The acute myeloid leukemia fusion protein AML1-ETO targets E proteins via a paired amphipathic helix-like TBP-associated factor homology domain
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Up to 15% of acute myeloid leukemias (AMLs) are characterized by the abnormal expression of the eight-twenty-one (ETO) transcriptional corepressor within an AML1-ETO fusion protein. The t(8;21) chromosomal translocation serves not only to disrupt WT AML1 function but also to introduce ETO activity during hematopoiesis. AML1-ETO was recently shown to inhibit E protein transactivation by physically displacing WT coactivator proteins in an interaction mediated by ETO. Here, we present the 3D solution structure of the human ETO TAFH (eTAFH) domain implicated in AML1-ETO:E protein interactions and report an unexpected fold similarity to paired amphipathic helix domains from the transcriptional corepressor Sin3. We identify and characterize a conserved surface on eTAFH that is essential for ETO:E protein recognition and show that the mutation of key conserved residues at this site alleviates ETO-based silencing of E protein transactivation. Our results address uncharacterized aspects of the corepression mechanism of ETO and suggest that eTAFH may serve to recruit ETO (or AML1-ETO) to DNA-bound transcription factors. Together, these findings imply that a cofactor exchange mechanism, analogous to that described for E protein inhibition, may represent a common mode of action for ETO.
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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".