors. Nat. Chem. Biol. 12, 876–884 (2016). This study presents a selective covalent inhibitor of CDK12 and CDK13 and demonstrated its efficacy in reducing the expression of DNA damage response and super-enhancer-associated transcription factor genes in cancer cell lines.
Geng, M. et al. Targeting CDK12-mediated transcription regulation in anaplastic thyroid carcinoma. Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 520, 544–550 (2019).
Liu, H., Liu, K. & Dong, Z. Targeting CDK12 for cancer therapy: function, mechanism, and drug discovery. Cancer Res. 81, 18–26 (2021).
Quereda, V. et al. Therapeutic targeting of CDK12/CDK13 in triple-negative breast cancer. Cancer Cell 36, 545–558.e7 (2019).
Jiang, B. et al. Discovery and resistance mechanism of a selective CDK12 degrader. Nat. Chem. Biol. 17, 675–683 (2021).
Johnson, S. F. et al. CDK12 inhibition reverses de novo and acquired PARP inhibitor resistance in BRCA wild-type and mutated models of triple-negative breast cancer. Cell Rep. 17, 2367–2381 (2016).
Iniguez, A. B. et al. EWS/FLI confers tumor cell synthetic lethality to CDK12 inhibition in ewing sarcoma. Cancer Cell 33, 202–216.e6 (2018).
Liu, Y. et al. Discovery of MFH290: a potent and highly selective covalent inhibitor for cyclin-dependent kinase 12/13. J. Med. Chem. 63, 6708–6726 (2020).
Li, Y. et al. CDK12/13 inhibition induces immunogenic cell death and enhances anti-PD-1 anticancer activity in breast cancer. Cancer Lett. 495, 12–21 (2020). This study highlights the effective combination of the selective CDK12 and CDK13 inhibitor SR-4835 with anti-PD1 immune-checkpoint inhibitors in pre-clinical breast cancer models.
Eick, D. & Geyer, M. The RNA polymerase II carboxy-terminal domain (CTD) code. Chem. Rev. 113, 8456–8490 (2013).
Mayfield, J. E. et al. Tyr1 phosphorylation promotes phosphorylation of Ser2 on the C-terminal domain of eukaryotic RNA polymerase II by P-TEFb. eLife 8, e48725 (2019).
Hintermair, C. et al. Threonine-4 of mammalian RNA polymerase II CTD is targeted by Polo-like kinase 3 and required for transcriptional elongation. EMBO J. 31, 2784–2797 (2012).
Nieto Moreno, N. et al. GSK-3 is an RNA polymerase II phospho-CTD kinase. Nucleic Acids Res. 48, 6068–6080 (2020).
Bonnet, F. et al. Transcription-independent phosphorylation of the RNA polymerase II C-terminal domain (CTD) involves ERK kinases (MEK1/2). Nucleic Acids Res. 27, 4399–4404 (1999).
Asghar, U. et al. The history and future of targeting cyclin-dependent kinases in cancer therapy. Nat. Rev. Drug Discov. 14, 130–146 (2015).
Hoshii, T. et al. A non-catalytic function of SETD1A regulates cyclin K and the DNA damage response. Cell 172, 1007–1021.e17 (2018).
Marx, A. et al. Upregulation of phosphatase 1 nuclear-targeting subunit (PNUTS) is an independent predictor of poor prognosis in prostate cancer. Dis. Markers 2020, 7050146 (2020).
Byrne, M. et al. Phase I study of the PTEFb inhibitor BAY 1251152 in patients with acute myelogenous leukemia. Blood 132 (Suppl. 1), 4055 (2018).
Song, H. et al. Targeting cyclin-dependent kinase 9 sensitizes medulloblastoma cells to chemotherapy. Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 520, 250–256 (2019).
Tee, A. E. et al. Combination therapy with the CDK7 inhibitor and the tyrosine kinase inhibitor exerts synergistic anticancer effects against MYCN-amplified neuroblastoma. Int. J. Cancer 147, 1928–1938 (2020).
McDermott, M. S. J. et al. CDK7 inhibition is effective in all the subtypes of breast cancer: determinants of response and synergy with EGFR inhibition. Cells 9, 638 (2020).
