The Circadian Clock Component BMAL1 Is a Critical Regulator of p21 Expression and Hepatocyte Proliferation
2007; Elsevier BV; Volume: 283; Issue: 8 Linguagem: Inglês
10.1074/jbc.m705576200
ISSN1083-351X
AutoresAline Gréchez‐Cassiau, Béatrice Rayet, Fabienne Guillaumond, Michèle Teboul, Franck Delaunay,
Tópico(s)Genetics, Aging, and Longevity in Model Organisms
ResumoMost living organisms show circadian (∼24 h) rhythms in physiology and behavior. These oscillations are generated by endogenous circadian clocks, present in virtually all cells where they control key biological processes. Although circadian gating of mitosis has been reported for many years in some peripheral tissues, the underlying molecular mechanisms have remained poorly understood. Here we show that the cell cycle inhibitor p21WAF1/CIP1 is rhythmically expressed in mouse peripheral organs. This rhythmic pattern of mRNA and protein expression was recapitulated in vitro in serum-shocked differentiated skeletal muscle cells. p21WAF1/CIP1 circadian expression is dramatically increased and no longer rhythmic in clock-deficient Bmal1–/– knock-out mice. Biochemical and genetic data show that oscillation of p21WAF1/CIP1 gene transcription is regulated by the antagonistic activities of the orphan nuclear receptors REV-ERBα/β and RORα4/γ, which are core clock regulators. Importantly, p21WAF1/CIP1 overexpressing Bmal1–/– primary hepatocytes exhibit a decreased proliferation rate. This phenotype could be reversed using small interfering RNA-mediated knockdown of p21WAF1/CIP1. These data establish a novel molecular link between clock and cell cycle genes and suggest that the G1 progression phase is a target of the circadian clock during liver cell proliferation. Most living organisms show circadian (∼24 h) rhythms in physiology and behavior. These oscillations are generated by endogenous circadian clocks, present in virtually all cells where they control key biological processes. Although circadian gating of mitosis has been reported for many years in some peripheral tissues, the underlying molecular mechanisms have remained poorly understood. Here we show that the cell cycle inhibitor p21WAF1/CIP1 is rhythmically expressed in mouse peripheral organs. This rhythmic pattern of mRNA and protein expression was recapitulated in vitro in serum-shocked differentiated skeletal muscle cells. p21WAF1/CIP1 circadian expression is dramatically increased and no longer rhythmic in clock-deficient Bmal1–/– knock-out mice. Biochemical and genetic data show that oscillation of p21WAF1/CIP1 gene transcription is regulated by the antagonistic activities of the orphan nuclear receptors REV-ERBα/β and RORα4/γ, which are core clock regulators. Importantly, p21WAF1/CIP1 overexpressing Bmal1–/– primary hepatocytes exhibit a decreased proliferation rate. This phenotype could be reversed using small interfering RNA-mediated knockdown of p21WAF1/CIP1. These data establish a novel molecular link between clock and cell cycle genes and suggest that the G1 progression phase is a target of the circadian clock during liver cell proliferation. Many physiological and behavioral processes display day-night oscillations in most organisms including mammals. These biological rhythms are controlled by endogenous self-sustained circadian (∼24 h) oscillators that operate not only in the central clock located in the suprachiasmatic nuclei of the hypothalamus but also in virtually all peripheral cells. Light is the main synchronizer of the central clock, which in turn coordinates the phases of peripheral oscillators regulating specific physiological outputs. Forward genetics and biochemical approaches have established the molecular basis underlying circadian oscillations in mammalian tissues (1Panda S. Hogenesch J.B. Kay S.A. Nature. 2002; 417: 329-335Crossref PubMed Scopus (775) Google Scholar, 2Reppert S.M. Weaver D.R. Nature. 2002; 418: 935-941Crossref PubMed Scopus (3416) Google Scholar, 3Ko C.H. Takahashi J.S. Hum. Mol. Genet. 2006; 15: R271-R277Crossref PubMed Scopus (1239) Google Scholar, 4Lowrey P.L. Takahashi J.S. Annu. Rev. Genomics. Hum. Genet. 