MicroRNAs Make Big Impression in Disease After Disease

Science 28 March 2008:
Vol. 319. no. 5871, pp. 1782 - 1784
DOI: 10.1126/science.319.5871.1782

News

MicroRNAs Make Big Impression in Disease After Disease

Jennifer Couzin

Hunting for new ways to diagnose and treat common diseases, biologists and companies are racing to decipher the promise of these RNAs

When it comes to RNA molecules, the deeper biologists dig the more they seem to uncover. The 2006 Nobel Prize honored the discovery of RNA interference, in which scientists use short strands of the chemical to silence specific genes, and RNAi has helped shed light on the fact that cells naturally use RNA molecules just 20 to 22 nucleotides long, dubbed microRNAs, to regulate gene expression. Lately, microRNAs are garnering attention on the biomedical front, startling researchers with ever-expanding roles in disease. A flood of studies show that microRNAs may offer a window into the development of various ailments, including cancer, diabetes, and heart failure, and provide a chance to strike disease targets that until now were unreachable.

Figure 1 New view of the body. From the heart to the blood to the pancreas and beyond, scientists are finding tantalizing hints that microRNAs can help keep us healthy or make us sick. Biotech firms are springing up to convert these discoveries into new products that can diagnose, treat, or predict the course of disease.
"People are essentially stunned that this whole level of regulation existed, and we just didn't know about it until a few years back," says developmental biologist Frank Slack of Yale University, who has branched out from studying microRNAs in cancer to linking them to Alzheimer's disease and life span. When poorly regulated, the molecules appear to drive cancer and a host of other diseases, and this could make them useful in diagnosing disease very early. MicroRNAs made by viruses, meanwhile, may help pathogens gain a foothold in their host, which could suggest new targets for antiviral drugs.

Biologists who have made some of the early microRNA discoveries are eager to push toward new treatments for patients; hoping to also cash in, many are teaming up with biotechnology companies or establishing their own. Companies that formed several years ago to capitalize on different types of RNA molecules, notably ones used for RNAi or others known as antisense, are now expanding into the microRNA arena.

Two microRNA-based therapeutic strategies are being considered: delivering mimics of the molecules that could promote health or blunting the impact of ones that contribute to disease. As with any novel therapy, microRNAs come with their own set of challenges that must be overcome before testing begins in people. Delivering the molecules to the right cells is still a technological hurdle, as is identifying the genes microRNAs influence to ensure that modifying their expression won't have untoward effects. Many individual microRNAs home in on dozens or even hundreds of genes.

Adding a reason for caution, biologists conducting animal tests have been taken aback by the dramatic effects of slightly dialing up or down the dose of a single microRNA. Many believe microRNAs will lead to therapeutics but warn that it will take time. "The microRNA network is really subtle," says geneticist John Rossi of City of Hope in Duarte, California, who is considering how microRNAs might modulate HIV infections as well as behavioral syndromes such as schizophrenia. He predicts that many correlations between microRNAs and disease "are going to be wrong in the end. But you have to start somewhere."

Help for faltering hearts
Out of the 25,000 or so human genes, scientists have identified about 500 that yield microRNAs, and they continue to surprise. Consider an experiment that caused Deepak Srivastava, who directs the Gladstone Institute of Cardiovascular Diseases at the University of California, San Francisco, to do a double take. Srivastava studies cardiac development and gene pathways that, when disrupted, can lead to congenital or adult heart disease. When he learned of microRNAs, which were first discovered in 1993 in worms, he began hunting for ones expressed at high or low levels in the heart, first in mice and in fruit flies and later in people. After identifying about 10 such microRNAs, he pursued them one by one, testing whether changing expression levels led to changes in heart function or development. Last April, he and his colleagues described in Cell one of the first examples of mice engineered to lack a specific microRNA, called miR-1-2.