Wang, J. et al. CDK7 inhibitor THZ1 enhances antiPD-1 therapy efficacy via the p38α/MYC/PD-L1 signaling in non-small cell lung cancer. J. Hematol. Oncol. 13, 99 (2020).
Chen, R. et al. The multi-kinase inhibitor TG02 induces apoptosis and blocks B-cell receptor signaling in chronic lymphocytic leukemia through dual mechanisms of action. Blood Cancer J. 11, 57 (2021).
Liang, K. et al. Targeting processive transcription elongation via SEC disruption for MYC-induced cancer therapy. Cell 175, 766–779.e17 (2018). This study presents KL-1/KL-2 compounds, which impaired Pol II pause release through the disruption of superelongation complex-mediated CDK9-recruitment to delay tumour progression in xenograft models of MYC-driven cancer.
Krivtsov, A. V. et al. A menin-MLL inhibitor induces specific chromatin changes and eradicates disease in models of MLL-rearranged leukemia. Cancer Cell 36, 660–673.e11 (2019).
Brzezinka, K. et al. Characterization of the Menin-MLL interaction as therapeutic cancer target. Cancers 12, 201 (2020).
Senisterra, G. et al. Small-molecule inhibition of MLL activity by disruption of its interaction with WDR5. Biochem. J. 449, 151–159 (2013).
Karatas, H. et al. High-affinity, small-molecule peptidomimetic inhibitors of MLL1/WDR5 protein-protein interaction. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 135, 669–682 (2013).
Ye, X. et al. The development of inhibitors targeting the mixed lineage leukemia 1 (MLL1)-WD repeat domain 5 protein (WDR5) protein-protein interaction. Curr. Med. Chem. 27, 5530–5542 (2020).
Dölle, A. et al. Design, synthesis, and evaluation of WD-repeat-containing protein 5 (WDR5) degraders. J. Med. Chem. 64, 10682–10710 (2021).
Thomas, L. R. et al. Targeting MYC through WDR5. Mol. Cell Oncol. 7, 1709388 (2020).
Erb, M. A. et al. Transcription control by the ENL YEATS domain in acute leukaemia. Nature 543, 270–274 (2017).
Garnar-Wortzel, L. et al. Chemical inhibition of ENL/AF9 YEATS domains in acute leukemia. ACS Central Sci. 7, 815–830 (2021).
Li, X. et al. Structure-guided development of YEATS domain inhibitors by targeting π-π-π stacking. Nat. Chem. Biol. 14, 1140–1149 (2018).
Doroshow, D. B., Eder, J. P. & LoRusso, P. M. BET inhibitors: a novel epigenetic approach. Ann. Oncol. 28, 1776–1787 (2017).
Hogg, S. J. et al. Targeting histone acetylation dynamics and oncogenic transcription by catalytic P300/CBP inhibition. Mol. Cell 81, 2183–2200.e13 (2021).
Lasko, L. M. et al. Discovery of a selective catalytic p300/CBP inhibitor that targets lineage-specific tumours. Nature 550, 128–132 (2017).
Hnisz, D. et al. A phase separation model for transcriptional control. Cell 169, 13–23 (2017).
Klein, I. A. et al. Partitioning of cancer therapeutics in nuclear condensates. Science 368, 1386–1392 (2020). This study demonstrates that physiochemically dependent partitioning of small-molecule cancer therapeutics in phase-separated condensates influences their on-target activity and suggests a mechanism for the selective sensitivity of super-enhancer-associated genes to global transcriptional inhibitors.
Hao, S. & Baltimore, D. The stability of mRNA influences the temporal order of the induction of genes encoding inflammatory molecules. Nat. Immunol. 10, 281–288 (2009).
Jia, Q. et al. Oncogenic super-enhancer formation in tumorigenesis and its molecular mechanisms. Exp. Mol. Med. 52, 713–723 (2020).
Meisner, N. C. et al. Identification and mechanistic characterization of low-molecular-weight inhibitors for HuR. Nat. Chem. Biol. 3, 508–515 (2007).
Caizzi, L. et al. Efficient RNA polymerase II pause release requires U2 snRNP function. Mol. Cell 81, 1920–1934.e9 (2021). This study demonstrates that U2 small nuclear ribonucleoprotein-dependent splicing is required for efficient CDK9 recruitment and Pol II elongation, highlighting feedback mechanisms between different phases of the transcription cycle.