2004; 5: 407-441Crossref PubMed Scopus (769) Google Scholar). This mechanism involves complex interlocked positive and negative transcriptional/posttranslational feedback loops between the clock genes Clock, Bmal1, Per1, Per2, Cry1, and Cry2 and their protein products. The robustness of the oscillations is ensured by additional regulators such as the REV-ERBα (NR1D1) and RORα (NR1F1) orphan nuclear receptors (5Preitner N. Damiola F. Lopez-Molina L. Zakany J. Duboule D. Albrecht U. Schibler U. Cell. 2002; 110: 251-260Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (1695) Google Scholar, 6Sato T.K. Panda S. Miraglia L.J. Reyes T.M. Rudic R.D. McNamara P. Naik K.A. FitzGerald G.A. Kay S.A. Hogenesch J.B. Neuron. 2004; 43: 527-537Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (803) Google Scholar). Furthermore, extensive multilevel posttranslational regulation of various clock components has also been shown to play an important role in the molecular clock mechanism (7Harms E. Kivimae S. Young M.W. Saez L. J. Biol. Rhythms. 2004; 19: 361-373Crossref PubMed Scopus (144) Google Scholar). There are substantial evidences that progression through the cell cycle occurs at specific times of the day/night cycle, suggesting that a function of the circadian clock system is to control this fundamental process. Notably, after the initial observation almost 40 years ago that cell division of the unicellular algae Euglena was controlled by an endogenous clock (8Edmunds Jr., L.N. Funch R.R. Science. 1969; 165: 500-503Crossref PubMed Scopus (34) Google Scholar), numerous studies have shown a circadian variation of the proliferative activity in mammalian tissues such as the epithelia of tongue, skin, oral mucosa, intestine, esophagus, stomach, duodenum, jejunum, and rectum as well as in bone marrow and pancreas (9Scheving L.E. Burns E.R. Pauly J.E. Am. J. Anat. 1972; 135: 311-317Crossref PubMed Scopus (52) Google Scholar, 10Scheving L.E. Burns E.R. Pauly J.E. Tsai T.H. Anat. Rec. 1978; 191: 479-486Crossref PubMed Scopus (128) Google Scholar, 11Smaaland R. Sothern R.B. Laerum O.D. Abrahamsen J.F. Chronobiol. Int. 2002; 19: 101-127Crossref PubMed Scopus (100) Google Scholar, 12Biederbick A. Elsasser H. Cell Tissue Res. 1998; 291: 277-283Crossref PubMed Scopus (13) Google Scholar, 13Bjarnason G.A. Jordan R.C. Wood P.A. Li Q. Lincoln D.W. Sothern R.B. Hrushesky W.J. Ben-David Y. Am. J. Pathol. 2001; 158: 1793-1801Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (319) Google Scholar, 14Bjarnason G.A. Jordan R. Chronobiol. Int. 2002; 19: 129-140Crossref PubMed Scopus (75) Google Scholar, 15Granda T.G. Liu X.H. Smaaland R. Cermakian N. Filipski E. Sassone-Corsi P. Levi F. FASEB. J. 2005; 19: 304-306Crossref PubMed Scopus (132) Google Scholar). Although several cell cycle regulators have been reported to be expressed rhythmically, the mechanism and the physiological relevance of this regulation remain poorly understood (16Matsuo T. Yamaguchi S. Mitsui S. Emi A. Shimoda F. Okamura H. Science. 2003; 302: 255-259Crossref PubMed Scopus (917) Google Scholar, 17Bjarnason G.A. Jordan R.C. Sothern R.B. Am. J. Pathol. 1999; 154: 613-622Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (145) Google Scholar, 18Grundschober C. Delaunay F. Puhlhofer A. Triqueneaux G. Laudet V. Bartfai T. Nef P. J. Biol. Chem. 2001; 276: 46751-46758Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (112) Google Scholar, 19Fu L. Pelicano H. Liu J. Huang P. Lee C. Cell. 2002; 111: 41-50Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (1042) Google Scholar, 20Hirayama J. Cardone L. Doi M. Sassone-Corsi P. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 2005; 102: 10194-10199Crossref PubMed Scopus (86) Google Scholar). However, Matsuo et al. (16Matsuo T. Yamaguchi S. Mitsui S. Emi A. Shimoda F. Okamura H. Science. 2003; 302: 255-259Crossref PubMed Scopus (917) Google Scholar) have recently demonstrated that mitosis is gated by the circadian clock in regenerating liver through the control of Wee1 kinase, a regulator of the G2/M transition. p21Waf1/CIP1 (hereafter referred as p21) is a member of the Cip/Kip family of cyclin-dependent kinase inhibitors, which negatively regulates cell cycle progression by inhibiting the activity of cyclin E-cdk2 complexes during G1 phase progression and blocking DNA replication through binding to proliferating cell nuclear antigen. p21 is also a major target of p53 activated after DNA damage and plays an important role during epidermis differentiation (21Dotto G.P. Biochim. Biophys. Acta. 2000; 1471: M43-M56PubMed Google Scholar, 22Di Cunto F. Topley G. Calautti E. Hsiao J. Ong L. Seth P.K. Dotto G.P. Science. 