Although miR-1-2 is highly expressed in heart muscle, Srivastava's team wasn't expecting their mice to look much different from normal ones. That's because miR-1-2 has a twin, an identical DNA sequence on another chromosome that the researchers didn't delete. By knocking out one copy, they dialed down the dose of this microRNA by 50%. The effect was dramatic: Half the animals died of holes in the heart, and others were found to have fatal disruptions in cardiac rhythm (Science, 27 April 2007, p. 530).

"At the time, it was a really surprising result," says Srivastava. Today, he believes, it "makes a little more sense." That's because scientists are now learning that microRNAs are "the regulators of the master regulators," as Srivastava puts it--potentially the controllers of entire pathways of genes. The cardiac defects seen in these mice resemble those that are among "the most common heart defects in humans," says Srivastava, although no one has proven yet that the human defects are caused by a microRNA deficiency, too. Srivastava, who's considering helping establish a company, is now studying how microRNAs govern the development of the heart's four chambers, each of which displays a unique gene-expression pattern and has a distinct function.

Although Srivastava's work hints that problems with microRNAs could explain some heart defects seen at birth, these bits of nucleic acids may also affect the adult heart. At the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center in Dallas, molecular biologist Eric Olson and his postdoctoral fellow Eva van Rooij are using mice to connect microRNAs to common heart diseases such as cardiac hypertrophy, in which the heart's walls thicken and the organ struggles to keep pumping. Eventually, the condition leads to heart failure; there are few effective treatments. The pair has identified a mouse microRNA, miR-208, whose DNA sequence is hidden within a gene that encodes the muscle protein myosin, which helps the heart contract and function under stress. More recently, they've found that many myosin genes contain microRNAs that regulate one another to keep heart muscle healthy--an interconnection among microRNAs that no other group has described, says van Rooij.

By manipulating microRNAs such as miR-208, "we can really start attacking disease in a whole different way," predicts William Marshall, a biologist and chemist in Boulder, Colorado. Marshall, who has worked at various RNA-focused biotechnology companies, met Olson through a mutual friend. They recruited others to launch the company Miragen Therapeutics last August; Marshall is the president and chief executive officer. Van Rooij will be the director of research beginning in January 2009.

The cardiology field has an advantage over others: Its doctors have experience supplying drugs straight into the target organ, for example, by injection into the coronary arteries. It should be doable, some predict, to shoot extra microRNAs, or microRNA suppressors, directly into the heart. "I think we might see the first trials [of a microRNA-based therapy] in the cardiology field," says Markus Stoffel, a molecular biologist at the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology in Zürich.

Target practice
Researchers such as Stoffel are hoping that microRNAs won't share the woes of a related technology that disappointed back in the 1990s, called antisense therapy. Like potential microRNA therapies, antisense sought to modulate gene expression but did so by targeting the messenger RNAs that translate genes into proteins, as a way of blocking protein synthesis. Researchers found that antisense "just doesn't work very well for inhibiting messenger RNAs," says geneticist and molecular biologist Joshua Mendell of Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore, Maryland, who focuses on microRNAs and cancer. Only one antisense drug has received approval, in 1998.

Figure 2 MicroRNA hunter. Molecular biologist Markus Stoffel is chasing early signs of a connection between the small RNAs and diabetes.

CREDIT: THE ROCKEFELLER UNIVERSITY

In some diseases, microRNAs are overabundant, and the goal will be to dial down their expression by injecting a complementary RNA sequence that binds to and disables the target microRNA. But in other ailments, such as certain cancers, microRNAs appear in lower concentrations than in normal tissue, suggesting that treatments will need to add microRNA "mimics."

