Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2013 Jun 12.
Published in final edited form as: Nature. 2011 Oct 2;478(7370):529–533. doi: 10.1038/nature10509

Figure 3. Transcriptome and ChIP analyses provide mechanistic insights for the efficacy of I-BET151.

Figure 3

(A) Volcano plots for DMSO vs I-BET151 treated samples, showing the adjusted significance p-value (log10) vs. fold change (log2). (B) Correlation of log2 fold change between MV411/MOLM131 across all genes. Notably no genes show opposing expression changes. Lines represent the identity line (black solid), the line of best fit (black dotted), or log2 fold-change threshold values (green dotted). (C) Heatmap of top 100 genes down-regulated following treatment with IBET151. (D) BCL2 gene-expression (normalized to B2M expression) is shown. Expression level of BCL2 in DMSO was assigned a value of 1. (E) Immunoblotting demonstrating a decrease in BCL2 and an increase in cleaved PARP (*) after IBET151 treatment. (F) ChIP analysis at the TSS 3′-end of BCL2 is illustrated. Bar graphs are represented as the mean enrichment relative to input and error bars reflect standard deviation of results derived from biological triplicate experiments.