DNAJA1 controls the fate of misfolded mutant p53 through the mevalonate pathway

Nature Cell Biology

Volumn 18, Issue 11, 2016, Pages 1233-1243

  Parrales, Alejandro ^a   Ranjan, Atul ^a   Iyer, Swathi V ^a   Padhye, Subhash ^b   Weir, Scott J ^a   Roy, Anuradha ^c   Iwakuma, Tomoo ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF KANSAS SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^b Abeda Inamdar Senior College   (India)

^c UNIVERSITY OF KANSAS   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ATORVASTATIN; COMPACTIN; DOXORUBICIN; HYDROXYMETHYLGLUTARYL COENZYME A REDUCTASE; MEVALONATE KINASE; MEVALONIC ACID; MEVINOLIN; MUTANT PROTEIN; PHOSPHOMEVALONATE KINASE; PROTEIN P53; ROSUVASTATIN; UBIQUITIN PROTEIN LIGASE E3; DNA; DNAJA1 PROTEIN, HUMAN; HEAT SHOCK PROTEIN 40; PROTEIN BINDING; TP53 PROTEIN, HUMAN;

ANIMAL CELL; ANIMAL EXPERIMENT; ANIMAL MODEL; ANIMAL TISSUE; ARTICLE; CANCER INHIBITION; CELL GROWTH; CHEMOSENSITIZATION; CONCENTRATION RESPONSE; CONTROLLED STUDY; DNAJA1 GENE; DRUG EFFECT; DRUG MECHANISM; EMBRYO; ENZYME INHIBITION; FEMALE; GENE CONTROL; GENE EXPRESSION REGULATION; GENE FUNCTION; GENE INTERACTION; GENE OVEREXPRESSION; GENE SILENCING; GROWTH INHIBITION; HIGH THROUGHPUT SCREENING; HUMAN; HUMAN CELL; MOUSE; NONHUMAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROTEIN DEGRADATION; PROTEIN INDUCTION; PROTEIN LOCALIZATION; PROTEIN MISFOLDING; PROTEIN TRANSPORT; SIGNAL TRANSDUCTION; TUMOR SUPPRESSOR GENE; UBIQUITINATION; UPREGULATION; WILD TYPE; CELL MOTION; CELL TRANSFORMATION; DRUG EFFECTS; GENETICS; METABOLISM; MUTATION; TUMOR CELL LINE;

CELL LINE, TUMOR; CELL MOVEMENT; CELL TRANSFORMATION, NEOPLASTIC; DNA; HSP40 HEAT-SHOCK PROTEINS; HUMANS; MEVALONIC ACID; MUTATION; PROTEIN BINDING; TUMOR SUPPRESSOR PROTEIN P53; UBIQUITINATION;

EID: 84992425403     PISSN: 14657392     EISSN: 14764679     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1038/ncb3427     Document Type: Article

References (34)

