Abstract
ETS-related gene (ERG) is a member of the E-26 transformation-specific (ETS) family of transcription factors with roles in development that include vasculogenesis, angiogenesis, haematopoiesis and bone development. ERG’s oncogenic potential is well known because of its involvement in Ewing’s sarcoma and leukaemia. However, in the past decade ERG has become highly associated with prostate cancer development, particularly as a result of a gene fusion with the promoter region of the androgen-induced TMPRRSS2 gene. We review ERG’s structure and function, and its role in prostate cancer. We discuss potential new therapies that are based on targeting ERG.
Similar content being viewed by others
Introduction
ERG (ETS-related gene) is a member of the E-26 transformation-specific (ETS) family of transcription factors.1, 2 There are 30 identified ETS family genes, 28 of which in the human genome.3, 4, 5 ETS genes are evolutionarily conserved across metazoa and are thought to have arisen 600–700 million years ago.6, 7, 8 Research in several vertebrate model organisms shows that ETS proteins are nuclear DNA-binding phosphoproteins that act as activators or repressors of transcription.4, 9, 10, 11, 12 The ETS transcription factors are required for development and differentiation impacting across a wide range of tissue and cell types with roles in embryogenesis,13 vasculogenesis,14 angiogenesis,15, 16 haematopoiesis17 and neuronal development.18 Their target genes are involved in the regulation of cellular architecture,19 cell migration,20 invasion21 and cell permeability.22, 23
The ERG gene was first described in 1987 by Reddy et al.24 in human colorectal carcinoma cells and gene resides on chromosome 21. Phylogenetic research suggests that ERG evolved from a series of ETS gene duplications during the Cambrian explosion around 542 million years ago.25
ERG’s roles in development and normal physiology
A detailed description of ERG’s roles in development and physiology is beyond the scope of this review; here we briefly outline key features. In normal development, ERG is initially highly expressed in the embryonic mesoderm and endothelium where it has a critical role in the formation of the vascular system, the urogenital tract and in bone development.15, 26 ERG is also expressed at high levels in embryonic neural crest cells during their migratory phase.27 ERG expression decreases during vascular development28 but continues to regulate the pluripotency of haematopoietic stem cells,29 endothelial cell (EC) homeostasis30, 31 and angiogenesis.15, 16 ERG expression is not restricted to development: in the adult mouse it is expressed in endothelial tissue including adrenal, cartilage, heart, spleen, lymphatic endothelial and eosinophil cells.28
During mouse embryonic development, ERG is initially expressed in ECs,13 particularly the amniotic membrane, in the blood vessels surrounding the neural tube,32 the vasculature of the heart and in precartilage.28, 33 ERG is essential for maintaining vascular integrity and the viability of the embryo. ERG maintains vascular stability by tight regulation of the WNT/β-catenin signalling pathway and the transcriptional control of EC-specific genes (angiopoietin 2, endoglin, vWF, VEGF-A and VE-cadherin).26, 30 Consistent with these observations, ERG knockout in mice leads to embryonic lethality associated with vascular defects.30
ERG has also been shown to have a major role in cell response to vascular inflammation where it works to maintain endothelial tube formation and EC barrier function.22, 23 Inhibition of ERG in human umbilical vein ECs leads to loss of cell–cell contact and inhibits tube formation.15, 16 ERG mediates junction stability via transcriptional activation of the adherens glycoprotein VE-cadherin and the tight junction protein claudin protein 5 (CLDN5) genes. Knockdown of ERG is associated with significant increases in endothelial permeability because of changes in cell structure.15, 16, 23 ERG also inhibits vascular inflammation via the repression of genes such as ICAM-1, interleukin-8 (IL-8) and vascular cell adhesion protein (VCAM).
Furthermore, ERG is required for definitive haematopoiesis, normal haematopoietic stem cell function and the maintenance of normal peripheral blood platelet numbers.34 T- and B-cell lymphocytes both arise from haematopoietic stem cells. ERG is found to continuously express in B-lymphocytes from early pre-B cells to mature B cells,35 whereas in T-lymphocytes ERG expression is only detected transiently during T-lineage specification and is silent in mature T-lymphocytes.36 The aberrant expression of ERG in T cells promotes T-cell acute lymphoblastic leukaemia, resulting the accumulation of immature lymphoblasts.34 Murine studies have shown that a proline to serine transition (S329P) in the DNA-binding domain of ERG leads to an inability to transactivate target genes and in the context of haematopoietic lineage, this results in a reduction of mature platelets, erythrocytes and leucocytes.17, 34, 35, 36
ERG is also expressed in mesodermal cells that form precartilage.32 In chicken, ERG is expressed in cartilaginous skeletal primordia.37 In adult mice, ERG is constitutively expressed in the articular chondrocytes of transient cartilage in order to prevent their differentiation into hypertrophic cells.38, 39, 40 ERG’s expression in chondrocytes has also been studied in chicken in which an ERG variant was cloned and called C-1-1.38 The variant lacks 27 amino acids that are normally located upstream of ERG’s DNA-binding domain. C-1-1 is a splice isoform of ERG in which exon 7 is skipped. However, although C-1-1 is expressed in developing articular chondrocytes, full-length ERG is more prominently expressed in prehypertrophic chondrocytes in the growth plate. Forced overexpression of C-1-1 from a viral vector maintained chondrocytes in an immature state preventing the replacement of cartilage with bone. As we will see later, increased skipping of ERG’s exon 7 has also been associated with the progression of prostate cancer.41
Structure of ERG protein
Full-length ERG is a 486 amino-acid 54 kDa transcription factor.3, 24 What identifies the ETS family uniquely is a specific DNA-binding domain called the ETS DNA-binding domain (EBD). It is an 85-amino-acid domain that consists of three α-helices supported by a four-strand anti-parallel β-sheet (Figure 1). This forms a winged helix-turn-helix motif where the third α-helix (H3) contacts the major groove of DNA and confers the principal DNA-binding activity. This is achieved by the EBD, which recognises DNA sequences that contain a core GGA(A/T) motif.42, 43, 44, 45 Direct contact with the DNA is made between two arginines within the third helix and the two guanines of the GGA(A/T) sequence.46 The amino acids directly flanking the EBD interact with the minor groove of DNA and a water molecule, effectively anchoring the protein to the DNA backbone.47 Conserved within the EBD are three tryptophan residues separated by 17–18 amino acids that create the integral structure of the EBD by forming a hydrophobic core around which the α-helices can be arranged.46, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52 This type of conformation can be observed in other families of transcription factors; for example, the DNA-binding, helix-turn-helix domain of the oncogenic transcription factor MYB has three conserved, tryptophan-rich repeated regions. Each region consists of three tryptophan residues separated by 18–19 amino acids.53 The tryptophan triplicates form a hydrophobic core in each repeat,54 which provide a scaffold for the protein’s helix-turn-helix binding domain.55
Analysis of the ERG protein predicts that the N-terminus contains a site for phosphorylation by protein kinase C and a pointed (PNT) domain. The PNT domain is 65 amino acids long and forms a monomeric, five-helix bundle that is thought to aid heterodimerisation with protein partners including other members of the ETS family (ETS1 and 2, ETV1, ETV6, FLI1 and ELK3) and with associated factors including DNA-dependent protein kinases, the androgen receptor (AR) and the AP-1 complex.56, 57 Although specific to ETS proteins, PNT domains form part of the larger sterile alpha motif (SAM) family of protein domains. SAM domains are known to be involved in diverse protein–protein interactions including self-association.58 ETV6 is an ETS member with a PNT domain that is able to self-associate;59 it is apparent that ERG can also form homodimers with itself via the PNT domain and the ETS-binding domain.60, 61 Studies have shown that the PNT domain has another potential function: in GABPα, ETS1 and ETS2 the PNT domain acts as a docking platform for mitogen-activated protein (MAP) kinases leading to phosphorylation of adjacent residues and enhanced transactivation activity.62, 63, 64, 65 Consistent with this observation, ERG contains a site close to its PNT domain, which has been shown to be phosphorylated by protein kinase C, IκB kinase and protein kinase B. It is presumed that ERG’s PNT domain also serves as a protein kinase docking platform.66
The middle part of ERG contains a transcriptional activation domain (TAD). TAD is also known as the central alternative domain or the alternative domain. This region also contains a negative regulatory domain.67 The C-terminus of the protein contains the ETS-binding domain including a nuclear localisation signal; adjacent is an additional, smaller transactivation domain, the C-terminal TAD.63 The TAD increases transactivation and is involved in binding protein partners including the AP-1 complex. Both the TAD and the C-terminal TAD can be inhibited by the negative regulatory domain. The EBD is essential for DNA recognition and is also involved in the recruitment of AP-168 and co-activators including histone acetyltransferases.69 The C-terminal transactivation domain has some involvement in heterodimerisation, but it is not involved in homodimerisation. Its main role appears to be in allosteric autoinhibition of ERG’s EBD.
