1
|
Indeglia A, Murphy ME. Elucidating the chain of command: our current understanding of critical target genes for p53-mediated tumor suppression. Crit Rev Biochem Mol Biol 2024; 59:128-138. [PMID: 38661126 PMCID: PMC11209770 DOI: 10.1080/10409238.2024.2344465] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/31/2024] [Accepted: 04/15/2024] [Indexed: 04/26/2024]
Abstract
TP53 encodes a transcription factor that is centrally-involved in several pathways, including the control of metabolism, the stress response, DNA repair, cell cycle arrest, senescence, programmed cell death, and others. Since the discovery of TP53 as the most frequently-mutated tumor suppressor gene in cancer over four decades ago, the field has focused on uncovering target genes of this transcription factor that are essential for tumor suppression. This search has been fraught with red herrings, however. Dozens of p53 target genes were discovered that had logical roles in tumor suppression, but subsequent data showed that most were not tumor suppressive, and were dispensable for p53-mediated tumor suppression. In this review, we focus on p53 transcriptional targets in two categories: (1) canonical targets like CDKN1A (p21) and BBC3 (PUMA), which clearly play critical roles in p53-mediated cell cycle arrest/senescence and cell death, but which are not mutated in cancer, and for which knockout mice fail to develop spontaneous tumors; and (2) a smaller category of recently-described p53 target genes that are mutated in human cancer, and which appear to be critical for tumor suppression by p53. Interestingly, many of these genes encode proteins that control broad cellular pathways, like splicing and protein degradation, and several of them encode proteins that feed back to regulate p53. These include ZMAT3, GLS2, PADI4, ZBXW7, RFX7, and BTG2. The findings from these studies provide a more complex, but exciting, potential framework for understanding the role of p53 in tumor suppression.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Alexandra Indeglia
- The Wistar Institute, Philadelphia PA 19104
- Biochemistry and Molecular Biophysics Graduate Group, The University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia PA 19104
| | | |
Collapse
|
2
|
Levine AJ, Carpten JD, Murphy M, Hainaut P. Exploring the genetic and molecular basis of differences in multiple myeloma of individuals of African and European descent. Cell Death Differ 2024; 31:1-8. [PMID: 38001255 PMCID: PMC10781774 DOI: 10.1038/s41418-023-01236-8] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/02/2023] [Revised: 10/08/2023] [Accepted: 10/30/2023] [Indexed: 11/26/2023] Open
Abstract
Multiple Myeloma is a typical example of a neoplasm that shows significant differences in incidence, age of onset, type, and frequency of genetic alterations between patients of African and European ancestry. This perspective explores the hypothesis that both genetic polymorphisms and spontaneous somatic mutations in the TP53 tumor suppressor gene are determinants of these differences. In the US, the rates of occurrence of MM are at least twice as high in African Americans (AA) as in Caucasian Americans (CA). Strikingly, somatic TP53 mutations occur in large excess (at least 4-6-fold) in CA versus AA. On the other hand, TP53 contains polymorphisms specifying amino-acid differences that are under natural selection by the latitude of a population and have evolved during the migrations of humans over several hundred thousand years. The p53 protein plays important roles in DNA strand break repair and, therefore, in the surveillance of aberrant DNA recombination, leading to the B-cell translocations that are causal in the pathogenesis of MM. We posit that polymorphisms in one region of the TP53 gene (introns 2 and 3, and the proline-rich domain) specify a concentration of the p53 protein with a higher capacity to repress translocations in CA than AA patients. This, in turn, results in a higher risk of acquiring inactivating, somatic mutations in a different region of the TP53 gene (DNA binding domain) in CA than in AA patients. Such a mechanism, by which the polymorphic status of a gene influencing its own "spontaneous" mutation frequency, may provide a genetic basis to address ethnicity-related differences in the incidence and phenotypes of many different forms of cancer.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Arnold J Levine
- Simons Center for Systems Biology, Institute for Advanced Study, Princeton, NJ, USA.