For the overabundance problem--which requires blunting microRNA expression--many scientists are now using a strategy designed by Stoffel in 2005. Stoffel studies microRNAs in diabetes and metabolism and realized that he needed a delivery system to get RNA sequences into cells where they could silence microRNAs. To accomplish this, Stoffel collaborated with Muthiah Manoharan of Alnylam Pharmaceuticals, an RNAi company in Cambridge, Massachusetts, to create "antagomirs," so called because they antagonize the miR, or microRNA. Stoffel's antagomirs are RNA snippets linked to cholesterol molecules, which help slip the silencers into cells. After being injected into the tail veins of mice, antagomirs travel through the body; they have successfully modified microRNA expression in many organs. Antagomirs can't cross the blood-brain barrier, but scientists have injected them directly into the brain, where they penetrated brain cells. By the third day after an antagomir injection, Stoffel says, the microRNAs targeted disappear and stay silent for weeks. He believes that's because the antagomirs remain in the cells for some time, blunting any new microRNAs a cell produces.

Alnylam, of whose scientific advisory board Stoffel is a member, has acquired rights to the antagomirs. And in September, Alnylam and another company, Isis Pharmaceuticals, pooled their intellectual property to create a new microRNA-focused company called Regulus Therapeutics.

It's not clear yet whether antagomirs will remain the delivery vehicle of choice for microRNA silencers because the cholesterol they contain might harm the liver, says Srivastava. Although he uses them in animal experiments without apparent side effects, Srivastava suspects that they may not be acceptable for treating people.

The mirror image of these efforts--the attempt to boost rather than silence microRNAs for therapeutic purposes--may be just as big a challenge. When it comes to overexpressing a microRNA, "it's not as straightforward as I thought it would be," says Stoffel. The favored approach involves supplementing a weak supply of a microRNA by administering synthetic precursors, which cells would take up and process into mature microRNAs. But how to get the precursors into the body's cells isn't clear. Developing traditional small-molecule drugs that boost the activity of genes that encode microRNAs is widely considered a long shot. "I don't hold out a lot of hope for it," says Marshall.

From the pancreas to the liver
Stoffel has juggled his work on antagomirs with another pet project, identifying microRNAs that may play a role in diabetes. Stoffel screened insulin-producing beta cells derived from a mouse pancreas for highly expressed microRNAs. Ten showed up that had not been identified in other organs, and Stoffel's group has focused on miR-375, the one most strongly expressed by the beta cells. Unpublished work Stoffel has done in mice suggests that miR-375 helps islets in the pancreas adapt to certain stresses, such as pregnancy or obesity, which call on the body to produce extra insulin.

MicroRNA researchers are also considering how to beat back viral infections. Molecular virologist Bryan Cullen of Duke University in Durham, North Carolina, has puzzled over how viruses invading the human body interact with natural RNAi machinery. But recently, he began focusing on the microRNAs made by some viruses and whether they might give the invading pathogens an advantage against their host. Many viruses in the herpesvirus family, for example, "make a ton of microRNAs" themselves. "The champion at this point is Epstein-Barr virus, with 23," he says.

Preliminary research by labs in France and Germany suggests that disabling some of these viral microRNA genes makes the viruses less harmful to mice. But at this point, "it's hard for us to tell what's going on," says Cullen. He is collaborating with the company Regulus to determine just how important microRNAs are for the viruses that carry them. And viruses also appear to exploit certain human microRNAs: Regulus's first project will be blunting a microRNA in the human liver that seems to help the hepatitis C virus replicate, says John Maraganore, Alnylam's CEO.

Detecting cancer's first steps
The starting point for microRNAs' role in disease was cancer, and that line of inquiry remains arguably the most active. Broad screens of human tumor tissue have shown that microRNAs tend to be expressed differently in cancer cells compared with normal tissue of the same organ. Moreover, patterns of microRNA expression--certain ones overexpressed, others underexpressed--correlate with disease prognosis, according to retrospective studies of cancer patients.

In some cases in which a microRNA is underexpressed in a cancer, replenishing its supply in cancerous cells stops the disease from proliferating in animal models. But at least in petri dishes, extra amounts of certain microRNAs don't appear to affect normal cells, which already boast abundant supplies.

Figure 3 Fast track to cancer. Overexpressing a particular microRNA in some of a mouse's immune cells leads to leukemia; in a mouse without extra microRNA (left), liver tissue (pink) is normal, but in one with boosted microRNA (right), leukemia cells (blue) infiltrate the liver.