The mechanism of autoinhibition is performed by two stretches of amino acids that directly flank ERG’s EBD. These regions are designated as the N-terminal inhibitory domain (NID), which consists of a randomly coiled formation; and the C-terminal inhibitory domain (CID), which consists of a small α-helix. The NID is found within the negative regulatory domain and the CID is situated on the boundary between the EBD and C-terminal activation domains. These inhibitory domains form a hydrophobic cage that acts primarily to bury the first α-helix (H1) of the EBD. In the absence of DNA, the NID is also able to bind H3 of the EBD. In the presence of DNA containing the ETS, GGA(A/T) sequence a specific tyrosine residue (Tyr354) within the EBD lies perpendicular to H3; in this position it is able to form hydrogen bonds with the target DNA. In the absence of DNA binding, Tyr354 rotates 90° and binds to the NID. It is also suggested that other proteins may interact with the NID to displace it and reinstate ERG’s DNA-binding abilities.70 This type of regulatory mechanism can be found in other ETS proteins. In ETS1, the CID (H4) can align in an anti-parallel manner with the H1, locking them together preventing access to the EBD.46 Instead in ETV6, the CID forms two separate helical structures, only one of which sterically blocks the EBD.71, 72
DNA-binding properties of ERG
To date, the binding specificity of individual ETS transcription factors is not yet fully known, although they share a GGA(A/T) core sequence. In general, ETS transcription factor-binding targets encompass sequences of approximately ~15–20 bp in length.42, 46, 73, 74 In order to determine binding preferences, several groups have tried to categorise the ETS family members through the similarity of the ETS binding domain.47, 75, 76 A classification system designed by Wei et al.47 defined five classes (I, IIa, IIb, III and IV) that are derived from binding site preference. Although all members of the ETS family bind the core sequence GGA(A/T), differentiation between the classes is associated with the surrounding sequences. ERG belongs to class I, containing the largest number of ETS factors (ERG, ETS1 and 2, ETV1–5, ELK1, ELK3, ELK4, ERF, FEV, FLI1 and GABPα). This class of ETS members prefer the extended sequence ACC(GGAA)NT, whereas classes IIa, IIb and III prefer CCC(GGAA)NT. Class IV preference is for CCC(GGAT) NT. Note that the class I target sequence begins with an A. This binding preference is facilitated by the substitution of a leucine residue in the fourth β-strand with a tyrosine or phenylalanine (Figure 1). This results in a reduced affinity for cytosine and a preference for adenine.47
ETS transcription factors also bind sites that do not conform to the core consensus sequence. ETS factor SPI (class I) binds sequences that lack the GGA(A/T) core, including sequences in the macrophage scavenger receptor (AGAGAAGT) and IL-1 beta (IL-1; GCAGAAGT) promoters in which the core sequence is AGAA.77 Binding specificity is also affected by post-translational modifications and protein–protein interactions. ERG has been shown to work in partnership with other proteins to alter DNA structure locally. To this effect, ERG cooperates with the SRY-related HMG box transcription factor SoxD to bind the major and minor groove of DNA. This interaction induces changes in the local DNA double helix geometry, facilitating transcription. Similarly, it has been demonstrated that ERG and the AP-1 complex (Fos+Jun) together form a pincer-like structure around the major groove of a DNA double helix. The C-terminal H3 of ERG’s EBD faces the N-terminus of Jun in an anti-parallel manner. This pairing is able to introduce a bend in the local DNA structure, facilitating access for the transcriptional machinery.61, 78
Alternative promoters and alternative splicing of ERG
There are several descriptions of ERG’s gene and exon/intron structure.24, 79, 80, 81, 82 Here, we use the classification proposed by Zammarchi et al. in 2013.83 The ERG locus is approximately 300 kb long and includes at least 12 exons. There are three mutually exclusive alternative promoters (PI-III) and consequently three alternative first exons (1a, 1b and 1c) and translation start sites. Exons 4 and 7b of ERG are cassette exons and are commonly subject to exon skipping. There are also alternative polyadenylation sites in exons 7b, exon 11 and exon 12.3, 52, 83 As a result, up to 30 alternative ERG transcripts are expressed encoding at least 15 protein variants. The protein variants can include three different N-termini, two alternative transactivation domains (generated by the skipping or retention of exon 7 and exon 7b) and three different C-termini (Figure 2). The splice isoforms denoted ERG2 (NM_004449) and ERG3 (NM_182918) are the main isoforms expressed in most endothelial, myeloid and lymphoid haematopoietic progenitor cells.84
The third alternative promoter (PIII) is most frequently activated in normal tissues, whereas in prostate cancer the second alternative promoter (PII) is the main driver of ERG transcription. What regulates the transcription of ERG expression is not yet fully understood. However, it is clear that the ERG promoters are epigenetically regulated and susceptible to hypermethylation in cancer.85 The ERG promoters contain two CpG islands (located +571 and +1415 upstream of the transcriptional start site). Hypermethylation of these islands leads to transcriptional repression of ERG in T-lymphoblastic leukaemia.86
In mice, a region 85- kb downstream of ERG’s promoter (termed the ERG +85 enhancer) is highly active in T-cell acute lymphoblastic leukaemia. This region shows strong binding of stem cell leukaemia, lymphoblastic leukaemia-associated haematopoiesis regulator 1 and LIM domain only 2 transcription factors. In the human ERG gene, this enhancer region is immediately upstream of ERG’s exon 4. In human T-cell acute lymphoblastic leukaemia cell lines, the expression of ERG is increased by the binding of ETS (ERG, FLI1), GATA (GATA3) and E-box (stem cell leukaemia, lymphoblastic leukaemia-associated haematopoiesis regulator 1 and LIM domain only 2) transcription factors to the +85 enhancer; this is associated with increased leukaemic cell proliferation.34 The binding of ERG to ETS motifs within its own promoter has also been demonstrated in prostate cancer; thus ERG can transactivate its own promoter. This positive feedback loop is associated with increased invasiveness of prostate cancer cell lines.87, 88
Isoforms of ERG interact with each other, as well as with other ETS family members (FLI1, ETV1 and SPI1) via the PNT and/or ETS-binding domain.89 ERG isoforms, which lack the 81-bp exon 7 (Δ81 isoforms) or the 72-bp exon 7b (Δ72), are expressed in chicken, mouse and human tissues (adding, in frame, 27 and 24 amino acids, respectively). Mice that overexpress the Δ81 isoform die at birth from respiratory failure are smaller and their skeletons hypo-mineralised.90 In cell lines, the expression of ERG isoforms that include exon 7b results in increased proliferation and invasion of prostate cancer cells;81 and both exon 7 and exon 7b inclusion increases in advanced prostate cancer (pathological stage T3).41 As exons 7 and 7b encode part of the TAD (Figure 1), alternative splicing therefore is likely to modulate ERG’s effect on the transcription of target genes.60
Involvement of ERG in prostate cancer
Over the last decade, ERG has been increasingly implicated in the aetiology of prostate cancer. In 2005, a paper published by Tomlins et al.79 showed that ERG is overexpressed in a high proportion of prostate carcinomas as a result of a gene fusion with the androgen-driven promoter of the TMPRSS2 gene. Prostate epithelia do not normally express ERG.89 ERG is one of the most consistently overexpressed oncogenes in malignant prostate cancer 91, 92 and is a driver event in the transition from prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia (PIN) to carcinoma.93 In prostate cancer, high expression of ERG is also associated with advanced tumour stage, high Gleason score, metastasis and shorter survival times.94 ERG is also implicated in other cancers, including Ewing’s sarcoma and leukaemia. For example, ERG-positive acute T-lymphoblastic leukaemias are four times more likely to relapse.95 The overexpression of ERG is one of the key factors in transforming localised, aggressive cancer into metastatic cancer.96 High levels of ERG are implicated in loss of cell polarity, changes in cell adhesion, nuclear pleomorphism promoting hyperplasia and PIN in mouse prostate epithelia.97
Aberrant ERG expression has a major impact on cell invasion and epithelial–mesenchymal transition (EMT) through the upregulation of the FZD4 gene, a member of the frizzled family of receptors.69 Higher levels of FZD4 increase the expression of mesenchymal markers and reduce the expression of epithelial markers. ERG overexpression also leads to the loss of E-cadherin expression (a marker of EMT), as well as increased cell mobility and invasion.69, 98, 99 Enhanced cell mobility and migration also results from ERG’s transactivation of the EMT-related gene vimentin. Vimentin is highly expressed in actively migrating cells but not stationary in cells. It is a key component of the cytoskeleton in which it has a role in the re-organisation of actin filaments in migrating cells.100, 101 High levels of ERG increase cell invasion via the activation of matrix metalloproteases (MMPs), the plasminogen activator pathway and the WNT-signalling pathway.21, 102 ERG upregulates MMP1 and indirectly modulates the activation of MMP3 and of secreted protein acidic and rich in cysteine. These genes regulate EC proliferation and induce loss of focal adhesion, alteration of cell morphology and barrier function.16, 103 Other ERG-regulated genes involved in EMT and cell invasion include RhoA,16, 23 VEGF-R2/FLK1 (ref. 5) and Zeb1/Zeb2.98
ERG is clearly implicated in metastasis. CXCR4 is a type 4 C-X-C chemokine receptor that is upregulated by ERG in ~80% of primary prostate cancers and promotes metastasis to bone tissue.20, 66, 104, 105 Its ligand, the chemokine stromal-derived factor-1 is produced by the bone marrow. Cells that express the membrane-bound CXCR4 receptor metastasise to sites of stromal-derived factor-1 release.106 Furthermore, the ADAMTS1 gene (encoding a disintegrin and metalloproteinase with a thrombospondin motif) is upregulated by ERG in prostate cancer cells. Cells that overexpress ADAMTS1 display excessive matrix deposition and chemotactic attraction towards fibroblasts.107, 108, 109 The downregulation or inactivation of the tumour-suppressor SMAD4 and the upregulation of osteopontin are associated with biochemical recurrence and lethal metastasis. ERG activates osteopontin transcription; and there is evidence of a reciprocal relationship between the expression of SMAD4 and ETS-regulated genes such as VEGF-A and MMP-9.75
ERG represses a number of prostate epithelium-specific genes (KLK3—best known as PSA, SLC45A3/prostein, C15ORF, MSMB/PSP94 and SCGB1D2). This suggests that ERG promotes the de-differentiaton of prostate epithelium.104 ERG may also have a role in cell lineage selection as its overexpression causes stem cell surface markers (such as CD49F) normally expressed by the basolateral layer of the prostate to be expressed in luminal cells.97 It is the basal cell layer and stem cells of the prostate that show the biggest response to ERG overexpression resulting in ductal dysplasia and PIN lesions.110, 111
ERG and the AR: transcriptional cross-talk in prostate cancer
The use of chromatin immunoprecipitation followed by massively parallel sequencing (ChIP-Seq) has revealed a complex network of transcriptional cross-talk between ERG, the androgen receptor (AR) and epigenetic programming in the context of prostate cancer. AR signalling is crucial for the lineage-specific differentiation of prostate epithelia; ERG is able to disrupt differentiation and maintain cells in a de-differentiated state.104 ERG can achieve this disruption via several mechanisms: through physical interaction with the AR protein, through binding to the promoter of AR itself and by binding to the promoters of downstream, AR-regulated genes.112 AR and ERG bind a wide range of sites in target genes. Binding sites that accommodate both AR and ERG are located both in distal enhancers and proximal promoters, most similar in location to AR-specific sites. ERG also appears to cooperate with histone deacetylase complexes (HDACs) and the polycomb protein E2H2 to module AR’s transcriptional output, inhibiting epithelial differentiation.113
Thus, it appears that one of ERG’s roles is to attenuate androgen-regulated transcription. The knockdown of ERG in prostate cancer cells leads to AR induction and the reversal of ERG’s transcriptional regulation programme; for example, the promoters of PSA, trefoil factor 3 and prostein are repressed by ERG and induced by AR.114, 115 The transcription factor MYC is upregulated by ERG. MYC upregulation is linked to increased cell survival, invasion, androgen independence and biochemical recurrence. Loss of ERG recruits the AR to the promoter of c-MYC, blocking its transcriptional activation.116, 117 Conversely, androgen deprivation in prostate cells can result in a cooperative interaction between ERG and the transforming growth factor β/bone morphogenic pathway; the latter is an initiator of EMT closely linked to WNT signalling.99 The cooperation is mainly achieved through interactions with transforming growth factor β and SMAD3 to control mesenchymal differentiation.39 Inhibition of AR-regulated gene transcription is further enhanced by ERG at the epigenetic level when HDAC1–3 and the H3K27 methyltransferase EZH2 are recruited to AR/ERG-binding sites. Once recruited to these sites, they can act as co-repressors aiding ERG-mediated transcriptional repression.113 This is well illustrated by ERG’s upregulation of EMT, orchestrated by ERG through the epigenetic silencing of WNT-signalling pathway repressors in collaboration with HDAC1.35, 36 HDAC1 is highly expressed in ERG-positive prostate cancers69 and its upregulation is mediated by ERG’s repression of the CREB-binding (CBP/p300) histone acetyltransferase. CBP/p300 activates the tumour-suppressor p53, which in turn inhibits the activation of HDAC1.118, 119 ERG and HDAC1 can form a protein complex along with the histone methyltransferase ESET (ERG-associated protein with a SET domain) and the co-repressors of transcription mSin3A and mSin3B to mediate transcriptional silencing.120, 121 ESET is required to keep cells in a pluripotent state122, 123 and may be one of the ways in which ERG overexpression contributes to cellular de-differentiation.
