Polycomb Repressive Complex 2 Confers BRG1 Dependency on the <i>CIITA</i> Locus
Bibliographic record
Abstract
CIITA (or MHC2TA) coordinates constitutive and IFN-γ-induced expression of MHC class II genes. IFN-γ responsiveness of CIITA requires BRG1 (SMARCA4), the ATPase engine of the chromatin remodeling SWI/SNF complex (also called BAF). SWI/SNF is defective in many human cancers, providing a mechanism to explain IFN-γ resistance. BRG1 dependency is mediated through remote elements. Short CIITA reporters lacking these elements respond to IFN-γ, even in BRG1-deficient cells, suggesting that BRG1 counters a remote repressive influence. The nature of this distal repressor is unknown, but it would represent a valuable therapeutic target to reactivate IFN-γ responsiveness in cancer. In this article, we show that the polycomb repressive complex 2 (PRC2) components EZH2 and SUZ12, as well as the associated histone mark H3K27me3, are codetected at interenhancer regions across the CIITA locus. IFN-γ caused a BRG1-dependent reduction in H3K27me3, associated with nucleosome displacement. SUZ12 knockdown restored IFN-γ responsiveness in BRG1-null cells, and it mimicked the ability of BRG1 to induce active histone modifications (H3K27ac, H3K4me) at the -50-kb enhancer. Thus, PRC2 confers BRG1 dependency on the CIITA locus. Our data suggest that, in addition to its known roles in promoting stemness and proliferation, PRC2 may inhibit immune surveillance, and it could be targeted to reactivate CIITA expression in SWI/SNF deficient cancers.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".