Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

FOXM1 cistrome predicts breast cancer metastatic outcome better than FOXM1 expression levels or tumor proliferation index

  • Preclinical Study
  • Published:
Breast Cancer Research and Treatment Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

FOXM1 is a key transcription factor regulating cell cycle progression, DNA damage response, and a host of other hallmark cancer features, but the role of the FOXM1 cistrome in driving estrogen receptor-positive (ER+) versus estrogen receptor-negative (ER−) breast cancer clinical outcomes remains undefined. Chromatin immunoprecipitation sequencing (ChIP-Seq) coupled with RNA sequencing (RNA-Seq) analyses was used to identify FOXM1 target genes in breast cancer cells (MCF-7) where FOXM1 expression was either induced by cell proliferation or repressed by p53 upregulation. The prognostic performance of these FOXM1 target genes was assessed relative to FOXM transcript levels and a 61-gene proliferation score (PS) for their ability to dichotomize a pooled cohort of 683 adjuvant chemotherapy-naïve, node-negative breast cancer cases (447 ER+, 236 ER−). Differences in distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS) between the dichotomized expression groups were determined by Cox proportional hazard modeling. Proliferation-associated FOXM1 upregulation induced a set of 145 differentially bound and expressed genes (direct targets), and these demonstrated minimal overlap with differentially bound and expressed genes following FOXM1 repression by p53 upregulation. This proliferation-associated FOXM1 cistrome was not only better at significantly predicting metastatic outcome of ER+ breast cancers (HR: 2.8 (2.0–3.8), p = 8.13E−10), but was the only parameter trending toward significance in predicting ER− metastatic outcome (HR: 1.6 (0.9–2.9), p = 0.087). Our findings demonstrate that FOXM1 target genes are highly dependent on the cellular context in which FOXM1 expression is modulated, and a newly identified proliferation-associated FOXM1 cistromic signature best predicts breast cancer metastatic outcome.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Yusuf D, Butland SL, Swanson MI, Bolotin E, Ticoll A, Cheung WA, Zhang XY, Dickman CT, Fulton DL, Lim JS, Schnabl JM, Ramos OH, Vasseur-Cognet M, de Leeuw CN, Simpson EM, Ryffel GU, Lam EW, Kist R, Wilson MS, Marco-Ferreres R, Brosens JJ, Beccari LL, Bovolenta P, Benayoun BA, Monteiro LJ, Schwenen HD, Grontved L, Wederell E, Mandrup S, Veitia RA, Chakravarthy H, Hoodless PA, Mancarelli MM, Torbett BE, Banham AH, Reddy SP, Cullum RL, Liedtke M, Tschan MP, Vaz M, Rizzino A, Zannini M, Frietze S, Farnham PJ, Eijkelenboom A, Brown PJ, Laperriere D, Leprince D, de Cristofaro T, Prince KL, Putker M, del Peso L, Camenisch G, Wenger RH, Mikula M, Rozendaal M, Mader S, Ostrowski J, Rhodes SJ, Van Rechem C, Boulay G, Olechnowicz SW, Breslin MB, Lan MS, Nanan KK, Wegner M, Hou J, Mullen RD, Colvin SC, Noy PJ, Webb CF, Witek ME, Ferrell S, Daniel JM, Park J, Waldman SA, Peet DJ, Taggart M, Jayaraman PS, Karrich JJ, Blom B, Vesuna F, O’Geen H, Sun Y, Gronostajski RM, Woodcroft MW, Hough MR, Chen E, Europe-Finner GN, Karolczak-Bayatti M, Bailey J, Hankinson O, Raman V, LeBrun DP, Biswal S, Harvey CJ, DeBruyne JP, Hogenesch JB, Hevner RF, Heligon C, Luo XM, Blank MC, Millen KJ, Sharlin DS, Forrest D, Dahlman-Wright K, Zhao C, Mishima Y, Sinha S, Chakrabarti R, Portales-Casamar E, Sladek FM, Bradley PH, Wasserman WW (2012) The transcription factor encyclopedia. Genome Biol 13(3):R24. doi:10.1186/gb-2012-13-3-r24

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Alvarez-Fernandez M, Medema RH (2013) Novel functions of FoxM1: from molecular mechanisms to cancer therapy. Front Oncol 3:30. doi:10.3389/fonc.2013.00030