Adding to this already complex transcriptional regulatory partnership is the inclusion of microRNA-mediated regulation. It has become clear that microRNAs have a role in transcriptional regulation in prostate cancer. Several are implicated in the ERG/AR network. MiR-221 is downregulated in ERG-positive tumours and linked recurrence and metastasis after surgery.124 The downregulation of orphan receptor small heterodimer partner by miR-141 leads to the promotion of transcriptional activity by AR.125 The microRNA miR-200c can prevent ERG-directed EMT transition by repressing downstream effectors such as Zeb1 and vimentin; however, in turn ERG is able to directly bind to and prevent transcription of miR-200c. This results in the restoration of expression of miR-200c target genes and the re-establishment of EMT, cell migration and invasion characteristics.126 ERG itself is a direct target of miR-145 and miR-30. These microRNAs can bind ERG mRNA at specific sequences in the 3’UTR and work as potential tumour suppressors, blocking translation and downregulating ERG protein expression. Not surprisingly, the expression of these microRNAs is low in ERG-positive prostate cancers. The effect of miR-30 on ERG expression is even considered a possible mechanism in the progression to androgen-independent prostate cancer.127, 128
TMPRSS2–ERG fusions in prostate cancer
ERG is involved in gene translocations in Ewing’s sarcoma and acute myeloid leukaemia (specifically EWS-ERG and TLS/FUS-ERG).96, 129, 130, 131, 132, 133, 134 Chromosomal re-arrangements that produce fusion genes were generally thought to be uncommon in epithelial cancers such as prostate cancer but a break-through study by Tomlins et al.79 showed a recurring fusion between the promoter of the transmembrane protease serine 2 (TMPRSS2) gene and ERG. TMPRSS2 is a transmembrane protease135 expressed in the epithelium of normal prostate glands and found in semen. In prostate cancer, TMPRSS2 is detected in the apical membrane of secretory epithelia, in the lumen of the glands and in the basal cells.136, 137 The biological function of TMPRSS2 is complex; it has been shown to regulate sodium absorption in human airway epithelia,138 the activation of influenza139, 140, 141 and even severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) replication.142, 143 In the prostate, TMPRSS2 is cleaved and can activate protease-activated receptor-2 as part of a signal transduction pathway associated with inflammation, metastasis and invasion.144
In prostate cancer, the promoter region of TMPRSS2 becomes fused to the coding region of ERG. The promoter of TMPRSS2 contains androgen-sensitive elements145 and subsequently this fusion drives the overexpression of ERG in the presence of androgens.79 Fusions are caused by chromosomal translocation or by interstitial deletion of the intergenic region between TMPRSS2 and ERG. Both genes are located on chromosome 21, approximately 3 Mb apart.146, 147, 148, 149 Deletions may occur because of fragile sites and breakpoints found in intron 2 of ERG and in introns 1 and 2 of TMPRSS2.149 An alignment of these breakpoint regions shows them to be very similar to Alu repeat elements (80% homology).150 Androgen may drive the fusion by initiating chromatin looping via the AR transcription complex, bringing the ERG and TMPRSS2 loci together. This, in combination with DNA double-strand break repair, can then lead to the deletion of the interstitial 2.8 Mb of DNA and result in a fusion gene.87, 151
Why does the ERG:TMPRSS2 fusion occur? Androgen signalling leads to recruitment of the AR and TOP2B to breakpoint regions within the regulatory regions of the TMPRSS2 and ERG genes where it induces double-strand breaks and gene recombination events.152 Thus, fusions are thought to occur as a result of long-term exposure to androgens, increased AR activity and inhibition of the double-strand break preventing protein PIWIL1 (Piwi-like protein 1).153 Recent findings have suggested that formation of the TMPRSS2:ERG translocation represents a distinct subset of prostate cancer and that overexpression of ERG may cause structural changes in chromatin topology and DNA damage repair.154, 155, 156, 157 Fusions generated by interstitial deletion rather than translocation are more prevalent in end-stage, castration-resistant prostate cancer.158
Several variants may be generated by differing combinations TMPRSS2 and ERG exons (Figure 3). The most common fusion variant contains either exon 1, or exon 1 and 2 of TMPRSS2 fused with exon 4 of ERG. There are many TMPRSS2–ERG fusion transcripts. The resulting ERG proteins include full-length, N-truncated ERG and those with premature stop codons. Fusions in which TMPRSS2 provides a translation start site in frame with the ERG open reading frame are associated with more aggressive cancer characterised by seminal vesicle invasion.159, 160, 161, 162, 163, 164
The TMPRSS2:ERG fusion is a remarkably common event in prostate cancer (~50%).79, 160, 161, 162, 163 The occurrence of the fusion increases in frequency from high-grade PIN (10–20%)162, 165, 166, 167 to carcinoma (30–80%).146, 161, 163, 165, 168, 169, 170, 171, 172, 173, 174, 175, 176, 177 Normal prostate tissue does not normally present with TMPRSS2:ERG fusions;168 however, normal tissue adjacent to a site of prostate cancer occasionally contains the fusion (15.6%).178 Interestingly, sites of high-grade PIN containing the fusion are found adjacent to areas of aggressive fusion-positive cancer and both share the same fusion type.146 Fusions have also been detected at low frequency (6–8.3%) in benign prostatic hyperplasia.178, 179 This could indicate that fusion is an early-stage event and that their presence in benign prostatic hyperplasia could increase the risk of developing carcinoma.
The Gleason score is a prognostic grading system numbering from 1 (well-differentiated cells) to 5 (poorly differentiated cells). The most common grade present plus the highest grade give the overall Gleason score. Evidence suggests that the fusion is found more often in moderately to poorly differentiated samples (Gleason score >6).174 The presence of the fusion also correlates with disease recurrence after surgery; 79% of patients with the fusion are more likely to relapse.169 Patients with early onset prostate cancer, which include ERG fusions develop biochemical relapse but those lacking ERG fusion do not.180 In contrast, other studies indicate that the fusion is associated with favourable prognosis, lower-grade cancers and lack of seminal vesicle invasion.177, 181, 182 The use of alternative TMPRSS2 first exons could impact pathogenesis of the fusion. TMPRSS2 can make use of two initial exons (T0 and T1). The most commonly utilised is exon T1; it forms part of the most frequently detected TMPRSS2:ERG fusion (T1-E4). The alternative exon, T0, lies approximately 4-kb upstream of T1 and appears to be prostate specific. Although the use of the T0 exon does not result in a different ERG protein, it appears that prostate cancers that express the T0 containing variant are of lower pathological stage and associated with more favourable prognosis. Therefore, the presence of a T0 containing fusion may be an indicator of a less aggressive tumour.170, 183 Copy number variation may also have a role in prognostic outcome. Increased copy numbers of the TMPRSS2 and ERG loci along with the presence of a deletion fusion are linked poor outcome.177 Single copy fusions are associated with lower Gleason scores, whereas increased fusion copy numbers are associated with higher Gleason scoring.184 This implies that a higher dosage of ERG leads to more severe disease phenotype—this makes sense given ERG’s oncogenic role.
The overexpression of TMPRSS2:ERG in mice leads them to develop PIN and a disrupted basal cell layer (a prime indicator of invasive carcinoma). The overexpression of ERG in cell lines increases invasive abilities via activation of the urokinase plasminogen pathway. In fact, there are several indicators that ERG facilitates the PIN to prostate cancer transition. Forced overexpression of TMPRSS2:ERG in the prostate cancer cell-line PC3 (fusion negative, with trace ERG expression), keeps cells in a de-differentiated state leading to a significant increase in cell migration and invasion.92 Furthermore, two genes that are directly induced by TMPRSS2:ERG are MMP 9 and PLXNA2 (Plexin A2). These genes act to breakdown the extracellular matrix and as a signal for axonal growth cone guidance molecules, respectively.185 Upregulation of the microtubule-forming protein β-III tubulin has also been tightly associated with the TMPRSS2:ERG fusion and phosphatase and tensin homologue deleted on chromosome 10 (PTEN) deletion, particularly in tumours with a high Gleason score.186 TMPRSS2:ERG has been shown to physically interact with poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase 1 (PARP1) and the catalytic subunit of DNA-dependent protein kinases. They act as co-factors in ERG-driven invasion of prostate cells; and contribute to further DNA damage by inducing double-strand breaks.156
TMPRSS2:ERG expression is also linked to stromal changes, the promotion of EMT and aggressive prostate cancer phenotype.94, 98 ERG also activates the promoter of EZH2 in prostate cancer cells, promoting cancer growth progression by epigenetically deactivating tumour-suppressor genes such as NKX3.1. NKX3.1, a homeobox transcription factor, negatively regulates TMPRSS2187 and is also essential for early prostate differentiation.188 Loss of NKX3.1 allows the transcription of the TMPRSS2:ERG fusion gene to proceed uninhibited.189 Interestingly, EZH2 has been shown to repress ERG transcription in normal prostate cell lines but to have no effect in cancer cell lines.85 High expression levels of the polycomb gene EZH2 in localised prostate cancer is a clinical predictor of poor prognosis190 and the resulting hypermethylation of glutathione S-transferase pi 1 (GSTP1) is considered to be a crucial event in early prostate cancer development.191
In the absence of AR activity, TMPRSS2:ERG can be regulated by other androgen-independent mechanisms, including by ERG itself88 or even by the oestrogen receptor ERα. TMPRSS2:ERG fusions are associated with a distinct genetic signature that is consistent with ER signalling. Expression of TMPRSS2:ERG decreases in response to an ERβ agonist, but increases in response to an ERα agonist.112, 192
ERG as a diagnostic and prognostic indicator in prostate cancer
Clearly, the spectrum of target genes and biological processes associated with ERG is complex. As a result, the value of ERG as a prognostic or diagnostic indicator of prostate cancer is greatly debated at present. Conflicting data have suggested that ERG overexpression is associated with aggressive disease, indolent disease, early-stage cancer and later-stage cancer, an indicator of early biochemical recurrence and an indicator of a better recurrence-free survival. This is most probably due to heterogeneity in sample collection methods, screening, sample types and processing.