Li, N. et al. Cyclin C is a haploinsufficient tumour suppressor. Nat. Cell Biol. 16, 1080–1091 (2014).
van Delft, F. W. et al. Clonal origins of relapse in ETV6-RUNX1 acute lymphoblastic leukemia. Blood 117, 6247–6254 (2011).
Ohata, N. et al. Highly frequent allelic loss of chromosome 6q16-23 in osteosarcoma: involvement of cyclin C in osteosarcoma. Int. J. Mol. Med. 18, 1153–1158 (2006).
Yang, S. et al. Identification of genes with correlated patterns of variations in DNA copy number and gene expression level in gastric cancer. Genomics 89, 451–459 (2007).
Ding, L. et al. Somatic mutations affect key pathways in lung adenocarcinoma. Nature 455, 1069–1075 (2008).
Ekumi, K. M. et al. Ovarian carcinoma CDK12 mutations misregulate expression of DNA repair genes via deficient formation and function of the Cdk12/CycK complex. Nucleic Acids Res. 43, 2575–2589 (2015).
Naidoo, K. et al. Evaluation of CDK12 protein expression as a potential novel biomarker for DNA damage response-targeted therapies in breast cancer. Mol. Cancer Ther. 17, 306–315 (2018).
Quigley, D. A. et al. Genomic hallmarks and structural variation in metastatic prostate. Cancer Cell 174, 758–769.e9 (2018).
Reimers, M. A. et al. Clinical outcomes in cyclin-dependent kinase 12 mutant advanced prostate cancer. Eur. Urol. 77, 333–341 (2020).
Haesen, D. et al. Recurrent PPP2R1A mutations in uterine cancer act through a dominant-negative mechanism to promote malignant cell growth. Cancer Res. 76, 5719–5731 (2016).
Shih, l-M. et al. Somatic mutations of PPP2R1A in ovarian and uterine carcinomas. Am. J. Pathol. 178, 144C2–1447 (2011).
Kauko, O. et al. PP2A inhibition is a druggable MEK inhibitor resistance mechanism in KRAS-mutant lung cancer cells. Sci. Transl Med. 10, eaaq1093 (2018).
Pippa, R. et al. MYC-dependent recruitment of RUNX1 and GATA2 on the SET oncogene promoter enhances PP2A inactivation in acute myeloid leukemia. Oncotarget 8, 53989–54003 (2017).
De Meyer, T. et al. E2Fs mediate a fundamental cell-cycle deregulation in high-grade serous ovarian carcinomas. J. Pathol. 217, 14–20 (2009).
Di Fiore, R. et al. RB1 in cancer: different mechanisms of RB1 inactivation and alterations of pRb pathway in tumorigenesis. J. Cell Physiol. 228, 1676–1687 (2013).
Fry, E. A., Mallakin, A. & Inoue, K. Translocations involving ETS family proteins in human cancer. Integr. Cancer Sci. Ther. 5, 10.15761/ICST.1000281 (2018).
Sizemore, G. M. et al. The ETS family of oncogenic transcription factors in solid tumours. Nat. Rev. Cancer 17, 337–351 (2017).
Igelmann, S., Neubauer, H. A. & Ferbeyre, G. STAT3 and STAT5 activation in solid cancers. Cancers 11, 1428 (2019).
Shahmarvand, N. et al. Mutations in the signal transducer and activator of transcription family of genes in cancer. Cancer Sci. 109, 926–933 (2018).
DiMartino, J. F. et al. The AF10 leucine zipper is required for leukemic transformation of myeloid progenitors by MLL-AF10. Blood 99, 3780–3785 (2002).
Russler-Germain, D. A. et al. The R882H DNMT3A mutation associated with AML dominantly inhibits wild-type DNMT3A by blocking its ability to form active tetramers. Cancer Cell 25, 442–454 (2014).
Yan, X. J. et al. Exome sequencing identifies somatic mutations of DNA methyltransferase gene DNMT3A in acute monocytic leukemia. Nat. Genet. 43, 309–315 (2011).
Lio, C. J., Yuita, H. & Rao, A. Dysregulation of the TET family of epigenetic regulators in lymphoid and myeloid malignancies. Blood 134, 1487–1497 (2019).