CREDIT: CARLO CROCE AND STEFAN COSTINEAN

In mice, certain microRNAs can be manipulated to drive cancer. Carlo Croce of Ohio State University, Columbus, one of the first in the cancer-microRNA arena, and others have found that artificially upregulating or down-regulating particular microRNAs can initiate or spur on the disease. Croce has founded a company, Crogen Pharmaceuticals, to tackle microRNA-based diagnostics, prognostics, and therapeutics in cancer. One of the first microRNA companies, Rosetta Genomics, was launched in Israel in 2000 and is also pouring resources into cancer.

To nail down the role of microRNAs in tumors, it's crucial to develop genetically engineered animals born without specific microRNAs, says Mendell of Johns Hopkins. "We need to do a better job of documenting their roles in cancer and documenting the mechanisms" by which they act.

That's tougher than it sounds. For example, Mendell has found that the protein produced by the oncogene myc, which is frequently active in cancer cells, downregulates dozens of microRNAs. But that's far from the whole story, for the microRNA-gene network is unimaginably complex. Although some proteins made by oncogenes home in on microRNAs, as Mendell describes, the reverse is also true, with other microRNAs controlling the activity of oncogenes. "The result is a series of interactions that can have a very potent effect" on cancer, says Mendell.

Beyond exploiting microRNA biology to treat cancer, many are eyeing potential diagnostics that would detect cancer at an early stage or diagnose it when standard approaches fail. One strategy is to examine microRNA expression patterns in metastatic tumors of unknown origin, a problem that occurs in 2% to 4% of cancers and presents treatment challenges. In 2005, a team led by Todd Golub at the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute in Boston described in Nature their effort to classify 17 tumors that couldn't be cataloged based on their appearance. They correctly identified the origins of 12 of the 17 based on microRNA patterns in tumors that vary slightly depending on where in the body the tumor originated. Traditional gene-expression signatures using messenger RNAs correctly identified just one.

Rosetta Genomics officials say they hope to begin selling three microRNA-based cancer diagnostic tests later this year; one will pin down tumors of unknown origin, and the others will help doctors distinguish between different lung-related cancers. In 2006, the company Asuragen in Austin, Texas, was launched and now focuses on microRNAs in body fluids as a cancer-diagnosis tool. Slack of Yale is one of the academics it's collaborating with. Company officials won't say much about their plans, beyond saying that Asuragen will concentrate on many major cancers, including lung, prostate, colon, breast, and stomach, and expects the development of microRNA-based diagnostics to take several years. Many microRNAs overlap among a number of cancers, which makes commercializing them less daunting. Recently, Asuragen closed on a second round of funding, garnering $18.5 million.

MicroRNAs in medicine "is a hot field," agrees Bruce Booth, a venture capitalist at Atlas Venture in Waltham, Massachusetts, who helped found and fund Miragen. Still, no one knows whether targeting microRNAs will wind up helping people--but if they do, they may play a huge role in patient care. "We're willing to take on higher risk with such significant upsides," says Booth. Like many others, he's betting big that his investment will pay off.


GENETIC RISK:With New Disease Genes, a Bounty of Questions

Science 28 March 2008:
Vol. 319. no. 5871, pp. 1754 - 1755
DOI: 10.1126/science.319.5871.1754

News Focus

GENETIC RISK:
With New Disease Genes, a Bounty of Questions

Jennifer Couzin

New techniques, including genome-wide associations, are identifying new disease risk factors; researchers are uncertain what they mean--and what to advise patients

Figure 1
CREDIT: MARK WEBER/GETTY IMAGES
Scientists trying to understand the factors that lead to breast cancer have a wealth of new leads to follow up. During the past couple of years, they have identified an alphabet soup of variations in DNA sequences--CHEK2, FGFR2, TNRC9--that appear to increase a woman's risk of getting breast cancer. But these new finds come with a host of questions--in particular, whether to test women for these genetic variations and what to tell those who carry them. It's been "a matter of uncertainty about how exactly to advise people" on this, says Mark Robson, a breast oncologist and clinic director of the clinical genetics service at Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center in New York City. For the most part, Robson says, he doesn't.