However, on the whole recent data points towards ERG fusion as being a relatively early-stage event in the progression to malignant prostate cancer. It has been suggested that there are two main types of malignant prostate cancers—ETS+ (those containing ERG or other ETS gene fusions) and ETS− (those without ERG/ETS fusions). ERG overexpression in conjunction with loss of PTEN or TP53 is able to transform high-grade PIN into invasive carcinoma with increased cell migration.97 Therefore, it is thought that only the concomitant loss or inactivation of a tumour-suppressor gene is required for the progression to a more aggressive, invasive phenotype.97, 103 Consistent with this theory, lesions in PTEN and TP53 tumour-suppressor genes are associated with ETS+ tumours.193, 194 The loss, mutation or inhibition of PTEN, TP53 and other tumour-suppressor genes are thought to be the triggers for invasion and metastasis.195, 196
ERG status can act as an indicator of pathological stage but in isolation it is not necessarily related to biochemical recurrence or survival; this would require further confirmation of PTEN and TP53 status.197 TMPRSS2:ERG fusions can be detected with quantitative PCR in the urine of patients with suspected prostate cancer. Urine samples are taken before biopsy and results correlate with tissue-based fluorescence in situ hybridisation results, suggesting a non-invasive diagnostic test.198 It is now reasonable to expect that ERG testing will become part of routine clinical practise. Table 1 summarises the association between different biological features of ERG, pathological consequences and clinical outcomes.
ERG-based therapies
Together, the several findings described in these previous sections convincingly implicate ERG in several aspects of the biology of prostate cancer. Overwhelming evidence suggests that ERG does contribute to worse outcomes and is involved in the regulation of signalling pathways that are dysregulated. ERG is strongly implicated in several processes that are relevant to prostate cancer including invasion and metastasis, EMT, epigenetic reprogramming, differentiation and inflammation.
Having discussed the involvement of ERG in prostate cancer, and its utility in diagnostic tests, we turn our attention to potential ERG-based therapies. Owing to the high prevalence of TMPRSS2:ERG fusions in prostate cancer, ERG proteins and their co-factors offer an attractive target for novel therapies. The enzyme PARP1 has been shown to be a required co-factor for ERG proteins in prostate cancer cells. Treatment with the PARP inhibitor olaparib significantly reduced the invasive abilities of ERG+ cells.156 Exposure of ERG+ /PTEN− prostate cells to the PARP inhibitor rucaparib was shown to sensitise the cells to low-dose radiation. This sensitisation occurred via DNA damage, activation of senescence and reduction of clonogenic survival.199
Similarly, inhibiting HDAC partners of ERG could prevent the advancement of prostate cancer development. ERG-positive cell lines treated with the HDAC inhibitors trichostatin A, MS-275 and suberoylanilide hydroxamic acid displayed growth inhibition and cell death. Furthermore, HDAC interference interfered with AR transport by sequestering AR in the cytoplasm and preventing nuclear transport.200 The use of HDAC inhibitors trichostatin A and valproic acid significantly decreases TMPRSS2:ERG expression at both the mRNA and protein level; this is concurrent with an increase in acetylation of p53, increasing apoptosis and the upregulation of cell cycle control gene CDKN1A (linked with cell cycle arrest and senescence).119
Other inhibitors function by directly targeting ERG itself. The small molecule inhibitor, YK-4–279, can directly bind to ERG and inhibit its transcriptional activity. This is mediated by interfering with ERG protein–protein interactions rather than ERG-DNA binding. In ERG-positive prostate cancer cell lines, its inhibition leads to decreased motility, invasion and metastasis.201 A DNA-binding inhibitor, DB1255 (di-(thiophene-phenyl-amidine)), targets the core GGA(A/T) consensus sequence within an ETS-binding site and prevents the ETS-binding domain from binding it.202
Targeting ERG for rapid degradation is another avenue for potential treatment. The deubiquitinase enzyme ubiquitin-specific peptidase 9 has been shown to deubiquitinate ERG in vitro, leading to stabilisation of the protein. Knockdown of USP9X resulted in increased ubiquitination and degradation of ERG. A similar effect was seen using a direct inhibitor of USP9X, the compound WP1130, a second-generation tyrphostin derivative. Treatment of ERG-positive cells with WP1130 resulted in ERG degradation both in vivo and in vitro.203
A new novel method for direct inhibition of ERG has been achieved in vivo. Long-term knockdown of the two most common variants of the TMPRSS2:ERG fusion (T1-E4 and T2-E4, see Figure 3) has been successfully performed in mouse xenograft models using small interfering RNA delivered in non-toxic liposomal nanovectors (2-dioleoyl-sn-glycero-3-phosphatidylcholine). After 4 weeks of treatment tumour growth inhibition, reduced tumour weight and increased cell death was observed with minimal toxicity.204 This approach could be used in the future to personalise treatment by targeting specific oncogenic fusions within a tumour.
Conclusions and future perspectives
The occurrence of ERG overexpression in prostate cancer has been well established over the last decade. Although some debate still remains as to the prognostic implications of this event, there is an emerging role for its diagnostic value as an early indicator of prostate cancer development with ERG overexpression being found in benign prostatic hyperplasia and PIN, as well as later-stage carcinoma and castration-resistant cancers. Prognostically, there is evidence to suggest that the TMPRSS2:ERG gene fusion event is linked to early relapse and biochemical recurrence. ERG’s ability to regulate a wide network of genes implicated in differentiation, growth, motility, invasion and epigenetic control are all hallmarks of its oncogenic potential. To link a specific gene so clearly to a specific type of cancer is a very rare occurrence in the field of cancer research. This review has focused on prostate cancer; however, ERG is also implicated in Ewing’s sarcoma and acute myeloid leukaemia. It is reasonable to expect that ERG will turn out to be involved in several other types of cancer.
The use of small molecule inhibitors to interfere with ERG’s abilities to interact with protein partners and co-factors (such as PARP and HDACs) or to inhibit its DNA-binding properties and stability are just starting to be explored. Further research is required before the full story of ERG’s role in prostate cancer can be understood. There is no doubt that diagnostic tests and therapies that are based on ERG will provide new opportunities in the treatment of prostate cancer.
References
Leprince D, Gegonne A, Coll J, De Taisne C, Schneeberger A, Lagrou C et al. A putative second cell-derived oncogene of the avian leukaemia retrovirus E26. Nature 1983; 306: 395–397.
Nunn MF, Seeburg PH, Moscovici C, Duesberg PH . Tripartite structure of the avian erythroblastosis virus E26 transforming gene. Nature 1983; 306: 391–395.
Rao VN, Papas TS, Reddy E . ERG, a human ets-related gene on chromosome 21: alternative splicing, polyadenylation, and translation. Science 1987; 237: 635–639.
Boulukos K, Pognonec P, Rabault B, Begue A, Ghysdael J . Definition of an ETS1 protein domain required for nuclear localization in cells and DNA-binding activity in vitro. Mol Cell Biol 1989; 9: 5718–5721.
Meadows SM, Myers CT, Krieg PA . Regulation of endothelial cell development by ETS transcription factors. Sem Cell Dev Biol 2011; 22: 976–984.
Watson DK, McWilliams MJ, Lapis P, Lautenberger JA, Schweinfest CW, Papas TS . Mammalian ETS-1 and ETS-2 genes encode highly conserved proteins. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 1988; 85: 7862–7866.
Larroux C, Fahey B, Liubicich D, Hinman VF, Gauthier M, Gongora M et al. Developmental expression of transcription factor genes in a demosponge: insights into the origin of metazoan multicellularity. Evol Dev 2006; 8: 150–173.
Garrett-Sinha LA . Review of ETS1 structure, function, and roles in immunity. Cell Mol Life Sci 2013; 70: 3375–3390.
Watson D, McWilliams-Smith M, Nunn M, Duesberg P, O'Brien S, Papas T . The ets sequence from the transforming gene of avian erythroblastosis virus, E26, has unique domains on human chromosomes 11 and 21: both loci are transcriptionally active. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 1985; 82: 7294–7298.
Reddy E, Rao V . ERG, an ETS-related gene, codes for sequence-specific transcriptional activators. Oncogene 1991; 6: 2285–2289.
Heo SH, Choi YJ, Ryoo HM, Cho JY . Expression profiling of ETS and MMP factors in VEGF‐activated endothelial cells: role of MMP‐10 in VEGF‐induced angiogenesis. J Cell Physiol 2010; 224: 734–742.
Gutierrez-Hartmann A, Duval DL, Bradford AP . ETS transcription factors in endocrine systems. Trends Endocrinol Metab 2007; 18: 150–158.
Nikolova-Krstevski V, Yuan L, Le Bras A, Vijayaraj P, Kondo M, Gebauer I et al. ERG is required for the differentiation of embryonic stem cells along the endothelial lineage. BMC Dev Biol 2009; 9: 72.
Yuan L, Sacharidou A, Stratman AN, Le Bras A, Zwiers PJ, Spokes K et al. RhoJ is an endothelial cell-restricted Rho GTPase that mediates vascular morphogenesis and is regulated by the transcription factor ERG. Blood 2011; 118: 1145–1153.
Birdsey GM, Dryden NH, Amsellem V, Gebhardt F, Sahnan K, Haskard DO et al. Transcription factor ERG regulates angiogenesis and endothelial apoptosis through VE-cadherin. Blood 2008; 111: 3498–3506.
McLaughlin F, Ludbrook VJ, Cox J, von Carlowitz I, Brown S, Randi AM . Combined genomic and antisense analysis reveals that the transcription factor ERG is implicated in endothelial cell differentiation. Blood 2001; 98: 3332–3339.
Loughran SJ, Kruse EA, Hacking DF, de Graaf CA, Hyland CD, Willson TA et al. The transcription factor ERG is essential for definitive hematopoiesis and the function of adult hematopoietic stem cells. Nat Immunol 2008; 9: 810–819.
Bosco A, Bureau C, Affaticati P, Gaspar P, Bally-Cuif L, Lillesaar C . Development of hypothalamic serotoninergic neurons requires Fgf signalling via the ETS-domain transcription factor Etv5b. Development 2013; 140: 372–384.
Birdsey GM, Dryden NH, Shah AV, Hannah R, Hall MD, Haskard DO et al. The transcription factor ERG regulates expression of histone deacetylase 6 and multiple pathways involved in endothelial cell migration and angiogenesis. Blood 2012; 119: 894–903.
Carver BS, Tran J, Gopalan A, Chen Z, Shaikh S, Carracedo A et al. Aberrant ERG expression cooperates with loss of PTEN to promote cancer progression in the prostate. Nat Genet 2009; 41: 619–624.
Klezovitch O, Risk M, Coleman I, Lucas JM, Null M, True LD et al. A causal role for ERG in neoplastic transformation of prostate epithelium. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2008; 105: 2105–2110.
Sperone A, Dryden N, Birdsey G, Madden LE, Evans P, Mason JC et al. The transcription factor ERG represses ICAM-1 expression and vascular inflammation. Atherosclerosis 2010; 213: e17.
Yuan L, Le Bras A, Sacharidou A, Itagaki K, Zhan Y, Kondo M et al. ETS-related gene (ERG) controls endothelial cell permeability via transcriptional regulation of the claudin 5 (CLDN5) gene. J Biol Chem 2012; 287: 6582–6591.
Reddy E, Rao VN, Papas TS . The ERG gene: a human gene related to the ets oncogene. Proc Natl Acad Sci 1987; 84: 6131–6135.
Lautenberger J, Burdett L, Gunnell M, Qi S, Watson D, O'Brien S et al. Genomic dispersal of the ETS gene family during metazoan evolution. Oncogene 1992; 7: 1713–1719.
