REVIEWS ne or multifunctiona tinctly different from inhibition of enzymatic activity by For example,many hanging mkTh0goadhceomenpeahg of a subsequent mark on a neighbouring nucleosome. o.F 24 n Ce 45. 28.1069-107B210 nin 8106-16 26 nter B 449 2019 47. a,M.e T6 and H 449 28. 48. 时 ation and 49. 878 50. 纱 1P002 31. Chi,P.Allis 51 f the Warbu 5 d br 33. 54. Epaeda of HDAC cB. D.B.et ol mutations at EZH2 Y64 50 56. d PRC2 4s-9459527 130770 AR20.603 58 00 58 R.et al.Th 05 010) with H Co 2008 0 420 6 20 OALt 7820101 as a 27e 65. 29 s.J.Neun thol.Exp.Newrol 69.575-58 acting t 20101 L M.et al SAH 398 MAY 2012 VOLUME 11 www.nature.com/reviews/drugdisc 2012 Macmillan Publishers Limited All riehts reservee multidomain nature of these proteins, and their participa￾tion in large protein complexes, there are probably several possibilities to target a single gene or multifunctional complex. For example, many of the enzymes or complexes that write histone marks also have reader domains for the same mark. This is thought to aid the enzyme in spreading the mark along chromatin by binding to the first written mark via the reader domain, thereby allowing the writing of a subsequent mark on a neighbouring nucleosome, and so on. Thus, targeting a reader domain involved in histone binding may result in cellular effects that are dis￾tinctly different from inhibition of enzymatic activity by changing the localization of enzymes or their complexes, or disrupting the positive feedback and spreading of the mark. Indeed, the recent expansion of exciting activities reported for bromodomain antagonists are examples of successful inhibition of protein–protein interactions and point to an exciting new frontier in drug discovery36,40,41,76. 1. Meaney, M. J. Epigenetics and the biological definition of gene×environment interactions. Child Dev. 81, 41–79 (2010). 2. Kelly, T. K., De Carvalho, D. D. & Jones, P. A. Epigenetic modifications as therapeutic targets. Nature Biotech. 28, 1069–1078 (2010). 3. Meaney, M. J. & Ferguson-Smith, A. C. Epigenetic regulation of the neural transcriptome: the meaning of the marks. Nature Neurosci. 13, 1313–1318 (2010). 4. Portela, A. & Esteller, M. Epigenetic modifications and human disease. Nature Biotech. 28, 1057–1068 (2010). 5. Allis, C. D., Jenuwein, T. & Reinberg, D. Epigenetics (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press, New York, 2007). 6. Taberlay, P. C. & Jones, P. A. DNA methylation and cancer. Prog. Drug Res. 67, 1–23 (2011). 7. Strahl, B. D. & Allis, C. D. The language of covalent histone modifications. Nature 403, 41–45 (2000). 8. Turner, B. M. Histone acetylation and an epigenetic code. Bioessays 22, 836–845 (2000). 9. Turner, B. M. Cellular memory and the histone code. Cell 111, 285–291 (2002). 10. Schreiber, S. L. & Bernstein, B. E. Signaling network model of chromatin. Cell 111, 771–778 (2002). 11. Ernst, J. et al. Mapping and analysis of chromatin state dynamics in nine human cell types. Nature 473, 43–49 (2011). 12. Allfrey, V. G., Faulkner, R. & Mirsky, A. E. Acetylation and methylation of histones and their possible role in the regulation of RNA synthesis. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 51, 786–794 (1964). References 7, 8 and 12 highlight the role of histone modifications in gene regulation, and the concept of an epigenetic code. 13. Shahbazian, M. D. & Grunstein, M. Functions of site-specific histone acetylation and deacetylation. Annu. Rev. Biochem. 76, 75–100 (2007). 14. Das, C., Lucia, M. S., Hansen, K. C. & Tyler, J. K. CBP/p300-mediated acetylation of histone H3 on lysine 56. Nature 459, 113–117 (2009). 15. Filippakopoulos, P. et al. Histone recognition and large-scale structural analysis of the human bromodomain family. Cell 30 Mar 2012 (doi:10.1016/j.cell.2012.02.013). This is a full structural analysis of the entire human bromodomain-containing family of proteins, which established the size and details of this target class. 