Counseling women about mutations in the widely cited BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes makes sense, says Robson, because they can increase breast cancer risk by as much as nine times--a risk "so high that it clearly exceeds most people's threshold for action." But what to do with a gene variant that shifts breast cancer risk from 13% to 16% over a woman's lifetime? Or one that puts diabetes risk at 9% instead of 7%? By comparison, environmental effects can have a much bigger impact: For example, heavy smokers in their 50s have a 6% risk of dying of lung cancer over 10 years compared with about 0.2% for nonsmokers.

In the last year or so, questions about what to do with the flood of data have taken on new urgency. Genome-wide association (GWA) scans--which survey the genomes of people with a particular disease and compare them with the genomes of those without--are turning up dozens of DNA variations that boost risk only modestly. The results have generated enormous excitement among researchers, long frustrated by their inability to find variants driving common adult diseases. But with the data come more questions.

Researchers are finding that even with all the new details from GWA studies, much of the canvas remains obscure. For example, the function of most GWA variants hasn't been determined; it's also not known whether different variants that increase risk slightly for a disease might interact with or add to one another to increase risk substantially. Nor is it clear how the variants might contribute to disease mechanisms or treatment. Will a public that's apparently hungry for genetic knowledge incorporate low-risk data into their lives? These and related questions--many of which came up at a meeting earlier this month at the U.S. National Institutes of Health in Bethesda, Maryland--have leaders in the field wondering how best to apply recent findings, where to focus the next round of studies, and how to convey often sketchy data to the public.

Risk tolerance
Some concerns about the public's reaction have already eased. Two years ago, behavioral epidemiologist Colleen McBride and human geneticist Lawrence Brody, both at the National Human Genome Research Institute, began examining how healthy individuals respond to disease risk information. They offered volunteers in Detroit, Michigan, the chance to learn whether they carried deleterious variants for eight health conditions, including diabetes, colon cancer, and osteoporosis. Because the variants are common, virtually everyone was expected to harbor at least a couple. Those monitoring the study's safety "were really worried, literally, that people were going to jump off bridges" when they learned that their risk of disease was increased, says McBride.

Among the 300 or so who have participated, that hasn't happened--quite the opposite. "They're not having big emotional responses," says McBride. The researchers are tracking the volunteers to see whether the information affects decisions to reduce disease risk, such as seeking out a smoking-cessation program or consulting with a nutritionist.

Behavioral specialists have shifted from worrying about the devastating effects of learning about these new genetic risks to wondering whether the information will make any impression at all. In some ways, this isn't surprising--after all, many people with high cholesterol or high blood pressure don't make lifestyle adjustments, even though the markers have a substantial effect on disease risk. One open question is whether "people perceive the information as more accurate when DNA is being used," says Theresa Marteau, a psychologist at King's College London. Her analysis of published studies found that rarely is genetic information regarded fatalistically, as predicting inevitable disease. Now she's considering whether there's something about genetics--perhaps its uniqueness or its perceived accuracy--that can help drive healthy behavior, even if it doesn't add much new information about risk.

Marteau is testing this hypothesis in people who have a close relative with Crohn's disease, an inflammatory disorder of the digestive tract, aiming to recruit about 540 individuals. Because of their family histories, the participants have a Crohn's risk of 2% to 6%, compared with 0.1% in the general population. But their risk is also high for another reason: All the people in Marteau's study are smokers, which about doubles their chance of developing the disease.

Marteau wants to know whether adding genetic information to a risk assessment--even if it doesn't dramatically change the actual risk of disease--makes her volunteers more likely to stop smoking. All participants will receive information based on family history; half will also be tested for a gene, Nod2, that boosts risk of Crohn's.