Vijayaraj P, Le Bras A, Mitchell N, Kondo M, Juliao S, Wasserman M et al. ERG is a crucial regulator of endocardial-mesenchymal transformation during cardiac valve morphogenesis. Development 2012; 139: 3973–3985.
Maroulakou IG, Bowe DB . Expression and function of ETS transcription factors in mammalian development: a regulatory network. Oncogene 2000; 19: 6432–6442.
Mohamed AA, Tan S-H, Mikhalkevich N, Ponniah S, Vasioukhin V, Bieberich CJ et al. ETS family protein, ERG expression in developing and adult mouse tissues by a highly specific monoclonal antibody. J Cancer 2010; 1: 197.
Ng AP, Loughran SJ, Metcalf D, Hyland CD, de Graaf CA, Hu Y et al. ERG is required for self-renewal of hematopoietic stem cells during stress hematopoiesis in mice. Blood 2011; 118: 2454–2461.
Birdsey GM, Shah AV, Dufton N, Reynolds LE, Almagro LO, Yang Y et al. The endothelial transcription factor ERG promotes vascular stability and growth through Wnt/β-catenin signaling. Dev Cell 2015; 32: 82–96.
Lathen C, Zhang Y, Chow J, Singh M, Lin G, Nigam V et al. ERG-APLNR axis controls pulmonary venule endothelial proliferation in pulmonary veno-occlusive disease. Circulation 2014; 130: 1179–1191.
Vlaeminck-Guillem V, Carrere S, Dewitte F, Stehelin D, Desbiens X, Duterque-Coquillaud M . The ETS family member ERG gene is expressed in mesodermal tissues and neural crests at fundamental steps during mouse embryogenesis. Mech Dev 2000; 91: 331–335.
Schachterle W, Rojas A, Xu S-M, Black BL . ETS-dependent regulation of a distal Gata4 cardiac enhancer. Dev Biol 2012; 361: 439–449.
Thoms JA, Birger Y, Foster S, Knezevic K, Kirschenbaum Y, Chandrakanthan V et al. ERG promotes T-acute lymphoblastic leukemia and is transcriptionally regulated in leukemic cells by a stem cell enhancer. Blood 2011; 117: 7079–7089.
Rivera RR, Stuiver MH, Steenbergen R, Murre C . ETS proteins: new factors that regulate immunoglobulin heavy-chain gene expression. Mol Cell Biol 1993; 13: 7163–7169.
Anderson MK, Hernandez-Hoyos G, Diamond RA, Rothenberg EV . Precise developmental regulation of ETS family transcription factors during specification and commitment to the T cell lineage. Development 1999; 126: 3131–3148.
Dhordain P, Dewitte F, Desbiens X, Stehelin D, Duterque-Coquillaud M . Mesodermal expression of the chicken ERG gene associated with precartilaginous condensation and cartilage differentiation. Mech Dev 1995; 50: 17–28.
Iwamoto M, Higuchi Y, Koyama E, Enomoto-Iwamoto M, Kurisu K, Yeh H et al. Transcription factor ERG variants and functional diversification of chondrocytes during limb long bone development. J Cell Biol 2000; 150: 27–40.
Cox MK, Appelboom BL, Ban GI, Serra R . ERG cooperates with TGF-β to control mesenchymal differentiation. Exp Cell Res 2014; 328: 410–418.
Iwamoto M, Ohta Y, Larmour C, Enomoto‐Iwamoto M . Toward regeneration of articular cartilage. Birth Defects Res C Embryo Today Rev 2013; 99: 192–202.
Hagen RM, Adamo P, Karamat S, Oxley J, Aning JJ, Gillatt D et al. Quantitative analysis of ERG expression and its splice isoforms in formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded prostate cancer samples: association with seminal vesicle invasion and biochemical recurrence. Am J Clin Pathol 2014; 142: 533–540.
Donaldson LW, Petersen JM, Graves BJ, McIntosh LP . Solution structure of the ETS domain from murine ETS-1: a winged helix-turn-helix DNA binding motif. EMBO J 1996; 15: 125.
Liang H, Mao X, Olejniczak ET, Nettesheim DG, Yu L, Meadows RP et al. Solution structure of the ets domain of Fli-1 when bound to DNA. Nat Struct Mol Biol 1994; 1: 871–876.
Werner MH, Marius Clore G, Fisher CL, Fisher RJ, Trinh L, Shiloach J et al. The solution structure of the human ETS1-DNA complex reveals a novel mode of binding and true side chain intercalation. Cell 1995; 83: 761–771.
Batchelor AH, Piper DE, de la Brousse FC, McKnight SL, Wolberger C . The structure of GABPα/β: an ETS domain-ankyrin repeat heterodimer bound to DNA. Science 1998; 279: 1037–1041.
Shore P, Whitmarsh AJ, Bhaskaran R, Davis RJ, Waltho JP, Sharrocks AD . Determinants of DNA-binding specificity of ETS-domain transcription factors. Mol Cell Biol 1996; 16: 3338–3349.
Wei GH, Badis G, Berger MF, Kivioja T, Palin K, Enge M et al. Genome‐wide analysis of ETS‐family DNA‐binding in vitro and in vivo. EMBO J 2010; 29: 2147–2160.
Shore P, Sharrocks AD . The ETS-domain transcription factors Elk-1 and SAP-1 exhibit differential DNA binding specifitoies. Nucleic Acids Res 1995; 23: 4698–4706.
Karim F, Urness L, Thummel C, Klemsz M, McKercher S, Celada A et al. The ETS-domain: a new DNA-binding motif that recognizes a purine-rich core DNA sequence. Genes Dev 1990; 4: 1451–1453.
Wang C, Petryniak B, Ho I-C, Thompson C, Leiden J . Evolutionarily conserved ETS family members display distinct DNA binding specificities. J Exp Med 1992; 175: 1391–1399.
Seth A, Ascione R, Fisher R, Mavrothalassitis G, Bhat N, Papas T . The ETS gene family. Cell Growth Differ 1992; 3: 327.
Prasad D, Rao V, Lee L, Reddy E . Differentially spliced ERG-3 product functions as a transcriptional activator. Oncogene 1994; 9: 669–673.
Anton IA, Frampton J . Tryptophans in myb proteins. Nature 1987; 336: 719–719.
Kanei-Ishii C, Sarai A, Sawazaki T, Nakagoshi H, He D-N, Ogata K et al. The tryptophan cluster: a hypothetical structure of the DNA-binding domain of the myb protooncogene product. J Biol Chem 1990; 265: 19990–19995.
Saikumar P, Murali R, Reddy EP . Role of tryptophan repeats and flanking amino acids in Myb-DNA interactions. Proc Natl Acad Sci 1990; 87: 8452–8456.
Basuyaux JP, Ferreira E, Stéhelin D, Butticè G . The Ets transcription factors interact with each other and with the c-Fos/c-Jun complex via distinct protein domains in a DNA-dependent and-independent manner. J Biol Chem 1997; 272: 26188–26195.
Salek-Ardakani S, Smooha G, de Boer J, Sebire NJ, Morrow M, Rainis L et al. ERG is a megakaryocytic oncogene. Cancer Research 2009; 69: 4665–4673.
Mackereth CD, Schärpf M, Gentile LN, MacIntosh SE, Slupsky CM, McIntosh LP . Diversity in structure and function of the Ets family PNT domains. J Mol Biol 2004; 342: 1249–1264.
Kim CA, Bowie JU . SAM domains: uniform structure, diversity of function. Trends Biochem Sci 2003; 28: 625–628.
Carrère S, Verger A, Flourens A, Stehelin D, Duterque-Coquillaud M . Erg proteins, transcription factors of the ETS family, form homo, heterodimers and ternary complexes via two distinct domains. Oncogene 1998; 16: 3261–3268.
Verger A, Buisine E, Carrère S, Wintjens R, Flourens A, Coll J et al. Identification of amino acid residues in the ETS transcription factor Erg that mediate Erg-Jun/Fos-DNA ternary complex formation. J Biol Chem 2001; 276: 17181–17189.
Lau DK, Okon M, McIntosh LP . The PNT domain from Drosophila pointed‐P2 contains a dynamic N‐terminal helix preceded by a disordered phosphoacceptor sequence. Protein Sci 2012; 21: 1716–1725.
Slupsky CM, Gentile LN, Donaldson LW, Mackereth CD, Seidel JJ, Graves BJ et al. Structure of the ETS-1 pointed domain and mitogen-activated protein kinase phosphorylation site. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 1998; 95: 12129–12134.
Shwartz A, Yogev S, Schejter ED, Shilo B-Z . Sequential activation of ETS proteins provides a sustained transcriptional response to EGFR signaling. Development 2013; 140: 2746–2754.
Seidel JJ, Graves BJ . An ERK2 docking site in the pointed domain distinguishes a subset of ETS transcription factors. Genes Dev 2002; 16: 127–137.
Singareddy R, Semaan L, Conley-LaComb MK, John JS, Powell K, Iyer M et al. Transcriptional regulation of CXCR4 in prostate cancer: significance of TMPRSS2-ERG fusions. Mol Cancer Res 2013; 11: 1349–1361.
Siddique H, Rao V, Lee L, Reddy E . Characterization of the DNA binding and transcriptional activation domains of the ERG protein. Oncogene 1993; 8: 1751–1755.
Kim S, Denny CT, Wisdom R . Cooperative DNA binding with AP-1 proteins is required for transformation by EWS-Ets fusion proteins. Mol Cell Biol 2006; 26: 2467–2478.
Gupta S, Iljin K, Sara H, Mpindi JP, Mirtti T, Vainio P et al. FZD4 as a mediator of ERG oncogene–induced WNT signaling and epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition in human prostate cancer cells. Cancer Res 2010; 70: 6735–6745.
Regan MC, Horanyi PS, Pryor EE, Sarver JL, Cafiso DS, Bushweller JH . Structural and dynamic studies of the transcription factor ERG reveal DNA binding is allosterically autoinhibited. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2013; 110: 13374–13379.
Coyne HJ III, De S, Okon M, Green SM, Bhachech N, Graves BJ et al. Autoinhibition of ETV6 (TEL) DNA binding: appended helices sterically block the ETS domain. J Mol Biol 2012; 421: 67–84.
Green SM, Coyne HJ, McIntosh LP, Graves BJ . DNA binding by the ETS protein TEL (ETV6) is regulated by autoinhibition and self-association. J Biol Chem 2010; 285: 18496–18504.
Jolma A, Kivioja T, Toivonen J, Cheng L, Wei G, Enge M et al. Multiplexed massively parallel SELEX for characterization of human transcription factor binding specificities. Genome Res 2010; 20: 861–873.
Nye JA, Petersen JM, Gunther CV, Jonsen MD, Graves BJ . Interaction of murine ETS-1 with GGA-binding sites establishes the ETS domain as a new DNA-binding motif. Genes Dev 1992; 6: 975–990.
Oikawa T, Yamada T . Molecular biology of the ETS family of transcription factors. Gene 2003; 303: 11–34.
