No abstract

The MLL gene at chromosome 11, band q23, is involved in translocations with as many as 40 different chromosomal bands. Virtually all breakpoints occur within an 8.3 kb BamHI fragment and result in 5' MLL fused to partner genes in a 5'-3' orientation. The translocation t(9;11)(p22;q23), which results in the fusion of MLL to AF9, is the most common of the 11q23 chromosomal abnormalities observed in de novo acute myeloid leukemia (AML), in therapy related leukemia (t-AML), and rarely in acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL). We have studied 24 patients with a t(9;11) and an MLL rearrangement, including 19 patients with AML, four with t-AML, and one with ALL. To understand the mechanisms of this illegitimate recombination, we cloned and sequenced the t(9;11) translocation breakpoint junctions on both derivative chromosomes from one AML patient and from the Mono Mac 6 (MM6) cell line, which was derived from a patient with AML. Two different complex junctions were noted. In the AML patient, both chromosome 11 and 9 breaks were staggered, occurred in Alu DNA sequences, and resulted in a 331 bp duplication. In the MM6 cell line, breaks in chromosomes 11 and 9 were also staggered, but, in contrast to the finding in the AML patient, the breaks did not involve Alu DNA sequences and resulted in a 664 bp deletion at the breakpoints. Using reverse transcriptase (RT-) PCR, we analyzed 11 patient samples, including the two just described, for MML-AF9 fusions. The fusion occurred in six of seven AML patients, two of two t-AML patients, one patient with ALL, and in the MM6 cell line. Interestingly, all of the breaks within the AF9 gene in AML patients occurred in the central AF9 exon, called Site A by others, whereas in the single ALL patient the breakpoint mapped to a more 3' region of the AF9 gene. Our data, when combined with those of others, suggest that the fusion point within the AF9 gene, and thus the amount of AF9 material included in the MLL-AF9 fusion gene product, may influence the phenotype of the resulting leukemia. This further supports the proposal that the MML translocation partner genes play a critical role in the leukemogenic process.

A major unresolved question for 11q23 translocations involving MLL is the chromosomal mechanism(s) leading to these translocations. We have mapped breakpoints within the 8.3-kb BamHI breakpoint cluster region in 31 patients with acute lymphoblastic leukemia and acute myeloid leukemia (AML) de novo and in 8 t-AML patients. In 23 of 31 leukemia de novo patients, MLL breakpoints mapped to the centromeric half (4.57 kb) of the breakpoint cluster region, whereas those in eight de novo patients mapped to the telomeric half (3.87 kb). In contrast, only two t-AML breakpoints mapped in the centromeric half, whereas six mapped in the telomeric half. The difference in distribution of the leukemia de novo breakpoints is statistically significant (P = .02). A similar difference in distribution of breakpoints between de novo patients and t-AML patients has been reported by others. We identified a low- or weak-affinity scaffold attachment region (SAR) mapping just centromeric to the breakpoint cluster region, and a high-affinity SAR mapping within the telomeric half of the breakpoint cluster region. Using high stringency criteria to define in vitro vertebrate topoisomerase II (topo II) consensus sites, one topo II site mapped adjacent to the telomeric SAR, whereas six mapped within the SAR. Therefore, 74% of leukemia de novo and 25% of t-AML breakpoints map to the centromeric half of the breakpoint cluster region map between the two SARs; in contrast, 26% of the leukemia de novo and 75% of the t-AML patient breakpoints map to the telomeric half of the breakpoint cluster region that contains both the telomeric SAR and the topo II sites. Thus, the chromatin structure of the MLL breakpoint cluster region may be important in determining the distribution of the breakpoints. The data suggest that the mechanism(s) leading to translocations may differ in leukemia de novo and in t-AML.