1. Lane, D. & Levine, A. p53 research: the past thirty years and the next thirty years. Cold Spring Harb. Perspect. Biol. 2, a000893 (2010).
2. Levav-Cohen, Y. et al. The p53-Mdm2 loop: a critical juncture of stress response. Subcell. Biochem. 85, 161-186 (2014).
3. Rivlin, N., Koifman, G. & Rotter, V. p53 orchestrates between normal differentiation and cancer. Semin. Cancer Biol. 32, 10-17 (2015).
4. Boeckler, F. M. et al. Targeted rescue of a destabilized mutant of p53 by an in silico screened drug. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 105, 10360-10365 (2008).
5. Terzian, T. et al. The inherent instability of mutant p53 is alleviated by Mdm2 or p16INK4a loss. Genes Dev. 22, 1337-1344 (2008).
6. Lukashchuk, N. & Vousden, K. H. Ubiquitination and degradation of mutant p53. Mol. Cell. Biol. 27, 8284-8295 (2007).
7. Alexandrova, E. M. et al. Improving survival by exploiting tumour dependence on stabilized mutant p53 for treatment. Nature 523, 352-356 (2015).
8. Masciarelli, S. et al. Gain-of-function mutant p53 downregulates miR-223 contributing to chemoresistance of cultured tumor cells. Oncogene 33, 1601-1608 (2014).
9. Rivlin, N., Brosh, R., Oren, M. & Rotter, V. Mutations in the p53 tumor suppressor gene: important milestones at the various steps of tumorigenesis. Genes Cancer 2, 466-474 (2011).
10. Zhong, S. et al. Statin use and mortality in cancer patients: Systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies. Cancer Treat. Rev. 41, 554-567 (2015).
11. Li, M. et al. Mono-versus polyubiquitination: differential control of p53 fate by Mdm2. Science 302, 1972-1975 (2003).
12. Altwairgi, A. K. Statins are potential anticancerous agents (review). Oncol. Rep. 33, 1019-1039 (2015).
13. Shimoyama, S. Statins are logical candidates for overcoming limitations of targeting therapies on malignancy: their potential application to gastrointestinal cancers. Cancer Chemother. Pharmacol. 67, 729-739 (2011).
14. Freed-Pastor, W. A. et al. Mutant p53 disrupts mammary tissue architecture via the mevalonate pathway. Cell 148, 244-258 (2012).
15. Varley, J. M. et al. A detailed study of loss of heterozygosity on chromosome 17 in tumours from Li-Fraumeni patients carrying a mutation to the TP53 gene. Oncogene 14, 865-871 (1997).
16. Venkatachalam, S. et al. Retention of wild-type p53 in tumors from p53 heterozygous mice: reduction of p53 dosage can promote cancer formation. EMBO J. 17, 4657-4667 (1998).
17. McDonough, H. & Patterson, C. CHIP: a link between the chaperone and proteasome systems. Cell Stress Chaperones 8, 303-308 (2003).
18. Edkins, A. L. CHIP: a co-chaperone for degradation by the proteasome. Subcell. Biochem. 78, 219-242 (2015).
19. Peng, Y., Chen, L., Li, C., Lu, W. & Chen, J. Inhibition of MDM2 by hsp90 contributes to mutant p53 stabilization. J. Biol. Chem. 276, 40583-40590 (2001).
20. Li, D. et al. Functional inactivation of endogenous MDM2 and CHIP by HSP90 causes aberrant stabilization of mutant p53 in human cancer cells. Mol. Cancer Res. 9, 577-588 (2011).
21. Muller, P., Hrstka, R., Coomber, D., Lane, D. P. & Vojtesek, B. Chaperone-dependent stabilization and degradation of p53 mutants. Oncogene 27, 3371-3383 (2008).
22. Zhou, P. et al. ErbB2 degradation mediated by the co-chaperone protein CHIP. J. Biol. Chem. 278, 13829-13837 (2003).
23. Murata, S., Minami, Y., Minami, M., Chiba, T. & Tanaka, K. CHIP is a chaperone-dependent E3 ligase that ubiquitylates unfolded protein. EMBO Rep. 2, 1133-1138 (2001).
24. Hiraki, M. et al. Small-molecule reactivation of mutant p53 to wild-type-like p53 through the p53-Hsp40 regulatory axis. Chem. Biol. 22, 1206-1216 (2015).
25. King, F. W., Wawrzynow, A., Hohfeld, J. & Zylicz, M. Co-chaperones Bag-1, Hop and Hsp40 regulate Hsc70 and Hsp90 interactions with wild-type or mutant p53. EMBO J. 20, 6297-6305 (2001).
26. Yue, X. et al. BAG2 promotes tumorigenesis through enhancing mutant p53 protein levels and function. Elife 4, e08401 (2015).
27. Fan, C. Y., Lee, S. & Cyr, D. M. Mechanisms for regulation of Hsp70 function by Hsp40. Cell Stress Chaperones 8, 309-316 (2003).
28. Gandelman, K., Malhotra, B., LaBadie, B. B., Crownover, P. & Bergstrom, T. Analytes of interest and choice of dose: two important considerations in the design of bioequivalence studies with atorvastatin. Bioequiv. Bioavailab. 3, 62-68 (2011).
29. Bisgaier, C. L. et al. Attenuation of plasma low density lipoprotein cholesterol by select 3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl coenzyme A reductase inhibitors in mice devoid of low density lipoprotein receptors. J. Lipid Res. 38, 2502-2515 (1997).
30. Moon, H., Hill, M. M., Roberts, M. J., Gardiner, R. A. & Brown, A. J. Statins: protectors or pretenders in prostate cancer? Trends Endocrinol. Metab. 25, 188-196 (2014).
31. Baandrup, L., Dehlendorff, C., Friis, S., Olsen, J. H. & Kjaer, S. K. Statin use and risk for ovarian cancer: a Danish nationwide case-control study. Br. J. Cancer 112, 157-161 (2015).
32. Zhang, X. L. et al. Statin use and risk of kidney cancer: a meta-analysis of observational studies and randomized trials. B. J. Clin. Pharmacol. 77, 458-465 (2014).
33. Qiu, X. B., Shao, Y. M., Miao, S. & Wang, L. The diversity of the DnaJ/Hsp40 family, the crucial partners for Hsp70 chaperones. Cell Mol. Life Sci. 63, 2560-2570 (2006).
34. Kota, P., Summers, D. W., Ren, H. Y., Cyr, D. M. & Dokholyan, N. V. Identification of a consensus motif in substrates bound by a Type I Hsp40. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 106, 11073-11078 (2009).