Hollenhorst PC, Shah AA, Hopkins C, Graves BJ . Genome-wide analyses reveal properties of redundant and specific promoter occupancy within the ETS gene family. Genes Dev 2007; 21: 1882–1894.
Sementchenko VI, Watson DK . ETS target genes: past, present and future. Oncogene 2000; 19: 6533–6548.
Camuzeaux B, Spriet C, Héliot L, Coll J, Duterque-Coquillaud M . Imaging ERG and Jun transcription factor interaction in living cells using fluorescence resonance energy transfer analyses. Biochem Biophys Res Commun 2005; 332: 1107–1114.
Tomlins SA, Rhodes DR, Perner S, Dhanasekaran SM, Mehra R, Sun X-W et al. Recurrent fusion of TMPRSS2 and ETS transcription factor genes in prostate cancer. Science 2005; 310: 644–648.
Wang J, Cai Y, Yu W, Ren C, Spencer DM, Ittmann M . Pleiotropic biological activities of alternatively spliced TMPRSS2/ERG fusion gene transcripts. Cancer Res 2008; 68: 8516–8524.
Owczarek C, Portbury K, Hardy M, O'Leary D, Kudoh J, Shibuya K et al. Detailed mapping of the ERG– ETS2 interval of human chromosome 21 and comparison with the region of conserved synteny on mouse chromosome 16. Gene 2004; 324: 65–77.
Duterque-Coquillaud M, Niel C, Plaza S, Stehelin D . New human erg isoforms generated by alternative splicing are transcriptional activators. Oncogene 1993; 8: 1865–1873.
Zammarchi F, Boutsalis G, Cartegni L . 5′ UTR control of native ERG and of Tmprss2: ERG variants activity in prostate cancer. PloS One 2013; 8: e49721.
Rainis L, Toki T, Pimanda JE, Rosenthal E, Machol K, Strehl S et al. The proto-oncogene ERG in megakaryoblastic leukemias. Cancer Res 2005; 65: 7596–7602.
Schwartzman J, Mongoue-Tchokote S, Gibbs A, Gao L, Corless CL, Jin J et al. A DNA methylation microarray-based study identifies ERG as a gene commonly methylated in prostate cancer. Epigenetics 2011; 6: 1248–1256.
Bohne A, Schlee C, Mossner M, Thibaut J, Heesch S, Thiel E et al. Epigenetic control of differential expression of specific ERG isoforms in acute T-lymphoblastic leukemia. Leukemia Res 2009; 33: 817–822.
Mani R-S, Tomlins SA, Callahan K, Ghosh A, Nyati MK, Varambally S et al. Induced chromosomal proximity and gene fusions in prostate cancer. Science 2009; 326: 1230–1230.
Mani R-S, Iyer MK, Cao Q, Brenner JC, Wang L, Ghosh A et al. TMPRSS2–ERG-mediated feed-forward regulation of wild-type ERG in human prostate cancers. Cancer Res 2011; 71: 5387–5392.
Deramaudt TB, Remy P, Stiegler P . Identification of interaction partners for two closely-related members of the ETS protein family, FLI and ERG. Gene 2001; 274: 169–177.
Iwamoto M, Tamamura Y, Koyama E, Komori T, Takeshita N, Williams JA et al. Transcription factor ERG and joint and articular cartilage formation during mouse limb and spine skeletogenesis. Dev Biol 2007; 305: 40–51.
Vanaja DK, Cheville JC, Iturria SJ, Young CY . Transcriptional silencing of zinc finger protein 185 identified by expression profiling is associated with prostate cancer progression. Cancer Res 2003; 63: 3877–3882.
Tomlins SA, Laxman B, Varambally S, Cao X, Yu J, Helgeson BE et al. Role of the TMPRSS2-ERG gene fusion in prostate cancer. Neoplasia 2008; 10: 177–IN179.
Carver BS, Tran J, Chen Z, Carracedo-Perez A, Alimonti A, Nardella C et al. ETS rearrangements and prostate cancer initiation. Nature 2009; 457: E1–E1.
Hägglöf C, Hammarsten P, Strömvall K, Egevad L, Josefsson A, Stattin P et al. TMPRSS2-ERG expression predicts prostate cancer survival and associates with stromal biomarkers. PloS One 2014; 9: e86824.
Baldus CD, Burmeister T, Martus P, Schwartz S, Gökbuget N, Bloomfield CD et al. High expression of the ETS transcription factor ERG predicts adverse outcome in acute T-lymphoblastic leukemia in adults. J Clin Oncol 2006; 24: 4714–4720.
Shimizu K, Ichikawa H, Tojo A, Kaneko Y, Maseki N, Hayashi Y et al. An ETS-related gene, ERG, is rearranged in human myeloid leukemia with t (16; 21) chromosomal translocation. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 1993; 90: 10280–10284.
Zong Y, Xin L, Goldstein AS, Lawson DA, Teitell MA, Witte ON . ETS family transcription factors collaborate with alternative signaling pathways to induce carcinoma from adult murine prostate cells. Proc Natl Acad Sci 2009; 106: 12465–12470.
Leshem O, Madar S, Kogan-Sakin I, Kamer I, Goldstein I, Brosh R et al. TMPRSS2/ERG promotes epithelial to mesenchymal transition through the ZEB1/ZEB2 axis in a prostate cancer model. PloS One 2011; 6: e21650.
Brase JC, Johannes M, Mannsperger H, Fälth M, Metzger J, Kacprzyk LA et al. TMPRSS2-ERG-specific transcriptional modulation is associated with prostate cancer biomarkers and TGF-β signaling. BMC Cancer 2011; 11: 507.
Becker-Santos DD, Guo Y, Ghaffari M, Vickers ED, Lehman M, Altamirano-Dimas M et al. Integrin-linked kinase as a target for ERG-mediated invasive properties in prostate cancer models. Carcinogenesis 2012; 33: 2558–2567.
Zhang X, Fournier MV, Ware JL, Bissell MJ, Yacoub A, Zehner ZE . Inhibition of vimentin or β1 integrin reverts morphology of prostate tumor cells grown in laminin-rich extracellular matrix gels and reduces tumor growth in vivo. Mol Cancer Ther 2009; 8: 499–508.
Wu L, Zhao JC, Kim J, Jin H-J, Wang C-Y, Yu J . ERG is a critical regulator of Wnt/LEF1 signaling in prostate cancer. Cancer Res 2013; 73: 6068–6079.
Butticè G, Duterque-Coquillaud M, Basuyaux J-P, Carrere S, Kurkinen M, Stéhelin D . ERG, an ETS-family member, differentially regulates human collagenase1 (MMP1) and stromelysin1 (MMP3) gene expression by physically interacting with the Fos/Jun complex. Oncogene 1996; 13: 2297–2306.
Sun C, Dobi A, Mohamed A, Li H, Thangapazham R, Furusato B et al. TMPRSS2-ERG fusion, a common genomic alteration in prostate cancer activates C-MYC and abrogates prostate epithelial differentiation. Oncogene 2008; 27: 5348–5353.
Cai J, Kandagatla P, Singareddy R, Kropinski A, Sheng S, Cher ML et al. Androgens induce functional CXCR4 through ERG factor expression in TMPRSS2-ERG fusion-positive prostate cancer cells. Transl Oncol 2010; 3: 195–IN191.
Taichman RS, Cooper C, Keller ET, Pienta KJ, Taichman NS, McCauley LK . Use of the stromal cell-derived factor-1/CXCR4 pathway in prostate cancer metastasis to bone. Cancer Res 2002; 62: 1832–1837.
Rocks N, Paulissen G, El Hour M, Quesada F, Crahay C, Gueders M et al. Emerging roles of ADAM and ADAMTS metalloproteinases in cancer. Biochimie 2008; 90: 369–379.
Furusato B, Tan S, Young D, Dobi A, Sun C, Mohamed A et al. ERG oncoprotein expression in prostate cancer: clonal progression of ERG-positive tumor cells and potential for ERG-based stratification. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 2010; 13: 228–237.
Casey OM, Fang L, Hynes PG, Abou-Kheir WG, Martin PL, Tillman HS et al. TMPRSS2-driven ERG expression in vivo increases self-renewal and maintains expression in a castration resistant subpopulation. PloS One 2012; 7: e41668.
Lawson DA, Zong Y, Memarzadeh S, Xin L, Huang J, Witte ON . Basal epithelial stem cells are efficient targets for prostate cancer initiation. Proc Natl Acad Sci 2010; 107: 2610–2615.
Goldstein AS, Huang J, Guo C, Garraway IP, Witte ON . Identification of a cell of origin for human prostate cancer. Science 2010; 329: 568–571.
Yu J, Yu J, Mani R-S, Cao Q, Brenner CJ, Cao X et al. An integrated network of androgen receptor, polycomb, and TMPRSS2-ERG gene fusions in prostate cancer progression. Cancer Cell 2010; 17: 443–454.
Chng KR, Chang CW, Tan SK, Yang C, Hong SZ, Sng NYW et al. A transcriptional repressor co‐regulatory network governing androgen response in prostate cancers. EMBO Jl 2012; 31: 2810–2823.
Wright ME, Tsai M-J, Aebersold R . Androgen receptor represses the neuroendocrine transdifferentiation process in prostate cancer cells. Mol Endocrinol 2003; 17: 1726–1737.
Rickman DS, Chen Y-b, Banerjee S, Pan Y, Yu J, Vuong T et al. ERG cooperates with androgen receptor in regulating trefoil factor 3 in prostate cancer disease progression. Neoplasia 2010; 12: 1031–IN1022.
Bernard D, Pourtier-Manzanedo A, Gil J, Beach DH . Myc confers androgen-independent prostate cancer cell growth. J Clin Invest 2003; 112: 1724–1731.
Hawksworth D, Ravindranath L, Chen Y, Furusato B, Sesterhenn I, McLeod D et al. Overexpression of C-MYC oncogene in prostate cancer predicts biochemical recurrence. Prostate Cancer Prostatic Dis 2010; 13: 311–315.
Bode AM, Dong Z . Post-translational modification of p53 in tumorigenesis. Nat Rev Cancer 2004; 4: 793–805.
Fortson WS, Kayarthodi S, Fujimura Y, Xu H, Matthews R, Grizzle WE et al. Histone deacetylase inhibitors, valproic acid and trichostatin-A induce apoptosis and affect acetylation status of p53 in ERG-positive prostate cancer cells. Int J Oncol 2011; 39: 111.
Yang L, Xia L, Wu DY, Wang H, Chansky HA, Schubach WH et al. Molecular cloning of ESET, a novel histone H3-specific methyltransferase that interacts with ERG transcription factor. Oncogene 2002; 21: 148–152.
Yang L, Mei Q, Zielinska-Kwiatkowska A, Matsui Y, Blackburn M, Benedetti D et al. An ERG (ETS-related gene)-associated histone methyltransferase interacts with histone deacetylases 1/2 and transcription co-repressors mSin3A/B. Biochem J 2003; 369: 651–657.