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Koo CY, Muir KW, Lam EW (2012) FOXM1: from cancer initiation to progression and treatment. Biochim Biophys Acta 1819(1):28–37. doi:10.1016/j.bbagrm.2011.09.004

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Halasi M, Gartel AL (2013) FOX(M1) news–it is cancer. Mol Cancer Ther 12(3):245–254. doi:10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-12-0712

    Article  PubMed Central  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Zona S, Bella L, Burton MJ, Moraes GN, Lam EW (2014) FOXM1: an emerging master regulator of DNA damage response and genotoxic agent resistance. Biochim Biophys Acta 1839(11):1316–1322. doi:10.1016/j.bbagrm.2014.09.016

    Article  PubMed Central  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Barsotti AM, Prives C (2009) Pro-proliferative FoxM1 is a target of p53-mediated repression. Oncogene 28(48):4295–4305. doi:10.1038/onc.2009.282

    Article  PubMed Central  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Yau C, Wang Y, Zhang Y, Foekens JA, Benz CC (2011) Young age, increased tumor proliferation and FOXM1 expression predict early metastatic relapse only for endocrine-dependent breast cancers. Breast Cancer Res Treat 126(3):803–810. doi:10.1007/s10549-011-1345-1

    Article  PubMed Central  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Sanders DA, Ross-Innes CS, Beraldi D, Carroll JS, Balasubramanian S (2013) Genome-wide mapping of FOXM1 binding reveals co-binding with estrogen receptor alpha in breast cancer cells. Genome Biol 14(1):R6. doi:10.1186/gb-2013-14-1-r6

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Bergamaschi A, Madak-Erdogan Z, Kim YJ, Choi YL, Lu H, Katzenellenbogen BS (2014) The forkhead transcription factor FOXM1 promotes endocrine resistance and invasiveness in estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer by expansion of stem-like cancer cells. Breast Cancer Res 16(5):436. doi:10.1186/s13058-014-0436-4

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Zhang Y, Liu T, Meyer CA, Eeckhoute J, Johnson DS, Bernstein BE, Nusbaum C, Myers RM, Brown M, Li W, Liu XS (2008) Model-based analysis of ChIP-Seq (MACS). Genome Biol 9(9):R137. doi:10.1186/gb-2008-9-9-r137

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Shangary S, Qin D, McEachern D, Liu M, Miller RS, Qiu S, Nikolovska-Coleska Z, Ding K, Wang G, Chen J, Bernard D, Zhang J, Lu Y, Gu Q, Shah RB, Pienta KJ, Ling X, Kang S, Guo M, Sun Y, Yang D, Wang S (2008) Temporal activation of p53 by a specific MDM2 inhibitor is selectively toxic to tumors and leads to complete tumor growth inhibition. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 105(10):3933–3938. doi:10.1073/pnas.0708917105

    Article  PubMed Central  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Yau C, Sninsky J, Kwok S, Wang A, Degnim A, Ingle JN, Gillett C, Tutt A, Waldman F, Moore D, Esserman L, Benz CC (2013) An optimized five-gene multi-platform predictor of hormone receptor negative and triple negative breast cancer metastatic risk. Breast Cancer Res 15(5):R103. doi:10.1186/bcr3567

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Schaefer CF, Anthony K, Krupa S, Buchoff J, Day M, Hannay T, Buetow KH (2009) PID: the pathway interaction database. Nucleic Acids Res 37(Database issue):D674–679. doi:10.1093/nar/gkn653

    Article  PubMed Central  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This study was supported in part by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) U24-CA143858, NIH P01-35HG000205, California Breast Cancer Research Program Translational Research Award 18OB-0065, and Hazel P. Munroe memorial funding to the Buck Institute.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Christopher C. Benz.

Ethics declarations

Conflicts of Interest

Paul Labhart and Brian Egan are employees of Active Motif. Other authors declare that they have no conflict of interest to disclose relevant to this study.

Electronic supplementary material

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Yau, C., Meyer, L., Benz, S. et al. FOXM1 cistrome predicts breast cancer metastatic outcome better than FOXM1 expression levels or tumor proliferation index. Breast Cancer Res Treat 154, 23–32 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-015-3589-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-015-3589-7

Keywords

Navigation