Combining analysis of host proteome and transcriptome perturbations induced by tumour virus proteins with ongoing genome-wide studies of cancer facilitates the prioritization of cancer genes. This systematic search for host targets of tumour viruses, using proteome and transcriptome analyses of viral proteins from mammalian DNA viruses with transforming or tumorigenic properties, provides an extensive catalogue of changes in genetic and protein expression that can be screened against genome-wide studies of cancer. The study focuses on human papillomavirus, Epstein–Barr virus, adenovirus and polyomavirus. The resulting list of transforming viral protein targets identifies causal genes within both somatic and Mendelian cancer-associated loci. Genotypic differences greatly influence susceptibility and resistance to disease. Understanding genotype–phenotype relationships requires that phenotypes be viewed as manifestations of network properties, rather than simply as the result of individual genomic variations1. Genome sequencing efforts have identified numerous germline mutations, and large numbers of somatic genomic alterations, associated with a predisposition to cancer2. However, it remains difficult to distinguish background, or ‘passenger’, cancer mutations from causal, or ‘driver’, mutations in these data sets. Human viruses intrinsically depend on their host cell during the course of infection and can elicit pathological phenotypes similar to those arising from mutations3. Here we test the hypothesis that genomic variations and tumour viruses may cause cancer through related mechanisms, by systematically examining host interactome and transcriptome network perturbations caused by DNA tumour virus proteins. The resulting integrated viral perturbation data reflects rewiring of the host cell networks, and highlights pathways, such as Notch signalling and apoptosis, that go awry in cancer. We show that systematic analyses of host targets of viral proteins can identify cancer genes with a success rate on a par with their identification through functional genomics and large-scale cataloguing of tumour mutations. Together, these complementary approaches increase the specificity of cancer gene identification. Combining systems-level studies of pathogen-encoded gene products with genomic approaches will facilitate the prioritization of cancer-causing driver genes to advance the understanding of the genetic basis of human cancer.

In the absence of growth signals, cells exit the cell cycle and enter into G0 or quiescence. Alternatively, cells enter senescence in response to inappropriate growth signals such as oncogene expression. The molecular mechanisms required for cell cycle exit into quiescence or senescence are poorly understood. The DREAM (DP, RB [retinoblastoma], E2F, and MuvB) complex represses cell cycle-dependent genes during quiescence. DREAM contains p130, E2F4, DP1, and a stable core complex of five MuvB-like proteins: LIN9, LIN37, LIN52, LIN54, and RBBP4. In mammalian cells, the MuvB core dissociates from p130 upon entry into the cell cycle and binds to BMYB during S phase to activate the transcription of genes expressed late in the cell cycle. We used mass spectroscopic analysis to identify phosphorylation sites that regulate the switch of the MuvB core from BMYB to DREAM. Here we report that DYRK1A can specifically phosphorylate LIN52 on serine residue 28, and that this phosphorylation is required for DREAM assembly. Inhibiting DYRK1A activity or point mutation of LIN52 disrupts DREAM assembly and reduces the ability of cells to enter quiescence or undergo Ras-induced senescence. These data reveal an important role for DYRK1A in the regulation of DREAM activity and entry into quiescence.

The DREAM complex represses cell cycle genes during quiescence through scaffolding MuvB proteins with E2F4/5 and the Rb tumor suppressor paralog p107 or p130. Upon cell cycle entry, MuvB dissociates from p107/p130 and recruits B-Myb and FoxM1 for up-regulating mitotic gene expression. To understand the biochemical mechanisms underpinning DREAM function and regulation, we investigated the structural basis for DREAM assembly. We identified a sequence in the MuvB component LIN52 that binds directly to the pocket domains of p107 and p130 when phosphorylated on the DYRK1A kinase site S28. A crystal structure of the LIN52–p107 complex reveals that LIN52 uses a suboptimal LxSxExL sequence together with the phosphate at nearby S28 to bind the LxCxE cleft of the pocket domain with high affinity. The structure explains the specificity for p107/p130 over Rb in the DREAM complex and how the complex is disrupted by viral oncoproteins. Based on insights from the structure, we addressed how DREAM is disassembled upon cell cycle entry. We found that p130 and B-Myb can both bind the core MuvB complex simultaneously but that cyclin-dependent kinase phosphorylation of p130 weakens its association. Together, our data inform a novel target interface for studying MuvB and p130 function and the design of inhibitors that prevent tumor escape in quiescence.

Cell cycle-dependent gene expression is often controlled on the transcriptional level. Genes like cyclin B, CDC2 and CDC25C are regulated by cell cycle-dependent element (CDE) and cell cycle genes homology region (CHR) promoter elements mainly through repression in G ₀ /G ₁ . It had been suggested that E2F4 binding to CDE sites is central to transcriptional regulation. However, some promoters are only controlled by a CHR. We identify the DREAM complex binding to the CHR of mouse and human cyclin B2 promoters in G ₀ . Association of DREAM and cell cycle-dependent regulation is abrogated when the CHR is mutated. Although E2f4 is part of the complex, a CDE is not essential but can enhance binding of DREAM. We show that the CHR element is not only necessary for repression of gene transcription in G ₀ /G ₁ , but also for activation in S, G ₂ and M phases. In proliferating cells, the B-myb-containing MMB complex binds the CHR of both promoters independently of the CDE. Bioinformatic analyses identify many genes which contain conserved CHR elements in promoters binding the DREAM complex. With Ube2c as an example from that screen, we show that inverse CHR sites are functional promoter elements that can bind DREAM and MMB. Our findings indicate that the CHR is central to DREAM/MMB-dependent transcriptional control during the cell cycle.

PRB-mediated inhibition of cell proliferation is a complex process that depends on the action of many proteins. However, little is known about the specific pathways that cooperate with the Retinoblastoma protein (pRB) and the variables that influence pRB's ability to arrest tumor cells. Here we describe two shRNA screens that identify kinases that are important for pRB to suppress cell proliferation and pRB-mediated induction of senescence markers. The results reveal an unexpected effect of LATS2, a component of the Hippo pathway, on pRB-induced phenotypes. Partial knockdown of LATS2 strongly suppresses some pRB-induced senescence markers. Further analysis shows that LATS2 cooperates with pRB to promote the silencing of E2F target genes, and that reduced levels of LATS2 lead to defects in the assembly of DREAM (DP, RB [retinoblastoma], E2F, and MuvB) repressor complexes at E2F-regulated promoters. Kinase assays show that LATS2 can phosphorylate DYRK1A, and that it enhances the ability of DYRK1A to phosphorylate the DREAM subunit LIN52. Intriguingly, the LATS2 locus is physically linked with RB1 on 13q, and this region frequently displays loss of heterozygosity in human cancers. Our results reveal a functional connection between the pRB and Hippo tumor suppressor pathways, and suggest that low levels of LATS2 may undermine the ability of pRB to induce a permanent cell cycle arrest in tumor cells.