1998; 280: 1069-1072Crossref PubMed Scopus (254) Google Scholar, 23Gartel A.L. Tyner A.L. Exp. Cell Res. 1999; 246: 280-289Crossref PubMed Scopus (580) Google Scholar, 24Pei X.H. Xiong Y. Oncogene. 2005; 24: 2787-2795Crossref PubMed Scopus (138) Google Scholar). Here we investigate the molecular mechanism that links clock genes to p21 and show that genetic disruption of the circadian clock system results in aberrant p21 expression and altered cellular proliferation. Animals–All animal experiments were conducted in compliance with the CNRS regulation on animal ethics. Bmal1–/– mice in the C57Bl/6j background (kindly provided by C. A. Bradfield, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI) were used at 8–12 weeks of age, before they develop arthropathy (25Bunger M.K. Walisser J.A. Sullivan R. Manley P.A. Moran S.M. Kalscheur V.L. Colman R.J. Bradfield C.A. Genes. J. Genet. Dev. 2005; 41: 122-132Google Scholar). Heterozygous animals were crossed to generate knock-out mice and wild type littermates. Animals were housed in a 12-h light/12-h dark cycle (light/dark 12:12) in a temperature- and humidity-controlled environment and fed ad libitum. Zeitgeber time 0 (ZT0) 5The abbreviations used are: ZTZeitgeber timesiRNAsmall interfering RNAWTwild type. referred to lights on. For the constant darkness experiment, light was kept off at constant darkness 0 for 24 h. Zeitgeber time small interfering RNA wild type. Cell Culture–NIH 3T3 cells were from ATCC and grown under standard conditions. C2C12 cells were maintained in growth medium consisting of Dulbecco's modified Eagle's medium with 10% fetal bovine serum. Undifferentiated C2C12 were grown to confluence and then transferred to differentiation medium consisting of Dulbecco's modified Eagle's medium plus 2% horse serum. Differentiation medium was changed every 48 h. After 10 days, cells were stimulated with 50% fetal bovine serum for 2 h, and then the medium was replaced with Dulbecco's modified Eagle's medium plus 2% horse serum. Cells were collected every 4 h, and extracts were prepared for mRNA and protein analysis. Primary hepatocytes were isolated by in situ perfusion procedure using purified Liberase (Roche Diagnostics). Cells were plated at 2.5 × 104 cells/cm2 in collagen-coated 35-mm culture dishes in William's E medium supplemented with 10% fetal calf serum (v/v), 100 IU penicillin, 100 mg/ml streptomycin, and 5 μg of bovine insulin at 37 °C in 5% CO2. After cell attachment, medium was renewed without fetal calf serum and supplemented with 1 μm dexamethasone. Plasmid Construction and Cotransfection Assays–A 2240-bp fragment upstream of the first exon from the p21 gene has been amplified from mouse genomic DNA by PCR with the following primers: p21prom, forward, 5′-GCTCGAGTGTGTGCCTGGGGTGTGTATGTGTCAGG-3′; and reverse, 5′-CCAAGCTTCCCTCCCCCACACCTGGGCTATTCTCT-3′, and cloned between HindIII and Pst1 in front of the luciferase reporter gene in the pGL3 basic vector containing the Sac1-HindIII polylinker fragment from pBKS to generate the p21Prom::Luc construct. The p21 promoter deletion construct p21PromΔ1663::Luc was generated by digesting the p21Prom::Luc construct with SpeI and NheI and religation. The (proRORE)4x-TATA::Luc, (proROREmut)4x-TATA:: Luc, (intRORE)4x-TATA::Luc, and (intROREmut)4x-TATA:: Luc reporter vectors were made by annealing phosphorylated oligonucleotides containing wild type or mutated RORE elements and surrounding sequences from p21 (proRORE) promoter or p21 first intron (intRORE) and ligating four copies of the resulting double strand fragment into a TATA box containing pGL2 reporter plasmid. Control reporter vectors for ROR and REV-ERB activity contained three copies of the previously described wild type and consensus RORE (26Burke L. Downes M. Carozzi A. Giguere V. Muscat G.E. Nucleic Acids Res. 1996; 24: 3481-3489Crossref PubMed Google Scholar). The following oligonucleotides were used: (proRORE)4x-TATA::Luc, forward, 5′-GATCTGAGGAGGCCTGTCTAGGTCAGCTAAATCCGAGGAG-3′; and reverse, 5′-GATCCTCCTCGGATTTAGCTGACCTAGACAGGCCTCCTCA-3′; (proROREmut)4x-TATA::Luc, forward, 5′-GATCTGAGGAGGCCTGTCTAGAGTAGCTAAATCCGAGGAG-3′; and reverse, 5′-GATCCTCCTCGGATTTAGCTACTCTAGACAGGCCTCCTCA-3′; (intRORE)4x-TATA::Luc, forward, 5′-GATCTCCCGCGCGGCACAGTGACCTATTTGGCGGGCACAG-3′; and reverse, 5′-GATCCTGTGCCCGCCAAATAGGTCACTGTGCCGCGCGGGA-3′; (intROREmut)4x-TATA::Luc, forward, 5′-GATCTCCCGCGCGGCACAGTACTCTATTTGGCGGGCACAG-3′; and reverse, 5′-GATCCTGTGCCCGCCAAATAGAGTACTGTGCCGCGCGGGA-3′; (consRORE)3x-TATA:: Luc, forward, 