16. Haynes, S. R. et al. The bromodomain: a conserved sequence found in human, Drosophila and yeast proteins. Nucleic Acids Res. 20, 2603 (1992). 17. Tsukada, Y. et al. Histone demethylation by a family of JmjC domain-containing proteins. Nature 439, 811–816 (2006). 18. Shi, Y. et al. Histone demethylation mediated by the nuclear amine oxidase homolog LSD1. Cell 119, 941–953 (2004). References 17 and 18 describe the discovery of the two classes of lysine demethylases, both of which belong to larger druggable enzyme classes. 19. Trojer, P. et al. L3MBTL1, a histone-methylation￾dependent chromatin lock. Cell 129, 915–928 (2007). 20. Nielsen, A. L. et al. Heterochromatin formation in mammalian cells: interaction between histones and HP1 proteins. Mol. Cell 7, 729–739 (2001). 21. Lee, M. G. et al. Demethylation of H3K27 regulates polycomb recruitment and H2A ubiquitination. Science 318, 447–450 (2007). 22. Kuzmichev, A., Nishioka, K., Erdjument-Bromage, H., Tempst, P. & Reinberg, D. Histone methyltransferase activity associated with a human multiprotein complex containing the Enhancer of Zeste protein. Genes Dev. 16, 2893–2905 (2002). 23. Bannister, A. J. & Kouzarides, T. Regulation of chromatin by histone modifications. Cell Res. 21, 381–395 (2011). 24. Kouzarides, T. Chromatin modifications and their function. Cell 128, 693–705 (2007). 25. Di Lorenzo, A. & Bedford, M. T. Histone arginine methylation. FEBS Lett. 585, 2024–2031 (2011). 26. Kirmizis, A. et al. Arginine methylation at histone H3R2 controls deposition of H3K4 trimethylation. Nature 449, 928–932 (2007). 27. Guccione, E. et al. Methylation of histone H3R2 by PRMT6 and H3K4 by an MLL complex are mutually exclusive. Nature 449, 933–937 (2007). 28. Jones, P. A. & Baylin, S. B. The epigenomics of cancer. Cell 128, 683–692 (2007). 29. Krennhrubec, K., Marshall, B. L., Hedglin, M., Verdin, E. & Ulrich, S. M. Design and evaluation of ‘Linkerless’ hydroxamic acids as selective HDAC8 inhibitors. Bioorg. Med. Chem. Lett. 17, 2874–2878 (2007). 30. Oehme, I. et al. Histone deacetylase 8 in neuroblastoma tumorigenesis. Clin. Cancer Res. 15, 91–99 (2009). 31. Chi, P., Allis, C. D. & Wang, G. G. Covalent histone modifications — miswritten, misinterpreted and mis-erased in human cancers. Nature Rev. Cancer 10, 457–469 (2010). This is a summary of the extensive number and types of ‘errors’ in epigenetic proteins implicated in cancer. 32. Simon, J. A. & Lange, C. A. Roles of the EZH2 histone methyltransferase in cancer epigenetics. Mutat. Res. 647, 21–29 (2008). 33. Okada, Y. et al. hDOT1L links histone methylation to leukemogenesis. Cell 121, 167–178 (2005). 34. Daigle, S. R. et al. Selective killing of mixed lineage leukemia cells by a potent small-molecule DOT1L inhibitor. Cancer Cell 20, 53–65 (2011). This is the first example of selective inhibition of a histone methyltransferase that has efficacy in a cancer model. 35. Yap, D. B. et al. Somatic mutations at EZH2 Y641 act dominantly through a mechanism of selectively altered PRC2 catalytic activity, to increase H3K27 trimethylation. Blood 117, 2451–2459 (2010). 36. Filippakopoulos, P. et al. Selective inhibition of BET bromodomains. Nature 468, 1067–1073 (2011). 37. Darnell, J. E. Jr. Transcription factors as targets for cancer therapy. Nature Rev. Cancer 2, 740–749 (2002). 38. Beroukhim, R. et al. The landscape of somatic copy-number alteration across human cancers. Nature 463, 899–905 (2010). 39. Meyer, N. & Penn, L. Z. Reflecting on 25 years with MYC. Nature Rev. Cancer 8, 976–990 (2008). 40. Delmore, J. E. et al. BET bromodomain inhibition as a therapeutic strategy to target c-Myc. Cell 146, 904–917 (2011). References 36 and 40 provide the first examples of bromodomain inhibition that has apparent therapeutic benefit. 41. Dawson, M. A. et al. Inhibition of BET recruitment to chromatin as an effective treatment for MLL-fusion leukaemia. Nature 478, 529–533 (2011). 