Waitkus, M. S., Diplas, B. H. & Yan, H. Biological role and therapeutic potential of IDH mutations in cancer. Cancer Cell 34, 186–195 (2018).
Borrow, J. et al. The translocation t(8;16)(p11;p13) of acute myeloid leukaemia fuses a putative acetyltransferase to the CREB-binding protein. Nat. Genet. 14, 33–41 (1996).
Panagopoulos, I. et al. Fusion of the MORF and CBP genes in acute myeloid leukemia with the t(10;16)(q22;p13). Hum. Mol. Genet. 10, 395–404 (2001).
Chaffanet, M. et al. MOZ is fused to p300 in an acute monocytic leukemia with t(8;22). Genes Chromosomes Cancer 28, 138–144 (2000).
Gayther, S. A. et al. Mutations truncating the EP300 acetylase in human cancers. Nat. Genet. 24, 300–303 (2000).
Mullighan, C. G. et al. CREBBP mutations in relapsed acute lymphoblastic leukaemia. Nature 471, 235–239 (2011).
Kishimoto, M. et al. Mutations and deletions of the CBP gene in human lung cancer. Clin. Cancer Res. 11, 512–519 (2005).
Levine, A. J. The many faces of p53: something for everyone. J. Mol. Cell Biol. 11, 524–530 (2019).
Morel, D. et al. Combining epigenetic drugs with other therapies for solid tumours — past lessons and future promise. Nat. Rev. Clin. Oncol. 283, 91–107 (2020).
Gibcus, J. H. & Dekker, J. The hierarchy of the 3D genome. Mol. Cell 49, 773–782 (2013).
Dekker, J. & Mirny, L. The 3D genome as moderator of chromosomal communication. Cell 164, 1110–1121 (2016).
Bonev, B. & Cavalli, G. Organization and function of the 3D genome. Nat. Rev. Genet. 17, 661–678 (2016).
Kim, S. & Shendure, J. Mechanisms of interplay between transcription factors and the 3D genome. Mol. Cell 76, 306–319 (2019).
Noble, C. G. et al. Key features of the interaction between Pcf11 CID and RNA polymerase II CTD. Nat. Struct. Mol. Biol. 12, 144–151 (2005).
Becker, R., Loll, B. & Meinhart, A. Snapshots of the RNA processing factor SCAF8 bound to different phosphorylated forms of the carboxyl-terminal domain of RNA polymerase II. J. Biol. Chem. 283, 22659–22669 (2008).
Ni, Z. et al. Control of the RNA polymerase II phosphorylation state in promoter regions by CTD interaction domain-containing proteins RPRD1A and RPRD1B. Transcription 2, 237–242 (2011).
Sabari, B. R. et al. Coactivator condensation at super-enhancers links phase separation and gene control. Science 361, eaar3958 (2018).
Boehning, M. et al. RNA polymerase II clustering through carboxy-terminal domain phase separation. Nat. Struct. Mol. Biol. 25, 833–840 (2018).
Boija, A. et al. Transcription factors activate genes through the phase-separation capacity of their activation domains. Cell 175, 1842–1855.e16 (2018).
Lu, H. et al. Phase-separation mechanism for C-terminal hyperphosphorylation of RNA polymerase II. Nature 558, 318–323 (2018).
Harlen, K. M. & Churchman, L. S. The code and beyond: transcription regulation by the RNA polymerase II carboxy-terminal domain. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 18, 263–273 (2017).
Archambault, J. et al. An essential component of a C-terminal domain phosphatase that interacts with transcription factor IIF in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 94, 14300–14305 (1997).
Kobor, M. S. et al. An unusual eukaryotic protein phosphatase required for transcription by RNA polymerase II and CTD dephosphorylation in S. cerevisiae. Mol. Cell 4, 55–62 (1999).
Krishnamurthy, S. et al. Ssu72 Is an RNA polymerase II CTD phosphatase. Mol. Cell 14, 387–394 (2004).
Schreieck, A. et al. RNA polymerase II termination involves C-terminal-domain tyrosine dephosphorylation by CPF subunit Glc7. Nat. Struct. Mol. Biol. 21, 175–179 (2014).