Yeap L-S, Hayashi K, Surani MA . ERG-associated protein with SET domain (ESET)-Oct4 interaction regulates pluripotency and represses the trophectoderm lineage. Epigenet Chromatin 2009; 2: 12.
Yuan P, Han J, Guo G, Orlov YL, Huss M, Loh Y-H et al. Eset partners with Oct4 to restrict extraembryonic trophoblast lineage potential in embryonic stem cells. Genes Dev 2009; 23: 2507–2520.
Gordanpour A, Stanimirovic A, Nam RK, Moreno CS, Sherman C, Sugar L et al. miR-221 Is down-regulated in TMPRSS2: ERG fusion-positive prostate cancer. Anticancer Res 2011; 31: 403–410.
Xiao J, Gong AY, Eischeid AN, Chen D, Deng C, Young CY et al. miR‐141 modulates androgen receptor transcriptional activity in human prostate cancer cells through targeting the small heterodimer partner protein. Prostate 2012; 72: 1514–1522.
Kim J, Wu L, Zhao J, Jin H, Yu J . TMPRSS2–ERG gene fusions induce prostate tumorigenesis by modulating microRNA miR-200c. Oncogene 2014; 33: 5183–5192.
Hart M, Wach S, Nolte E, Szczyrba J, Menon R, Taubert H et al. The proto‐oncogene ERG is a target of microRNA miR‐145 in prostate cancer. FEBS J 2013; 280: 2105–2116.
Kao C, Martiniez A, Shi X, Yang J, Evans C, Dobi A et al. miR-30 as a tumor suppressor connects EGF/Src signal to ERG and EMT. Oncogene 2014; 33: 2495–2503.
Dunn T, Praissman L, Hagag N, Viola MV . ERG gene is translocated in an Ewing's sarcoma cell line. Cancer Genet Cytogenet 1994; 76: 19–22.
Tsuzuki S, Taguchi O, Seto M . Promotion and maintenance of leukemia by ERG. Blood 2011; 117: 3858–3868.
Sorensen PH, Lessnickz SL, Lopez-Terrada D, Liu XF . A second Ewing's sarcoma translocation, t(21;22), fuses the EWS gene to another ETS-family transcription factor, ERG. Nat Genet 1994; 6: 146–151.
Ichikawa H, Shimizu K, Hayashi Y, Ohki M . An RNA-binding protein gene, TLS/FUS, is fused to ERG in human myeloid leukemia with t (16; 21) chromosomal translocation. Cancer Res 1994; 54: 2865–2868.
Panagopoulos I, Åman P, Fioretos T, Höglund M, Johansson B, Mandahl N et al. Fusion of the FUS gene with ERG in acute myeloid leukemia with t (16; 21)(p11; q22). Genes Chromosomes Cancer 1994; 11: 256–262.
Hart AH, Corrick CM, Tymms MJ, Hertzog PJ, Kola I . Human ERG is a proto-oncogene with mitogenic and transforming activity. Oncogene 1995; 10: 1423–1430.
Paoloni-Giacobino A, Chen H, Peitsch MC, Rossier C, Antonarakis SE . Cloning of the TMPRSS2 gene, which encodes a novel serine protease with transmembrane, LDLRA, and SRCR domains and maps to 21q22. 3. Genomics 1997; 44: 309–320.
Lin B, Ferguson C, White JT, Wang S, Vessella R, True LD et al. Prostate-localized and androgen-regulated expression of the membrane-bound serine protease TMPRSS2. Cancer Res 1999; 59: 4180–4184.
Chen Y-W, Lee M-S, Lucht A, Chou F-P, Huang W, Havighurst TC et al. TMPRSS2, a serine protease expressed in the prostate on the apical surface of luminal epithelial cells and released into semen in prostasomes, is misregulated in prostate cancer cells. Am J Pathol 2010; 176: 2986–2996.
Donaldson SH, Hirsh A, Li DC, Holloway G, Chao J, Boucher RC et al. Regulation of the epithelial sodium channel by serine proteases in human airways. Journal of Biological Chemistry 2002; 277: 8338–8345.
Böttcher-Friebertshäuser E, Freuer C, Sielaff F, Schmidt S, Eickmann M, Uhlendorff J et al. Cleavage of influenza virus hemagglutinin by airway proteases TMPRSS2 and HAT differs in subcellular localization and susceptibility to protease inhibitors. J Virol 2010; 84: 5605–5614.
Bertram S, Glowacka I, Blazejewska P, Soilleux E, Allen P, Danisch S et al. TMPRSS2 and TMPRSS4 facilitate trypsin-independent spread of influenza virus in Caco-2 cells. J Virol 2010; 84: 10016–10025.
Hatesuer B, Bertram S, Mehnert N, Bahgat MM, Nelson PS, Pöhlman S et al. Tmprss2 is essential for influenza H1N1 virus pathogenesis in mice. PLoS Pathogens 2013; 9: e1003774.
Bertram S, Heurich A, Lavender H, Gierer S, Danisch S, Perin P et al. Influenza and SARS-coronavirus activating proteases TMPRSS2 and HAT are expressed at multiple sites in human respiratory and gastrointestinal tracts. PloS One 2012; 7: e35876.
Glowacka I, Bertram S, Müller MA, Allen P, Soilleux E, Pfefferle S et al. Evidence that TMPRSS2 activates the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus spike protein for membrane fusion and reduces viral control by the humoral immune response. J Virol 2011; 85: 4122–4134.
Wilson S, Greer B, Hooper J, Zijlstra A, Walker B, Quigley J et al. The membrane-anchored serine protease, TMPRSS2, activates PAR-2 in prostate cancer cells. Biochem J 2005; 388: 967–972.
Kim TS, Heinlein C, Hackman RC, Nelson PS . Phenotypic analysis of mice lacking the TMPRSS2-encoded protease. Mol Cell Biol 2006; 26: 965–975.
Perner S, Demichelis F, Beroukhim R, Schmidt FH, Mosquera J-M, Setlur S et al. TMPRSS2: ERG fusion-associated deletions provide insight into the heterogeneity of prostate cancer. Cancer Res 2006; 66: 8337–8341.
Rubin MA, Chinnaiyan AM . Bioinformatics approach leads to the discovery of the TMPRSS2: ETS gene fusion in prostate cancer. Lab Invest 2006; 86: 1099–1102.
Iljin K, Wolf M, Edgren H, Gupta S, Kilpinen S, Skotheim RI et al. TMPRSS2 fusions with oncogenic ETS factors in prostate cancer involve unbalanced genomic rearrangements and are associated with HDAC1 and epigenetic reprogramming. Cancer Res 2006; 66: 10242–10246.
Hermans KG, van Marion R, van Dekken H, Jenster G, van Weerden WM, Trapman J . TMPRSS2: ERG fusion by translocation or interstitial deletion is highly relevant in androgen-dependent prostate cancer, but is bypassed in late-stage androgen receptor–negative prostate cancer. Cancer Res 2006; 66: 10658–10663.
Liu W, Ewing CM, Chang BL, Li T, Sun J, Turner AR et al. Multiple genomic alterations on 21q22 predict various TMPRSS2/ERG fusion transcripts in human prostate cancers. Genes Chromosomes Cancer 2007; 46: 972–980.
Wu D, Zhang C, Shen Y, Nephew KP, Wang Q . Androgen receptor-driven chromatin looping in prostate cancer. Trends Endocrinol Metab 2011; 22: 474–480.
Haffner MC, Aryee MJ, Toubaji A, Esopi DM, Albadine R, Gurel B et al. Androgen-induced TOP2B-mediated double-strand breaks and prostate cancer gene rearrangements. Nat Genet 2010; 42: 668–675.
Bastus NC, Boyd LK, Mao X, Stankiewicz E, Kudahetti SC, Oliver RTD et al. Androgen-induced TMPRSS2: ERG fusion in nonmalignant prostate epithelial cells. Cancer Res 2010; 70: 9544–9548.
Rubin MA, Maher CA, Chinnaiyan AM . Common gene rearrangements in prostate cancer. J Clin Oncol 2011; 29: 3659–3668.
Rickman DS, Soong TD, Moss B, Mosquera JM, Dlabal J, Terry S et al. Oncogene-mediated alterations in chromatin conformation. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2012; 109: 9083–9088.
Brenner JC, Ateeq B, Li Y, Yocum AK, Cao Q, Asangani IA et al. Mechanistic rationale for inhibition of poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase in ETS gene fusion-positive prostate cancer. Cancer Cell 2011; 19: 664–678.
Berger MF, Lawrence MS, Demichelis F, Drier Y, Cibulskis K, Sivachenko AY et al. The genomic complexity of primary human prostate cancer. Nature 2011; 470: 214–220.
Mehra R, Tomlins SA, Yu J, Cao X, Wang L, Menon A et al. Characterization of TMPRSS2-ETS gene aberrations in androgen-independent metastatic prostate cancer. Cancer Res 2008; 68: 3584–3590.
Tomlins SA, Mehra R, Rhodes DR, Cao X, Wang L, Dhanasekaran SM et al. Integrative molecular concept modeling of prostate cancer progression. Nat Genet 2006; 39: 41–51.
Soller W, Johansson Soller M, Isaksson M, Elfving P, Abrahamsson P, Lundgren R et al. High frequency of the TMPRSS2/ERG fusion gene in prostate cancer. Eur Urol Suppl 2006; 5: 789.
Winnes M, Lissbrant E, Damber J-E, Stenman G . Molecular genetic analyses of the TMPRSS2-ERG and TMPRSS2-ETV1 gene fusions in 50 cases of prostate cancer. Oncol Rep 2007; 17: 1033–1036.
Clark J, Attard G, Jhavar S, Flohr P, Reid A, De-Bono J et al. Complex patterns of ETS gene alteration arise during cancer development in the human prostate. Oncogene 2007; 27: 1993–2003.
Wang J, Cai Y, Ren C, Ittmann M . Expression of variant TMPRSS2/ERG fusion messenger RNAs is associated with aggressive prostate cancer. Cancer Res 2006; 66: 8347–8351.
Hu Y, Dobi A, Sreenath T, Cook C, Tadase AY, Ravindranath L et al. Delineation of TMPRSS2-ERG splice variants in prostate cancer. Clin Cancer Res 2008; 14: 4719–4725.
Furusato B, Gao C-L, Ravindranath L, Chen Y, Cullen J, McLeod DG et al. Mapping of TMPRSS2–ERG fusions in the context of multi-focal prostate cancer. Mod Pathol 2007; 21: 67–75.
Zhang S, Pavlovitz B, Tull J, Wang Y, Deng F-M, Fuller C . Detection of TMPRSS2 gene deletions and translocations in carcinoma, intraepithelial neoplasia, and normal epithelium of the prostate by direct fluorescence in situ hybridization. Diagn Mol Pathol 2010; 19: 151–156.
Mosquera J-M, Perner S, Genega EM, Sanda M, Hofer MD, Mertz KD et al. Characterization of TMPRSS2-ERG fusion high-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia and potential clinical implications. Clin Cancer Res 2008; 14: 3380–3385.