5′-GATCTGACTGATCCATAAGTAGGTCAGGATCCTAGCAG-3′; and reverse, 5′-GATCCTGCTAGGATCCTGACCTACTTATGGATCAGTCA-3′; (consROREmut)3x-TATA::Luc, forward, 5′-GATCTGACTGATCCATAAGTAGAGTAGGATCCTAGCAG-3′; and reverse, 5′-GATCCTGCTAGGATCCTACTCTACTTATGGATCAGTCA. RORE elements are in bold, and mutated nucleotides are underlined. Expression vectors for RORα4 (NM_134262) and RORγ (NM_005060) were obtained by amplification of the respective open reading frames using HepG2 cell cDNA and the following primers: RORα4, forward, 5′-GCGCTTAAATGATGTATTTTGTGATCGC-3′; and reverse, 5′-CATTTACCCATCAATTTGCATTGCTG; RORγ forward, 5′-GGGAGCTGCACCATGGACAGGGC-3′; and reverse, 5′-GGGAGAGGCAAGGAGTCCCTCTTCC. The resulting fragments were then digested by EcoRI and ligated into pcDNA3.1. To construct expression vectors for REVERBα (NM_145434) and REVERBβ (NM_011582), the respective open reading frames were amplified by PCR from mouse liver cDNA using the following primers: REV-ERBα, forward, 5′-GGTGAAGACATGACGACCCTGGACTCC-3′; and reverse, 5′-CGGGTCACTGGGCGTCCACCCGGAAG-3′; REVERBβ, forward, 5′-CGCGGATCCCACCATGGAGCTGAACGCAGGAGG-3′; and reverse, 5′-CGCGGATCCTTAAGGATGAACTTTAAAGGC-3′. The resulting fragments were digested by NotI or BamHI, respectively, and ligated into pcDNA3.1. All the constructs were verified by sequencing. CLOCK and BMAL1 expression vector have described previously (27Grechez-Cassiau A. Panda S. Lacoche S. Teboul M. Azmi S. Laudet V. Hogenesch J.B. Taneja R. Delaunay F. J. Biol. Chem. 2004; 279: 1141-1150Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (71) Google Scholar). NIH3T3 cells were cotransfected for 7 h with reporter (100 ng) and expression (300 ng) vectors using Lipofectamine (Invitrogen). Cells were incubated for 48 h in fresh medium, and luciferase activity was determined using Promega reagents and a Berthold Centro LB960 luminometer. Luciferase activities were normalized to total protein concentrations. Real-time PCR–Measurements were performed with a Light Cycler 1.5 (Roche Applied Science, Meylan, France) using SYBR green I dye detection according to the manufacturer's recommendations. cDNA was added to a reaction mixture (Faststart DNA SYBR Green I; Roche Diagnostics) with appropriate primers at 0.5 μm each and amplified using the following PCR conditions: 10 min at 95 °C, 30 s at 95 °C, 10 s at 65 °C, and 10 s at 72 °C for 45 cycles and then melting curve analysis. Relative mRNA abundance was calculated using a standard curve method. Expression levels were normalized to the levels of 36B4. The following primers were used: p21, forward, 5′-GCAGACCAGCCTGACAGATTT-3′; and reverse, 5′-GAGAGGGCAGGCAGCGTAT-3′; RORα4, forward, 5′-CGCAGCGATGAAAGCTCA-3′; and reverse, 5′-TTGGACATCCGACCAAACTT-3′; RORγ forward, 5′-TTTTGAGGAAACCAGGCATC-3′; and reverse, 5′-CCACATCTCCCACATTGACTTC-3′; Rev-erbα forward, 5′-AACCTCCAGTTTGTGTCAAGGT-3′; and reverse, 5′-GATGACGATGATGCAGAAGAAG-3′; Rev-erbβ forward, 5′-TTCCAGTAGGTGGATGTTCTCA-3′; and reverse, 5′-CTGCTGGGGTAAAACTCATTG-3′; p53, forward, 5′-GCTTCTCCGAAGACTGGATGA-3′; and reverse, 5′-GACACTCGGAGGGCTTCACT-3′; Wee1, forward, 5′-GAGCGTATTTTAATGATTCC-3′; and reverse, 5′-AGAGCCAGCCAATGGTTTT-3′; Cdk6, forward, 5′-GGCAAAGACCTACTTCTGAAATG-3′; and reverse, 5′-GCCAATGTGTTCAGATGACG-3′; Ccne2, forward, 5′-GCATCAGTATGAGATTAGGAATTG-3′; and reverse, 5′-CAGAATGCAGAACTTGAAAATGT-3′; 36B4, forward, 5′-GCTGATGGGCAAGAACACCA-3′; and reverse, 5′-CCCAAAGCCTGGAAGAAGGA-3′. Western Blot Analysis–Harvested cells were lysed in a buffer containing 20 mm Hepes pH 7.9, 1.5 mm MgCl2, 0.42 m NaCl, 0.2 mm EDTA, 25% glycerol, 0.5 mm phenylmethylsulfonyl fluoride, 1 mm NaF, 0.5 mm dithiothreitol, and protease inhibitor mixture (10 μg/ml aprotinin and pepstatin). Total cellular proteins (50–100 μg/lane) were loaded, separated by 12% SDS-polyacrylamide gels, transferred to polyvinylidene difluoride membrane (Amersham Biosciences), incubated with blocking buffer (5% nonfat dry milk in phosphate-buffered saline) for 2 h, and probed overnight at 4 °C with primary antibodies diluted in blocking solution. The following primary antibodies were used at a dilution of 1:100 for p21 (Santa Cruz Biotechnology, Sc-397) and 1:1000 for EF-1α (Upstate Biotechnology). After incubation with second antibodies, peroxidase activity was detected by enhanced chemiluminescence according to the manufacturer's instructions (Amersham Biosciences) and using a LAS3000 imager (Fuji). [methyl-3H]Thymidine Incorporation