Fig. 3: Loss of FGFR1 affects cell cycle progression and downregulates the expression of PRC2 core member EZH2.

(A) Venn Diagram showing the differentially expressed gene in shFGFR1 vs. Vec ctrl analysis (p < 0.05, FC > 2) (B) Enrichment of the DEG obtained in panel A using Enrichr (C) Heatmap to show expression of MCL proliferation signature genes (PSG) in FGFR1 VC vs. knockdown cells of MCL cell lines Z-138 and Granta-519. (D) Cell cycle analysis determined the percentage of the G1 population in VC vs. shFGFR1 cells of Z-138 and Granta-519. (E) Cell cycle analysis determined the percentage of the G1 population in control vs. erdafitinib treated (16 h) cells of Z-138 and Granta-519. 2-way ANOVA (a = 0.05). (F) The hockey plot for the TF co-expressed with DEG was determined by ARCHS analysis. (G) Western blots show EZH2 expression in Z-138, Granta-519, Jeko-1R, and SP-49R control vs. shFGFR1 cells; EZH2 expression in Z138 was probed on the same blot from Fig. S2H. (H) Western blots show EZH2 expression in Z-138, Granta-519, Mino, and Jeko-1R cells upon erdafitinib treatment. (I) Co-immunoprecipitation of EZH2 and KDM2B (PRC1.1), SUZ12 (PRC2) or PCGF4 (PRC1) followed by western blot in Jeko-1R and Z-138 cells. 2% input was loaded with IP with appropriate IgG isotype control, followed by an IP-EZH2 sample.