For many diseases, researchers are beginning to consider whether certain combinations of gene variants might have a major impact. In January, scientists reported in the New England Journal of Medicine that for men with a family history of prostate cancer, five genetic variants together increases risk roughly nine times. This is similar to a BRCA-linked risk for breast cancer. About 2% of men harbor four or five of the prostate cancer variants in question, says Jianfeng Xu, a genetic epidemiologist at Wake Forest University School of Medicine in Winston-Salem, North Carolina, who helped lead the study. Xu and his colleagues have formed a company to commercialize the test, which he expects will be sold to doctors starting late this spring.

Although a ninefold boost in risk for prostate cancer is substantial, Xu still worries that the measure is crude. Only about 15% to 20% of men diagnosed with prostate cancer need aggressive treatment, and a much better test would be one anticipating the likelihood of aggressive disease rather than any prostate cancer. Xu is now hunting for more informative variants and hopes to add them to the test when they've been identified.

The public appears hungry for such information: After his paper appeared, Xu received calls and e-mails from people with a family history of prostate cancer wanting to know their genetic risk. "I don't think we've been very good at anticipating that market forces were going to enter into it," says McBride, noting that researchers and physicians have been outraged by the proliferation of companies selling gene tests directly to consumers. DeCODE Genetics in Reykjavik, Iceland, recently began marketing risk tests for type 2 diabetes, atrial fibrillation and stroke, heart attack, and prostate cancer. Its prostate cancer test, released in February, includes the five variants Xu is focusing on along with three others.

Frontier zone
While physicians worry about how to convey the results of genetic tests to patients, some scientists are thinking more about what GWA studies are not turning up. GWA has established a list of 31 genes implicated in Crohn's disease, for example, but there's still a mystery about how the disease is inherited. None of the 31 genes has explained why Ashkenazi Jews--a genetically cohesive group--are disproportionately at risk for Crohn's. There must be a genetic component that "we're just not getting yet," says Judy Cho, head of the Inflammatory Bowel Disease Center at Yale University. Cho is beginning studies of copy number variation: duplication or loss of DNA stretches that may contribute to disease but aren't picked up in GWA scans.

Figure 2 Inherited risk? A Canadian group is looking for DNA that distinguishes people with a normal heart (top) from those with an occluded artery (bottom).

CREDIT: DR. MARINO LABINAZ/UNIVERSITY OF OTTAWA HEART INSTITUTE

In type 2 diabetes, notwithstanding some widely hailed GWA discoveries, "the proportion of heritability that we're picking up is relatively small, and that places serious limits on how good these are as individualized predictions in diagnostics," says Mark McCarthy, an endocrinologist at the University of Oxford in the U.K. "Despite all the giddy excitement, we're only capturing a very small proportion of what's out there." He suggests looking more closely at rare mutations, which, like copy number, are territory that GWA is not designed to capture.

GWA studies could also be skewed by the populations they cover. So far, most have been done on people of European origin, and it's not clear how well they'll translate to other groups. In heart disease, a DNA stretch called 9p21 that falls between genes has been replicated in four large GWA studies, but it's not standing out yet in African Americans. "We're still a little bit unclear about that," says Ruth McPherson, an expert in cardiovascular risk prevention at the University of Ottawa Heart Institute in Canada and one of those who first discovered 9p21. She says that she and her colleagues are "trying to understand if it's not a risk factor for disease among blacks." Complicating matters are the logistical challenges: Many patients in GWA studies of heart disease, says McPherson, are not defined based on coronary angiography, x-ray imaging of the arteries of the heart. Finding people who have undergone angiography to serve as controls is another "difficult problem," she says. Differences among populations and study designs suggest that failure to replicate a finding doesn't necessarily mean it was wrong, she and others say.