| | - John D Carpten
- City of Hope Comprehensive Cancer Center, Duarte, CA, USA
| | | | - Pierre Hainaut
- Institute for Advanced Biosciences, Université Grenoble Alpes, Grenoble, France
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Carter T, Valenzuela RK, Yerukala Sathipati S, Medina-Flores R. Gene signatures associated with prognosis and chemotherapy resistance in glioblastoma treated with temozolomide. Front Genet 2023; 14:1320789. [PMID: 38259614 PMCID: PMC10802164 DOI: 10.3389/fgene.2023.1320789] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/12/2023] [Accepted: 12/06/2023] [Indexed: 01/24/2024] Open
Abstract
Background: Glioblastoma (GBM) prognosis remains extremely poor despite standard treatment that includes temozolomide (TMZ) chemotherapy. To discover new GBM drug targets and biomarkers, genes signatures associated with survival and TMZ resistance in GBM patients treated with TMZ were identified. Methods: GBM cases in The Cancer Genome Atlas who received TMZ (n = 221) were stratified into subgroups that differed by median overall survival (mOS) using network-based stratification to cluster patients whose somatic mutations affected genes in similar modules of a gene interaction network. Gene signatures formed from differentially mutated genes in the subgroup with the longest mOS were used to confirm their association with survival and TMZ resistance in independent datasets. Somatic mutations in these genes also were assessed for an association with OS in an independent group of 37 GBM cases. Results: Among the four subgroups identified, subgroup four (n = 71 subjects) exhibited the longest mOS at 18.3 months (95% confidence interval: 16.2, 34.1; p = 0.0324). Subsets of the 86 genes that were differentially mutated in this subgroup formed 20-gene and 8-gene signatures that predicted OS in two independent datasets (Spearman's rho of 0.64 and 0.58 between actual and predicted OS; p < 0.001). Patients with mutations in five of the 86 genes had longer OS in a small, independent sample of 37 GBM cases, but this association did not reach statistical significance (p = 0.07). Thirty-one of the 86 genes formed signatures that distinguished TMZ-resistant GBM samples from controls in three independent datasets (area under the curve ≥ 0.75). The prognostic and TMZ-resistance signatures had eight genes in common (ANG, BACH1, CDKN2C, HMGA1, IFI16, PADI4, SDF4, and TP53INP1). The latter three genes have not been associated with GBM previously. Conclusion: PADI4, SDF4, and TP53INP1 are novel therapy and biomarker candidates for GBM. Further investigation of their oncologic functions may provide new insight into GBM treatment resistance mechanisms.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Tonia Carter
- Center for Precision Medicine Research, Marshfield Clinic Research Institute, Marshfield, WI, United States
| | - Robert K. Valenzuela
- Center for Precision Medicine Research, Marshfield Clinic Research Institute, Marshfield, WI, United States
| | | | - Rafael Medina-Flores
- Department of Pathology (Neuropathology), Marshfield Clinic, Marshfield, WI, United States
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Zhou Y, Nakajima R, Shirasawa M, Fikriyanti M, Zhao L, Iwanaga R, Bradford AP, Kurayoshi K, Araki K, Ohtani K. Expanding Roles of the E2F-RB-p53 Pathway in Tumor Suppression. BIOLOGY 2023; 12:1511. [PMID: 38132337 PMCID: PMC10740672 DOI: 10.3390/biology12121511] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/06/2023] [Revised: 12/03/2023] [Accepted: 12/06/2023] [Indexed: 12/23/2023]
Abstract
The transcription factor E2F links the RB pathway to the p53 pathway upon loss of function of pRB, thereby playing a pivotal role in the suppression of tumorigenesis. E2F fulfills a major role in cell proliferation by controlling a variety of growth-associated genes. The activity of E2F is controlled by the tumor suppressor pRB, which binds to E2F and actively suppresses target gene expression, thereby restraining cell proliferation. Signaling pathways originating from growth stimulative and growth suppressive signals converge on pRB (the RB pathway) to regulate E2F activity. In most cancers, the function of pRB is compromised by oncogenic mutations, and E2F activity is enhanced, thereby facilitating cell proliferation to promote tumorigenesis. Upon such events, E2F activates the Arf tumor suppressor gene, leading to activation of the tumor suppressor p53 to protect cells from tumorigenesis. ARF inactivates MDM2, which facilitates degradation of p53 through proteasome by ubiquitination (the p53 pathway). P53 suppresses tumorigenesis by inducing cellular senescence or apoptosis. Hence, in almost all cancers, the p53 pathway is also disabled. Here we will introduce the canonical functions of the RB-E2F-p53 pathway first and then the non-classical functions of each component, which may be relevant to cancer biology.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yaxuan Zhou
- Department of Biomedical Sciences, School of Biological and Environmental Sciences, Kwansei Gakuin University, 1 Gakuen Uegahara, Sanda, Hyogo 669-1330, Japan; (Y.Z.); (R.N.); (M.S.); (M.F.); (L.Z.)
| | - Rinka Nakajima
- Department of Biomedical Sciences, School of Biological and Environmental Sciences, Kwansei Gakuin University, 1 Gakuen Uegahara, Sanda, Hyogo 669-1330, Japan; (Y.Z.); (R.N.); (M.S.); (M.F.); (L.Z.)
| | - Mashiro Shirasawa
- Department of Biomedical Sciences, School of Biological and Environmental Sciences, Kwansei Gakuin University, 1 Gakuen Uegahara, Sanda, Hyogo 669-1330, Japan; (Y.Z.); (R.N.); (M.S.); (M.F.); (L.Z.)
| | - Mariana Fikriyanti
- Department of Biomedical Sciences, School of Biological and Environmental Sciences, Kwansei Gakuin University, 1 Gakuen Uegahara, Sanda, Hyogo 669-1330, Japan; (Y.Z.); (R.N.); (M.S.); (M.F.); (L.Z.)
| | - Lin Zhao
- Department of Biomedical Sciences, School of Biological and Environmental Sciences, Kwansei Gakuin University, 1 Gakuen Uegahara, Sanda, Hyogo 669-1330, Japan; (Y.Z.); (R.N.); (M.S.); (M.F.); (L.Z.)
| | - Ritsuko Iwanaga
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Anschutz Medical Campus, 12800 East 19th Avenue, Aurora, CO 80045, USA; (R.I.); (A.P.B.)
| | - Andrew P. Bradford
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Colorado School of Medicine, Anschutz Medical Campus, 12800 East 19th Avenue, Aurora, CO 80045, USA; (R.I.); (A.P.B.)
| | - Kenta Kurayoshi
- Division of Molecular Genetics, Cancer Research Institute, Kanazawa University, Kakuma-machi, Kanazawa 920-1192, Japan;
| | - Keigo Araki
- Department of Morphological Biology, Ohu University School of Dentistry, 31-1 Misumido Tomitamachi, Koriyama, Fukushima 963-8611, Japan;
| | - Kiyoshi Ohtani
- Department of Biomedical Sciences, School of Biological and Environmental Sciences, Kwansei Gakuin University, 1 Gakuen Uegahara, Sanda, Hyogo 669-1330, Japan; (Y.Z.); (R.N.); (M.S.); (M.F.); (L.Z.)
| |
Collapse
|