Assay–DNA synthesis was measured by adding 1 μCi of [methyl-3H]thymidine (Amersham Biosciences, 25 Ci/mmol, 1 mCi/ml) to primary hepatocytes for 16–24 h. Radiolabeled cells were washed, scraped, and centrifuged, and the cell pellets were lysed in 50 mm Tris, pH 7.8, 1 mm dithiothreitol, 0.1% Triton X-100 buffer. DNA was precipitated with 15% trichloroacetic acid, and the incorporated radioactivity was detected by liquid scintillation counting and normalized to total proteins. RNA Interference–Small interfering RNA (siRNA) oligonucleotide sequences were as follows: p21 siRNA control, sense, 5′-GCAGACCAGCCUAACAGAU-3′, and antisense, 5′-AUCUGUUAGGCUGGUCUGC-3′; p21 siRNA, sense 5′-CACGUGGCCUUGUCGCUGU-3′, and antisense, 5′-ACAGCGACAAGGCCACGUG-3′ plus two 2′-deoxythymidine overhangs on each strand. Transfection of siRNA (100 nm) was performed in 35-mm plates in the presence of Lipofectamine 2000. After 16 h of incubation, the medium was changed to William's E medium supplemented with 5 μg of insulin and 1 μm dexamethasone. [methyl-3H]Thymidine was added 4 h later. Cells were collected 24 h later and assayed for DNA synthesis and protein expression. p21 Is a Clock-controlled Gene–We and others previously identified through genome-wide analysis of rhythmic gene expression in peripheral tissues or cells several cell cycle genes including p21, a well known cell cycle inhibitor (18Grundschober C. Delaunay F. Puhlhofer A. Triqueneaux G. Laudet V. Bartfai T. Nef P. J. Biol. Chem. 2001; 276: 46751-46758Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (112) Google Scholar, 27Grechez-Cassiau A. Panda S. Lacoche S. Teboul M. Azmi S. Laudet V. Hogenesch J.B. Taneja R. Delaunay F. J. Biol. Chem. 2004; 279: 1141-1150Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (71) Google Scholar). Real-time PCR analysis of p21 mRNA levels in the liver from mice kept in constant darkness confirmed that p21 expression is controlled by an endogenous oscillator, with peak and trough values at constant darkness 0 and constant darkness 8, respectively (Fig. 1A). Genomic analyses of circadian gene expression in peripheral tissues have shown that very few (10%) clock-controlled genes oscillate in more than one tissue (28Delaunay F. Laudet V. Trends Genet. 2002; 18: 595-597Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (88) Google Scholar). Profiling different peripheral organs for p21 expression revealed that its rhythmic gene expression pattern was not restricted to the liver as the heart and skeletal muscle displayed a similar gene expression pattern (supplemental information, Fig. S1). These observations show that the high tissue specificity of clock-controlled gene expression does not apply to p21, possibly because its main function is related to an essential and ubiquitous cellular process. To test genetically that p21 is controlled by clock genes, we next analyzed its expression in Bmal1-null mice, a clock-deficient model that exhibits a profound alteration of the circadian system (25Bunger M.K. Walisser J.A. Sullivan R. Manley P.A. Moran S.M. Kalscheur V.L. Colman R.J. Bradfield C.A. Genes. J. Genet. Dev. 2005; 41: 122-132Google Scholar, 29Bunger M.K. Wilsbacher L.D. Moran S.M. Clendenin C. Radcliffe L.A. Hogenesch J.B. Simon M.C. Takahashi J.S. Bradfield C.A. Cell. 2000; 103: 1009-1017Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (1198) Google Scholar, 30Rudic R.D. McNamara P. Curtis A.M. Boston R.C. Panda S. Hogenesch J.B. Fitzgerald G.A. PLoS. Biol. 2004; 2: e377Crossref PubMed Scopus (799) Google Scholar). A dramatic increase of p21 mRNA levels from ZT4 to ZT16 with 8–12-fold overexpression at ZT8 was observed in the liver of Bmal1–/– mice as compared with wild type animals (Fig. 1B). Although this observation suggests that BMAL1 represses p21 transcription, the lack of cognate E-box element in the p21 promoter and first intron makes unlikely a direct inhibitory mechanism. p53, a well known regulator of p21 that has also been reported to oscillate in the human oral mucosa (17Bjarnason G.A. Jordan R.C. Sothern R.B. Am. J. Pathol. 