Cerveira N, Ribeiro FR, Peixoto A, Costa V, Henrique R, Jerönimo C et al. TMPRSS2-ERG gene fusion causing ERG overexpression precedes chromosome copy number changes in prostate carcinomas, paired HGPIN lesions. Neoplasia 2006; 8: 826–832.
Nam R, Sugar L, Yang W, Srivastava S, Klotz L, Yang L et al. Expression of the TMPRSS2: ERG fusion gene predicts cancer recurrence after surgery for localised prostate cancer. Br J Cancer 2007; 97: 1690–1695.
Lapointe J, Kim YH, Miller MA, Li C, Kaygusuz G, van de Rijn M et al. A variant TMPRSS2 isoform and ERG fusion product in prostate cancer with implications for molecular diagnosis. Mod Pathol 2007; 20: 467–473.
Mehra R, Tomlins SA, Shen R, Nadeem O, Wang L, Wei JT et al. Comprehensive assessment of TMPRSS2 and ETS family gene aberrations in clinically localized prostate cancer. Mod Pathol 2007; 20: 538–544.
Demichelis F, Fall K, Perner S, Andrén O, Schmidt F, Setlur S et al. TMPRSS2: ERG gene fusion associated with lethal prostate cancer in a watchful waiting cohort. Oncogene 2007; 26: 4596–4599.
Mehra R, Han B, Tomlins SA, Wang L, Menon A, Wasco MJ et al. Heterogeneity of TMPRSS2 gene rearrangements in multifocal prostate adenocarcinoma: molecular evidence for an independent group of diseases. Cancer Res 2007; 67: 7991–7995.
Rajput AB, Miller MA, De Luca A, Boyd N, Leung S, Hurtado-Coll A et al. Frequency of the TMPRSS2: ERG gene fusion is increased in moderate to poorly differentiated prostate cancers. J Clin Pathol 2007; 60: 1238–1243.
Dai M, Chen L, Zheng Y, Chen W, Tao Z, Weng Z et al. Frequency and transcript variant analysis of gene fusions between TMPRSS2 and ETS transcription factor genes in prostate cancer. Zhonghua Yi Xue Za Zhi 2008; 88: 669–673.
Rouzier C, Haudebourg J, Carpentier X, Valério L, Amiel J, Michiels J-F et al. Detection of the TMPRSS2- ETS fusion gene in prostate carcinomas: retrospective analysis of 55 formalin-fixed and paraffin-embedded samples with clinical data. Cancer Genet Cytogenet 2008; 183: 21–27.
Gopalan A, Leversha MA, Satagopan JM, Zhou Q, Al-Ahmadie HA, Fine SW et al. TMPRSS2-ERG gene fusion is not associated with outcome in patients treated by prostatectomy. Cancer Res 2009; 69: 1400–1406.
Robert G, Jannink S, Smit F, Aalders T, Hessels D, Cremers R et al. Rational basis for the combination of PCA3 and TMPRSS2: ERG gene fusion for prostate cancer diagnosis. Prostate 2013; 73: 113–120.
Velaeti S, Dimitriadis E, Kontogianni-Katsarou K, Savvani A, Sdrolia E, Pantazi G et al. Detection of TMPRSS2-ERG fusion gene in benign prostatic hyperplasia. Tumour Biol 2014; 35: 9597–9602.
Huang K-C, Dolph M, Donnelly B, Bismar T . ERG expression is associated with increased risk of biochemical relapse following radical prostatectomy in early onset prostate cancer. Clin Transl Oncol 2014; 16: 1–7.
Petrovics G, Liu A, Shaheduzzaman S, Furasato B, Sun C, Chen Y et al. Frequent overexpression of ETS-related gene-1 (ERG1) in prostate cancer transcriptome. Oncogene 2005; 24: 3847–3852.
Saramäki OR, Harjula AE, Martikainen PM, Vessella RL, Tammela TL, Visakorpi T . TMPRSS2: ERG fusion identifies a subgroup of prostate cancers with a favorable prognosis. Clin Cancer Res 2008; 14: 3395–3400.
Hermans KG, Boormans JL, Gasi D, van Leenders GJ, Jenster G, Verhagen PC et al. Overexpression of prostate-specific TMPRSS2 (exon 0)-ERG fusion transcripts corresponds with favorable prognosis of prostate cancer. Clin Cancer Res 2009; 15: 6398–6403.
Fine SW, Gopalan A, Leversha MA, Al-Ahmadie HA, Tickoo SK, Zhou Q et al. TMPRSS2–ERG gene fusion is associated with low Gleason scores and not with high-grade morphological features. Mod Pathol 2010; 23: 1325–1333.
Tian T, Tomavo N, Huot L, Flourens A, Bonnelye E, Flajollet S et al. Identification of novel TMPRSS2: ERG mechanisms in prostate cancer metastasis: involvement of MMP9 and PLXNA2. Oncogene 2014; 33: 2204–2214.
Tsourlakis MC, Weigand P, Grupp K, Kluth M, Steurer S, Schlomm T et al. βIII-Tubulin overexpression iI an independent predictor of prostate cancer progression tightly linked to ERG fusion status and PTEN deletion. Am J Pathol 2014; 184: 609–617.
Sreenath TL, Dobi A, Petrovics G, Srivastava S . Oncogenic activation of ERG: a predominant mechanism in prostate cancer. J Carcinogenesis 2011; 10: 37.
Abate-Shen C, Shen MM, Gelman E . Integrating differentiation and cancer: the Nkx3.1 homeobox gene in prostate organogenesis and carcinogenesis. Differentiation 2008; 76: 717–727.
Thangapazham R, Saenz F, Katta S, Mohamed AA, Tan S-H, Petrovics G et al. Loss of the NKX3. 1 tumorsuppressor promotes the TMPRSS2-ERG fusion gene expression in prostate cancer. BMC Cancer 2014; 14: 16.
Berezovska OP, Glinskii AB, Yang Z, Li X-M, Hoffman RM, Glinsky GV . Report essential role for activation of the polycomb-group (PcG) protein chromatin silencing pathway in metastatic prostate cancer. Cell Cycle 2006; 5: 1886–1901.
Lee W-H, Morton RA, Epstein JI, Brooks JD, Campbell PA, Bova GS et al. Cytidine methylation of regulatory sequences near the pi-class glutathione S-transferase gene accompanies human prostatic carcinogenesis. Proc Natl Acad Sci 1994; 91: 11733–11737.
Setlur SR, Mertz KD, Hoshida Y, Demichelis F, Lupien M, Perner S et al. Estrogen-dependent signaling in a molecularly distinct subclass of aggressive prostate cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 2008; 100: 815–825.
Barbieri CE, Baca SC, Lawrence MS, Demichelis F, Blattner M, Theurillat J-P et al. Exome sequencing identifies recurrent SPOP, FOXA1 and MED12 mutations in prostate cancer. Nat Genet 2012; 44: 685–689.
Grasso CS, Wu Y-M, Robinson DR, Cao X, Dhanasekaran SM, Khan AP et al. The mutational landscape of lethal castration-resistant prostate cancer. Nature 2012; 487: 239–243.
Bowen KA, Doan HQ, Zhou BP, Wang Q, Zhou Y, Rychahou PG et al. PTEN loss induces epithelial—mesenchymal transition in human colon cancer cells. Anticancer Res 2009; 29: 4439–4449.
Netto GJ . TMPRSS2–ERG fusion as a marker of prostatic lineage in small‐cell carcinoma. Histopathology 2010; 57: 633–633.
Pettersson A, Graff RE, Bauer SR, Pitt MJ, Lis RT, Stack EC et al. The TMPRSS2: ERG rearrangement, ERG expression, and prostate cancer outcomes: a cohort study and meta-analysis. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prevent 2012; 21: 1497–1509.
Laxman B, Tomlins SA, Mehra R, Morris DS, Wang L, Helgeson BE et al. Noninvasive detection of TMPRSS2: ERG fusion transcripts in the urine of men with prostate cancer. Neoplasia 2006; 8: 885–888.
Chatterjee P, Choudhary GS, Sharma A, Singh K, Heston WD, Ciezki J et al. PARP inhibition sensitizes to low dose-rate radiation TMPRSS2-ERG fusion gene-expressing and PTEN-deficient prostate cancer cells. PLoS One 2013; 8: e60408.
Björkman M, Iljin K, Halonen P, Sara H, Kaivanto E, Nees M et al. Defining the molecular action of HDAC inhibitors and synergism with androgen deprivation in ERG‐positive prostate cancer. Int J Cancer 2008; 123: 2774–2781.
Rahim S, Beauchamp EM, Kong Y, Brown ML, Toretsky JA, Üren A . YK-4-279 inhibits ERG and ETV1 mediated prostate cancer cell invasion. PloS One 2011; 6: e19343.
Nhili R, Peixoto P, Depauw S, Flajollet S, Dezitter X, Munde MM et al. Targeting the DNA-binding activity of the human ERG transcription factor using new heterocyclic dithiophene diamidines. Nucleic Acids Res 2013; 41: 125–138.
Wang S, Kollipara RK, Srivastava N, Li R, Ravindranathan P, Hernandez E et al. Ablation of the oncogenic transcription factor ERG by deubiquitinase inhibition in prostate cancer. Proc Natl Acad Sci 2014; 111: 4251–4256.
Shao L, Tekedereli I, Wang J, Yuca E, Tsang S, Sood A et al. Highly specific targeting of the TMPRSS2/ERG fusion gene using liposomal nanovectors. Clin Cancer Res 2012; 18: 6648–6657.
Leinonen KA, Saramäki OR, Furusato B, Kimura T, Takahashi H, Egawa S et al. Loss of PTEN is associated with aggressive behavior in ERG-positive prostate cancer. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prevent 2013; 22: 2333–2344.
Acknowledgements
Dr P Adamo was supported by the Rotary Club of Bristol, The Bristol Urological Institute, Funds for Women Graduates and the University of the West of England, Bristol. Dr MR Ladomery was supported by a grant from the Bristol Urological Institute (BUI256). We would also like to thank Dr Ian Wilson for providing constructive feedback.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Competing interests
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Adamo, P., Ladomery, M. The oncogene ERG: a key factor in prostate cancer. Oncogene 35, 403–414 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1038/onc.2015.109
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/onc.2015.109
- Springer Nature Limited
This article is cited by
-
Genome-wide identification and characteristic analysis of ETS gene family in blood clam Tegillarca granosa
BMC Genomics (2023)
-
Mucopenetrating Janus Nanoparticles For Field-Coverage Oral Cancer Chemoprevention
Pharmaceutical Research (2023)
-
The NCOR-HDAC3 co-repressive complex modulates the leukemogenic potential of the transcription factor ERG
Nature Communications (2023)
-
Study on the role of transcription factor SPI1 in the development of glioma
Chinese Neurosurgical Journal (2022)
-
CRISPR/Cas9-mediated deletion of Interleukin-30 suppresses IGF1 and CXCL5 and boosts SOCS3 reducing prostate cancer growth and mortality
Journal of Hematology & Oncology (2022)