Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26100407›Full record

ArticleGenome biology2015

FOXM1 binds directly to non-consensus sequences in the human genome.

Deborah A Sanders, Michael V Gormally, Giovanni Marsico, Dario Beraldi, David Tannahill, Shankar Balasubramanian

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Genome biology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 45 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
45citing papers in PubMed
2.6field-weighted citation impact, top 10% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

45 citing papers in PubMed, 66 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. CD133Heliyon · 2024
    Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. The role of FoxM1 in immune cells.Clinical and experimental medicine · 2023
    Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Deborah A SandersCancer Research UK, Cambridge Research Institute, Li Ka Shing Center, Robinson Way, Cambridge, CB2 0RE, UK. das1001@cam.ac.uk.
Michael V GormallyCancer Research UK, Cambridge Research Institute, Li Ka Shing Center, Robinson Way, Cambridge, CB2 0RE, UK. mg606@cam.ac.uk.
Giovanni MarsicoCancer Research UK, Cambridge Research Institute, Li Ka Shing Center, Robinson Way, Cambridge, CB2 0RE, UK. Giovanni.Marsico@cruk.cam.ac.uk.
Dario BeraldiCancer Research UK, Cambridge Research Institute, Li Ka Shing Center, Robinson Way, Cambridge, CB2 0RE, UK. Dario.Beraldi@cruk.cam.ac.uk.
David TannahillCancer Research UK, Cambridge Research Institute, Li Ka Shing Center, Robinson Way, Cambridge, CB2 0RE, UK. David.Tannahill@cruk.cam.ac.uk.
Shankar BalasubramanianCancer Research UK, Cambridge Research Institute, Li Ka Shing Center, Robinson Way, Cambridge, CB2 0RE, UK. sb10031@cam.ac.uk.
Cancer Research UK · GBUniversity of Cambridge · GB

Funding

Cancer Research UK 12488Cancer Research UK C14303/A17197
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe Forkhead (FKH) transcription factor FOXM1 is a key regulator of the cell cycle and is overexpressed in most types of cancer. FOXM1, similar to other FKH factors, binds to a canonical FKH motif in vitro. However, genome-wide mapping studies in different cell lines have shown a lack of enrichment of the FKH motif, suggesting an alternative mode of chromatin recruitment. We have investigated the role of direct versus indirect DNA binding in FOXM1 recruitment by performing ChIP-seq with wild-type and DNA binding deficient FOXM1.

resultsAn in vitro fluorescence polarization assay identified point mutations in the DNA binding domain of FOXM1 that inhibit binding to a FKH consensus sequence. Cell lines expressing either wild-type or DNA binding deficient GFP-tagged FOXM1 were used for genome-wide mapping studies comparing the distribution of the DNA binding deficient protein to the wild-type. This shows that interaction of the FOXM1 DNA binding domain with target DNA is essential for recruitment. Moreover, analysis of the protein interactome of wild-type versus DNA binding deficient FOXM1 shows that the reduced recruitment is not due to inhibition of protein-protein interactions.

conclusionsA functional DNA binding domain is essential for FOXM1 chromatin recruitment. Even in FOXM1 mutants with almost complete loss of binding, the protein-protein interactions and pattern of phosphorylation are largely unaffected. These results strongly support a model whereby FOXM1 is specifically recruited to chromatin through co-factor interactions by binding directly to non-canonical DNA sequences.

Indexed as

Genome, HumanBase SequenceBinding SitesCell LineChromatin ImmunoprecipitationConsensus SequenceDNAForkhead Box Protein M1Forkhead Transcription FactorsGene Expression RegulationHEK293 CellsHeLa CellsHumansMutationPromoter Regions, GeneticProtein BindingDNAForkhead Box Protein M1Forkhead Transcription FactorsFOXM1 protein, human

Identifiers

PMID26100407
PMCPMC4492089
OpenAlexW1568433819

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.