1999; 154: 613-622Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (145) Google Scholar, 31el-Deiry W.S. Tokino T. Velculescu V.E. Levy D.B. Parsons R. Trent J.M. Lin D. Mercer W.E. Kinzler K.W. Vogelstein B. Cell. 1993; 75: 817-825Abstract Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (7957) Google Scholar), is expressed identically in Bmal1–/– and wild type livers in which no significant rhythmicity can be detected (Fig. 1C). p53 is therefore not a putative circadian regulator of p21. Consistently, recent data showed that p53 expression is neither rhythmic in wild type mouse liver nor altered in Per2-null mice and that Per1 overexpression in colon cancer cells leads to the inhibition of p21 in response to ionizing radiation independently of p53 (19Fu L. Pelicano H. Liu J. Huang P. Lee C. Cell. 2002; 111: 41-50Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (1042) Google Scholar, 32Gery S. Komatsu N. Baldjyan L. Yu A. Koo D. Koeffler H.P. Mol. Cell. 2006; 22: 375-382Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (468) Google Scholar). These and our observations strongly suggest that clock genes regulate p21 through a p53-independent pathway. To extend our analyses of the interactions between clock and cell cycle genes in the liver, we also investigated the effect of the Bmal1 mutation on three additional genes, Wee1, Cdk6, and Ccne2. Wee1 is a known clock target regulating the G2/M transition (16Matsuo T. Yamaguchi S. Mitsui S. Emi A. Shimoda F. Okamura H. Science. 2003; 302: 255-259Crossref PubMed Scopus (917) Google Scholar) that is expressed at intermediate and constant levels in Bmal1–/– animals (Fig. 1D). Cdk6 and Ccne2, which encode cell cycle protein involved in the G1 phase and G1/S transition, respectively, showed neither a significant oscillation in wild type liver nor an alteration of their expression in the mutant liver (Fig. 1, E and F). The p21 protein is a short-lived molecule that undergoes proteasomal degradation and that is consequently nearly undetectable in adult mouse tissues unless cell cycle arrest is stimulated (33Bloom J. Amador V. Bartolini F. DeMartino G. Pagano M. Cell. 2003; 115: 71-82Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (267) Google Scholar, 34Jascur T. Brickner H. Salles-Passador I. Barbier V. El Khissiin A. Smith B. Fotedar R. Fotedar A. Mol. Cell. 2005; 17: 237-249Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (110) Google Scholar). As the p21 mRNA was also found to oscillate in the cardiac and skeletal muscles, we analyzed p21 protein expression in C2C12 cells, a well established cellular model of skeletal muscle terminal differentiation during which the p21 protein is induced (35Guo K. Wang J. Andres V. Smith R.C. Walsh K. Mol. Cell Biol. 1995; 15: 3823-3829Crossref PubMed Scopus (365) Google Scholar). Differentiated C2C12 myotubes were subjected to a serum shock to synchronize the cellular circadian clocks, and p21 mRNA and protein level were monitored for 52 h (36Nagoshi E. Saini C. Bauer C. Laroche T. Naef F. Schibler U. Cell. 2004; 119: 693-705Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (789) Google Scholar). Results show that the p21 gene is clock-controlled in differentiated myotubes and that the p21 protein display a rhythmic expression pattern that mirrors that of the mRNA (Fig. 2, A and B). Altogether, these results demonstrate that the cell cycle inhibitor p21 gene is a circadian clock output in addition to Wee1 and that these two genes are differentially affected by the Bmal1 mutation. They further suggest a regulatory mechanism that does not directly involve the core clock component BMAL1. REV-ERB and ROR Nuclear Receptors Regulate p21 Expression–A close analysis of the phase relationship between the profiles of p21 and other known clock components suggested the orphan nuclear receptors Rev-erbα and Rev-erbβ (NR1D2) as two putative direct negative regulators because they are Bmal1 targets, and both peak when p21 is low. Consistently, Rev-erbα is a known target of the CLOCK:BMAL1 heterodimer (5Preitner N. Damiola F. Lopez-Molina L. Zakany J. Duboule D. Albrecht U. Schibler U. Cell. 2002; 110: 251-260Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (1695) Google Scholar, 37Triqueneaux G. Thenot S. Kakizawa T. Antoch M.P. Safi R. Takahashi J.S. Delaunay F. Laudet V. J. Mol. Endocrinol. 