42. Zuber, J. et al. RNAi screen identifies Brd4 as a therapeutic target in acute myeloid leukaemia. Nature 478, 524–528 (2011). 43. Kalashnikova, E. V. et al. ANCCA/ATAD2 overexpression identifies breast cancer patients with poor prognosis, acting to drive proliferation and survival of triple-negative cells through control of B-Myb and EZH2. Cancer Res. 70, 9402–9412 (2010). 44. Caron, C. et al. Functional characterization of ATAD2 as a new cancer/testis factor and a predictor of poor prognosis in breast and lung cancers. Oncogene 29, 5171–5181 (2010). 45. Zhang, Y. et al. PR-domain-containing Mds1–Evi1 is critical for long-term hematopoietic stem cell function. Blood 118, 3853–3861 (2011). 46. Velichutina, I. et al. EZH2-mediated epigenetic silencing in germinal center B cells contributes to proliferation and lymphomagenesis. Blood 116, 5247–5255 (2010). 47. Trubia, M. et al. Characterization of a recurrent translocation t(2;3)(p15–22;q26) occurring in acute myeloid leukaemia. Leukemia 20, 48–54 (2006). 48. Wang, G. G. et al. Haematopoietic malignancies caused by dysregulation of a chromatin-binding PHD finger. Nature 459, 847–851 (2009). 49. Parsons, D. W. et al. The genetic landscape of the childhood cancer medulloblastoma. Science 331, 435–439 (2011). 50. Northcott, P. A. et al. Multiple recurrent genetic events converge on control of histone lysine methylation in medulloblastoma. Nature Genet. 41, 465–472 (2009). 51. Wang, X. & Jin, H. The epigenetic basis of the Warburg effect. Epigenetics 5, 566–568 (2010). 52. Gorrini, C. et al. Tip60 is a haplo-insufficient tumour suppressor required for an oncogene-induced DNA damage response. Nature 448, 1063–1067 (2007). 53. Bouwman, P. et al. 53BP1 loss rescues BRCA1 deficiency and is associated with triple-negative and BRCA-mutated breast cancers. Nature Struct. Mol. Biol. 17, 688–695 (2010). 54. Williams, S. R. et al. Haploinsufficiency of HDAC4 causes brachydactyly mental retardation syndrome, with brachydactyly type E, developmental delays, and behavioral problems. Am. J. Hum. Genet. 87, 219–228 (2010). 55. Wang, J. et al. CBP histone acetyltransferase activity regulates embryonic neural differentiation in the normal and Rubinstein–Taybi syndrome brain. Dev. Cell 18, 114–125 (2010). 56. Chen, G., Zou, X., Watanabe, H., van Deursen, J. M. & Shen, J. CREB binding protein is required for both short-term and long-term memory formation. J. Neurosci. 30, 13066–13077 (2010). 57. Schaefer, A. et al. Control of cognition and adaptive behavior by the GLP/G9a epigenetic suppressor complex. Neuron 64, 678–691 (2009). 58. Kleefstra, T. et al. Further clinical and molecular delineation of the 9q subtelomeric deletion syndrome supports a major contribution of EHMT1 haploinsufficiency to the core phenotype. J. Med. Genet. 46, 598–606 (2009). 59. Kramer, J. M. & van Bokhoven, H. Genetic and epigenetic defects in mental retardation. Int. J. Biochem. Cell Biol. 41, 96–107 (2009). 60. Chiurazzi P., Schwartz C. E., Gecz, J. & Neri G. XLMR genes: update 2007. Eur. J. Hum. Genet. 16, 422–434 (2008). 61. Kleine-Kohlbrecher, D. et al. A functional link between the histone demethylase PHF8 and the transcription factor ZNF711 in X-linked mental retardation. Mol. Cell 38, 165–178 (2010). 62. Zakhary, S. M. et al. Distribution analysis of deacetylase SIRT1 in rodent and human nervous systems. Anat. Rec. (Hoboken) 293, 1024–1032 (2010). 63. Janssen, C. et al. Differential histone deacetylase mRNA expression patterns in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. J. Neuropathol. Exp. Neurol. 69, 573–581 (2010). 64. Riessland, M. et al. SAHA ameliorates the SMA phenotype in two mouse models for spinal muscular atrophy. Hum. Mol. Genet. 19, 1492–1506 (2010). REVIEWS 398 | MAY 2012 | VOLUME 11 www.nature.com/reviews/drugdisc © 2012 Macmillan Publishers Limited. All rights reserved