Parua, P. K. et al. A Cdk9-PP1 switch regulates the elongation-termination transition of RNA polymerase II. Nature 558, 460–464 (2018).
Parua, P. K. et al. Distinct Cdk9-phosphatase switches act at the beginning and end of elongation by RNA polymerase II. Nat. Commun. 11, 4338 (2020). Together with Parua et al. (2018), this study demonstrates distinct regulatory roles for protein phosphatases, PP1 and PP4, highlighting the balance between tCDK kinase activity and phosphatase activity at multiple phases of Pol II transcription cycles.
Sen, I. et al. DAF-16/FOXO requires Protein Phosphatase 4 to initiate transcription of stress resistance and longevity promoting genes. Nat. Commun. 11, 138 (2020).
Huang, K. L. et al. Integrator recruits protein phosphatase 2A to prevent pause release and facilitate transcription termination. Mol. Cell 80, 345–358.e9 (2020).
Zheng, H. et al. Identification of Integrator-PP2A complex (INTAC), an RNA polymerase II phosphatase. Science 370, eabb5872 (2020). Together with Huang and al. (2020), This study presents the identification of PP2A-dependent control of Pol II transcription cycles and structural characterization of the human Integator–PP2A complex.
Kavela, S. et al. PNUTS functions as a proto-oncogene by sequestering PTEN. Cancer Res. 73, 205–214 (2013).
Dingar, D. et al. MYC dephosphorylation by the PP1/PNUTS phosphatase complex regulates chromatin binding and protein stability. Nat. Commun. 9, 3502–350 (2018).
Farrington, C. C. et al. Protein phosphatase 2A activation as a therapeutic strategy for managing MYC-driven cancers. J. Biol. Chem. 295, 757–770 (2020).
Leonard, D. et al. Selective PP2A enhancement through biased heterotrimer stabilization. Cell 181, 688–701.e16 (2020). Together with Farrington et al. (2020), this study demonstrates the therapeutic properties and biochemical activities of small-molecule activators of protein phosphatase 2A, which exhibit efficacy in preclinical models of MYC and KRAS mutant-driven cancer.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
All authors made substantial contributions to researching data for the article, the discussion of content, writing and editing of the manuscript before final submission.
Corresponding authors
Ethics declarations
Competing Interests
The Johnstone laboratory receives research support from Roche, BMS, AstraZeneca and MecRx. R.W.J. is a scientific consultant and shareholder in MecRx. N.S.G. is a founder, science advisor and equity holder in C4, Syros, Soltego, B2S, Jengu, Allorion, EoCys and Larkspur Pharmaceuticals. The Gray laboratory receives or has received research funding from Novartis, Takeda, Astellas, Taiho, Janssen, Kinogen, Voronoi, Arbella, Deerfield and Sanofi. N.S.G. and N.K. are inventors on a patent application covering THZ1, which is licensed to a company co-founded by N.S.G.. N.K. is an employee of Kymera Therapeutics. S.J.V., J.R.D. and M.T. declare no competing interests.
Additional information
Peer review information
Nature Reviews Cancer thanks Ivan D’Orso, Shudong Wang, who co-reviewed with Muhammed Rahaman, and the other, anonymous, reviewer(s) for their contribution to the peer review of this work.
Publisher’s note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Supplementary information
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Vervoort, S.J., Devlin, J.R., Kwiatkowski, N. et al. Targeting transcription cycles in cancer. Nat Rev Cancer 22, 5–24 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41568-021-00411-8
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41568-021-00411-8
This article is cited by
-
EGR1 suppresses HCC growth and aerobic glycolysis by transcriptionally downregulating PFKL
Journal of Experimental & Clinical Cancer Research (2024)
-
MC180295 is a highly potent and selective CDK9 inhibitor with preclinical in vitro and in vivo efficacy in cancer
Clinical Epigenetics (2024)
-
Transcription factors-related molecular subtypes and risk prognostic model: exploring the immunogenicity landscape and potential drug targets in hepatocellular carcinoma
Cancer Cell International (2024)
-
Selective inhibition of CDK9 in triple negative breast cancer
Oncogene (2024)
-
Protein kinase CK2 – diverse roles in cancer cell biology and therapeutic promise
Molecular and Cellular Biochemistry (2023)