2004; 33: 585-608Crossref PubMed Scopus (128) Google Scholar). These two repressors bind to the same DNA response elements as ROR orphan nuclear receptors (termed RORE; consensus sequence: WAWNTRGGTCA), which in contrast, activates transcription. Although Rev-erbα and Reverbβ are ubiquitously expressed, ROR receptors display more complex expression patterns, with RORα4 and RORγ (NR1F3) being the only isotypes detected in liver. Interestingly, two evolutionary conserved RORE are present in the promoter and first intron regions of the p21 gene (Fig. 3A). This suggested that p21 oscillation could directly result from an alternative activation and repression mediated by ROR and REV-ERB proteins, respectively. However, because we could not exclude a direct negative regulation of the p21 gene by the CLOCK:BMAL1 heterodimer as shown previously for c-myc (19Fu L. Pelicano H. Liu J. Huang P. Lee C. Cell. 2002; 111: 41-50Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (1042) Google Scholar), we tested the response of a 2240-bp 5′ fragment of the p21 promoter fused to a luciferase reporter gene (p21Prom::Luc construct) in a cotransfection assay. No significant increase over basal activity could be observed in contrast to the reporter gene driven by Per1 consensus E-box elements (Fig. 3B). In contrast, RORγ transactivated the same p21Prom::Luc reporter construct, which contained the proRORE, by ∼2.5-fold, whereas RORα4 did not (Fig. 3C). A deletion mutant lacking the proRORE site (p21PromΔ1663::Luc construct) abolished the RORγ-dependent activation (Fig. 3C). Both REV-ERBα and REV-ERBβ could antagonize the RORγ-dependent transactivation of the p21 promoter (Fig. 3C). A reporter construct containing a multimerized proRORE ((proRORE)4x-TATA::Luc) was activated 2.2- and 1.6-fold in the presence of RORγ and RORα4, respectively, consistently with the results obtained using the full promoter sequence (Fig. 3D). Similarly, RORγ activity was antagonized by coexpressing REV-ERBα or REV-ERBβ. The relatively modest induction mediated by the proRORE suggested that part if not most of the p21 circadian regulation may involve additional response element(s). To address this issue, the identified intronic RORE (intRORE), which virtually matches the previously defined consensus RORE sequence, was tested. Cotransfection of the ((intRORE)4x-TATA::Luc) reporter construct together with RORγ and RORα4 resulted in a 2- and 9-fold activation, respectively (Fig. 3E), that is similar to that obtained with the consensus element (Fig. 3F). REV-ERBα and REV-ERBβ significantly repressed the ROR-dependent activation (Fig. 3, E and F). Corresponding mutated elements showed no response (Fig. 3, D and E). Altogether, these data demonstrate that the p21 locus contains functional elements that specify the responsiveness to the ROR and REV-ERB clock components. The Bmal1 Mutation Disrupts the ROR/REV-ERB Balance–To genetically test in vivo the assumption that RORα4, RORγ, Rev-erbα, and Rev-erbβ are downstream of Bmal1 and upstream of p21, we analyzed their mRNA expression profiles throughout the 24-h cycle. RORα4 was not rhythmic in wild type liver and not significantly affected by the loss of Bmal1 (Fig. 4A). In contrast, RORγ exhibited a robust rhythmic expression pattern in wild type liver with peak levels at ZT20, hence 4 h before that of p21, consistent with an activating role (Fig. 4B). Notably, RORγ was significantly overexpressed at all time points in Bmal1–/– liver, a finding that, together with the functional RORE recently identified in the RORγ promoter (38Ueda H.R. Hayashi S. Chen W. Sano M. Machida M. Shigeyoshi Y. Iino M. Hashimoto S. Nat. Genet. 2005; 37: 187-192Crossref PubMed Scopus (639) Google Scholar), suggests a positive autoregulation antagonized by REV-ERBα and/or REV-ERBβ. The opposite situation was observed with Rev-erbα and Rev-erbβ, which displayed a robust oscillation in WT animals but were nearly undetectable at all time points in Bmal1–/– animals (Fig. 4, C and D). These genetic data together with biochemical data suggest that p21 up-regulation in Bmal1–/– animals primarily results from the loss of Rev-erbα and Reverbβ expression possibly combined with the increased expression of RORγ. In this context, the release of the REV-ERB-dependent inhibition of RORα4 activity is also likely to play a role. Changes in additional unidentified positive and negative regulators of p21 expression may also play an additional role. From these data, we propose that in liver, the clock control of p21 high amplitude oscillation results from a RORa4- and RORγ-dependent activation, which is rhythmically repressed by REV-ERBα and REV-ERBβ. Impaired Proliferation in Bmal1–/– Hepatocytes–Unlike a large number of cell types that undergo terminal differentiation associated with permanent withdrawal from the cell cycle, mature quiescent hepatocytes retain high proliferative potential. After partial hepatectomy or acute injury, growth-arrested hepatocytes can rapidly and synchronously enter the cell cycle (39Diehl A.M. Front Biosci. 