Transposable Elements Are Co-opted as Oncogenic Regulatory Elements by Lineage-Specific Transcription Factors in Prostate Cancer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Transposable elements hold regulatory functions that impact cell fate determination by controlling gene expression. However, little is known about the transcriptional machinery engaged at transposable elements in pluripotent and mature versus oncogenic cell states. Through positional analysis over repetitive DNA sequences of H3K27ac chromatin immunoprecipitation sequencing data from 32 normal cell states, we report pluripotent/stem and mature cell state-specific "regulatory transposable elements." Pluripotent/stem elements are binding sites for pluripotency factors (e.g., NANOG, SOX2, OCT4). Mature cell elements are docking sites for lineage-specific transcription factors, including AR and FOXA1 in prostate epithelium. Expanding the analysis to prostate tumors, we identify a subset of regulatory transposable elements shared with pluripotent/stem cells, including Tigger3a. Using chromatin editing technology, we show how such elements promote prostate cancer growth by regulating AR transcriptional activity. Collectively, our results suggest that oncogenesis arises from lineage-specific transcription factors hijacking pluripotent/stem cell regulatory transposable elements. SIGNIFICANCE: We show that oncogenesis relies on co-opting transposable elements from pluripotent stem cells as regulatory elements altering the recruitment of lineage-specific transcription factors. We further discover how co-option is dependent on active chromatin states with important implications for developing treatment options against drivers of oncogenesis across the repetitive DNA. This article is featured in Selected Articles from This Issue, p. 2293.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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 teacher head, 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".