That argument isn't persuasive to David Cox, chief scientific officer of the company Perlegen Sciences in Mountain View, California. "You can come up with all sorts of reasons why [a GWA study] didn't replicate, but if you want to use this for any kind of prediction, it has to show up over and over again," he says. Cox worries that scientists are engaged in a love affair with GWA to the neglect of other strategies that can dissect disease. "It's like a huge stampede," he says.

One limitation of the technology, Cox notes, is that it likely won't pick up genetic variation that correlates with a person's response to medical treatments because the number of participants in a study would need to be enormous. Cox is working on this problem; his approach relies on rare gene variants to detect an effect that may be more potent than that conferred by common ones. Cox also questions how often GWA will lead researchers to new drug targets; the possibility has generated much hope and may yet pan out.

All these lingering questions are best solved by one strategy: "Find more of the genes," says McCarthy. "Think of how little of the territory we've covered." That solution--keep up the hunt--is drawing broad support.

Freedom of Expression

AS IN CIVIL SOCIETY, WHERE THERE MUST
necessarily be checks and balances on
freedom of expression, cells have evolved a
range of mechanisms to regulate the expression of
their constituent genes. By far the best-understood
medium for gene regulation is the protein transcription
factor. The broad set of rules by which these regulators operate is
outlined by Hobert (p. 1785). However, new and unexpected gene regulatory systems
have been discovered in the past decade, perhaps the most important of which involve
microRNAs (miRNAs). Hobert compares the action of these small noncoding
RNAs, found in many eukaryotes, with their proteinaceous counterparts, showing
that miRNAs share many similar activities but also display unique traits in their
compartmentalization, rapid reversibility, and evolvability. Makeyev and Maniatis
(p. 1789) provide examples of the profound systemwide influence that miRNAs can
have on gene expression programs. miRNAs are also being linked to a growing list of
common ailments, including cancer, heart disease, diabetes, and viral illnesses such
as hepatitis. In a related News story (p. 1782), Jennifer Couzin explores how miRNAs
are attracting the interest of biomedical researchers and biotechnology companies
eager for new ways to diagnose and treat diseases.
Another recently discovered RNA-based regulatory system is the riboswitch,
found in plant, fungal, and prokaryotic RNAs. Although they possess a deceptively
simple bipartite structure, Breaker (p. 1795) describes how their chemistry,
conformation, and kinetics have facilitated the evolution of sophisticated
gene-control systems. Indeed, the overwhelming regulatory potential of RNA is
graphically described by Amaral et al. (p. 1787), who list the many and varied
instances in which RNA has been implicated in regulatory events.
This is not to suggest that research on transcription factors is moribund―far
from it, as revealed by Core and Lis (p. 1791), for example, who discuss the
revival of earlier work revealing a critical regulatory step, the pausing of the RNA
polymerase II molecule, during the early phase of transcription elongation. The
often highly dispersed nature of transcription factor binding sites in many
eukaryotic genes provided the first clues that the spatial organization of the
genome can be critical for gene regulation; for example, allowing combinatorial
interactions between genes and regulatory elements, as described by Dekker
(p. 1793). Understanding the origins of these regulatory systems requires that
we examine how they have evolved, prompting Tuch et al. (p. 1797) to note
that orthologous regulatory circuits with similar transcriptional outputs can
nonetheless undergo massive rewiring in even closely related species.
Several gene regulatory systems are also highlighted in our online sister journal
Science Signaling (www.sciencemag.org/generegulation/): how oncogenic Ras
causes the epigenetic silencing of Fas and other tumor-suppressor genes, how
intrachromosomal looping positions enhancers close to the promoter of the tumor
necrosis factor�a gene to stimulate its expression in activated T cells, and how the
abundance of the transcriptional coactivator steroid receptor coactivator�3 controls
estrogen-dependent gene transcription.
�GUY RIDDIHOUGH, BEVERLY A. PURNELL, JOHN TRAVIS

What a beautiful day!

Bless all you people enjoy a good day!
 

原来做调查真的可以赚钱呢,哈哈

刚刚看自己的账户发现已经有了$10了,没想到还真可以赚到钱哈,哈哈