2002; 7: e301-e314Crossref PubMed Google Scholar). Although the p21 protein is undetectable in normal adult liver, it is strongly induced following partial hepatectomy, during which it regulates cell cycle progression (40Ilyin G.P. Glaise D. Gilot D. Baffet G. Guguen-Guillouzo C. Am. J. Physiol. 2003; 285: G115-G127Crossref PubMed Scopus (55) Google Scholar). Overexpression of p21 in Bmal1–/– mouse liver may thus compromise cell proliferation. Using a primary cell culture system, we observed that spontaneous proliferation of Bmal1–/– hepatocytes was significantly delayed by ∼24 h, whereas p21 protein induction was higher in comparison with that of WT cells (Fig. 5A). If this phenotype was the result of p21 overexpression, then reducing p21 expression would rescue the WT phenotype. To test this hypothesis, Bmal1–/– cells were assayed for proliferation in the presence of either a specific or a control p21 siRNA. Results show that specific siRNA-mediated knockdown of p21 expression caused a significant increased of the proliferation of hepatocytes as compared with untreated or siRNA control Bmal1–/– cells. In analogy to the work by Matsuo et al. (16Matsuo T. Yamaguchi S. Mitsui S. Emi A. Shimoda F. Okamura H. Science. 2003; 302: 255-259Crossref PubMed Scopus (917) Google Scholar), who showed that loss of clock activity in Cry1–/–/Cry 2–/– double mutant animals resulted in a delayed liver regeneration, we show here that a mutation in another key core clock gene results in a very similar phenotype. The kinase Wee1, a critical regulator of the G2/M transition during cell division cycle, was proposed as a direct CLOCK: BMAL1 target mediating the circadian gating of mitosis in liver (16Matsuo T. Yamaguchi S. Mitsui S. Emi A. Shimoda F. Okamura H. Science. 2003; 302: 255-259Crossref PubMed Scopus (917) Google Scholar). Our data suggest that progression through G1 may also undergo a circadian control through the ROR/REV-ERB pathway targeting the cyclin-dependent kinase inhibitor p21. Along this line, the clock Δ19 mutation was also reported to reduce the proliferation of embryonic fibroblasts (41Miller B.H. McDearmon E.L. Panda S. Hayes K.R. Zhang J. Andrews J.L. Antoch M.P. Walker J.R. Esser K.A. Hogenesch J.B. Takahashi J.S. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 2007; 104: 3342-3347Crossref PubMed Scopus (398) Google Scholar). Interestingly, it was also recently shown that the mammalian PER1 protein interacts with the checkpoint kinase 2, an important link between DNA damage-activated kinases with checkpoint effectors and DNA repair (32Gery S. Komatsu N. Baldjyan L. Yu A. Koo D. Koeffler H.P. Mol. Cell. 2006; 22: 375-382Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (468) Google Scholar). Collectively, these data suggest that the circadian clock can control cell proliferation at multiple levels including the G1 phase and G2/M transition as well as the DNA damage response pathway (Fig. 6). This raises the critical issue of how these actions are coordinated to provide an optimal circadian gating of the cell division cycle. These aspects are likely to become particularly relevant in the context of pathologies for which a strong circadian component is recognized including cancer as accumulating epidemiological, clinical, and experimental evidences indicate that disruption of the circadian system is linked to tumor cell growth (19Fu L. Pelicano H. Liu J. Huang P. Lee C. Cell. 2002; 111: 41-50Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (1042) Google Scholar, 42Fu L. Lee C.C. Nat. Rev. Cancer. 2003; 3: 350-361Crossref PubMed Scopus (597) Google Scholar, 43Filipski E. Delaunay F. King V.M. Wu M.W. Claustrat B. Grechez-Cassiau A. Guettier C. Hastings M.H. Francis L. Cancer Res. 2004; 64: 7879-7885Crossref PubMed Scopus (327) Google Scholar, 44Filipski E. King V.M. Li X. Granda T.G. Mormont M.C. Liu X. Claustrat B. Hastings M.H. Levi F. J. Natl. Cancer Inst. 2002; 94: 690-697Crossref PubMed Scopus (358) Google Scholar). We are thankful to Dr. Christopher Bradfield for the generous gift of Bmal1–/– mice, to Drs. Georges Baffet and Stephan Clavel for reagents and advice, and to Sophie Brangolo for expert technical assistance. Download .pdf (.23 MB) Help with pdf files
Referência(s)