The Tail That Wags the Dog: How the Disordered C-Terminal Domain Controls the Transcriptional Activities of the p53 Tumor-Suppressor Protein

Trends in Biochemical Sciences

Volumn 41, Issue 12, 2016, Pages 1022-1034

  Laptenko, Oleg ^a   Tong, David R ^a   Manfredi, James ^b   Prives, Carol ^a  

^a Och Spine at New York Presbyterian Hospitals   (United States)

^b MOUNT SINAI SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ISOPROTEIN; PROTEIN P53; PROTEIN P63; TRANSCRIPTION FACTOR; TUMOR PROTEIN P73; DNA; INTRINSICALLY DISORDERED PROTEIN; PROTEIN BINDING;

CARBOXY TERMINAL SEQUENCE; CHROMATIN; DNA BINDING; HUMAN; INTRINSICALLY DISORDERED REGION; MOLECULAR RECOGNITION; NONHUMAN; PROTEIN FUNCTION; PROTEIN STABILITY; PROTEIN STRUCTURE; REVIEW; STRUCTURE ANALYSIS; TRANSCRIPTION REGULATION; ALPHA HELIX; AMINO ACID SEQUENCE; ANIMAL; BETA SHEET; BINDING SITE; CHEMICAL PHENOMENA; CHEMISTRY; GENETICS; METABOLISM; PROTEIN DOMAIN; PROTEIN TERTIARY STRUCTURE; SEQUENCE ALIGNMENT; SEQUENCE HOMOLOGY; TRANSCRIPTION INITIATION;

AMINO ACID SEQUENCE; ANIMALS; BINDING SITES; DNA; HUMANS; HYDROPHOBIC AND HYDROPHILIC INTERACTIONS; INTRINSICALLY DISORDERED PROTEINS; PROTEIN BINDING; PROTEIN CONFORMATION, ALPHA-HELICAL; PROTEIN CONFORMATION, BETA-STRAND; PROTEIN DOMAINS; PROTEIN STRUCTURE, TERTIARY; SEQUENCE ALIGNMENT; SEQUENCE HOMOLOGY, AMINO ACID; TRANSCRIPTIONAL ACTIVATION; TUMOR SUPPRESSOR PROTEIN P53;

EID: 84995740171     PISSN: 09680004     EISSN: 13624326     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.tibs.2016.08.011     Document Type: Review

References (105)

1. 1 Belyi, V.A., et al. The origins and evolution of the p53 family of genes. Cold Spring Harb. Perspect. Biol, 2, 2010, a001198.
2. 2 Riley, T., et al. Transcriptional control of human p53-regulated genes. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell. Biol. 9 (2008), 402–412.
3. 3 Laptenko, O., Prives, C., Transcriptional regulation by p53: one protein, many possibilities. Cell Death Differ. 13 (2006), 951–961.
4. 4 Levine, A.J., p53, the cellular gatekeeper for growth and division. Cell 88 (1997), 323–331.
5. 5 Vousden, K.H., Prives, C., Blinded by the light: the growing complexity of p53. Cell 137 (2009), 413–431.
6. 6 Lee, T.I., Young, R.A., Transcription of eukaryotic protein-coding genes. Annu. Rev. Genet. 34 (2000), 77–137.
7. 7 Ptashne, M., Gann, A., Genes & Signals. 2001, Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory.
8. 8 Matthews, J.M., (eds.) Protein Dimerization and Oligomerization in Biology. (Advances in Experimental Medicine and Biology, Vol. 747), 2012, Springer Science+Business Media.
9. 9 Joerger, A.C., Fersht, A.R., Structural biology of the tumor suppressor p53. Annu. Rev. Biochem. 77 (2008), 557–582.
10. 10 Foord, O.S., et al. A DNA binding domain is contained in the C-terminus of wild type p53 protein. Nucleic Acids Res. 19 (1991), 5191–5198.
11. 11 Vogelstein, B., Kinzler, K.W., p53 function and dysfunction. Cell 70 (1992), 523–526.
12. 12 Ahn, J., Prives, C., The C-terminus of p53: the more you learn the less you know. Nat. Struct. Biol. 8 (2001), 730–732.
13. 13 Bell, S., et al. p53 contains large unstructured regions in its native state. J. Mol. Biol. 322 (2002), 917–927.
14. 14 Cheng, Y., et al. Mining alpha-helix-forming molecular recognition features with cross species sequence alignments. Biochemistry 46 (2007), 13468–13477.
15. 15 Friedler, A., et al. Modulation of binding of DNA to the C-terminal domain of p53 by acetylation. Structure 13 (2005), 629–636.
16. 16 Xue, B., et al. Intrinsically disordered regions of p53 family are highly diversified in evolution. Biochim. Biophys. Acta 1834 (2013), 725–738.
17. 17 Tompa, P., et al. Intrinsically disordered proteins: emerging interaction specialists. Curr. Opin. Struct. Biol. 35 (2015), 49–59.
18. 18 Brown, C.J., et al. Evolution and disorder. Curr. Opin. Struct. Biol. 21 (2011), 441–446.
19. 19 Rustandi, R.R., et al. Structure of the negative regulatory domain of p53 bound to S100B(betabeta). Nat. Struct. Biol. 7 (2000), 570–574.
20. 20 Mujtaba, S., et al. Structural mechanism of the bromodomain of the coactivator CBP in p53 transcriptional activation. Mol. Cell. 13 (2004), 251–263.
21. 21 Tong, Q., et al. Structural plasticity of methyllysine recognition by the tandem tudor domain of 53BP1. Structure 23 (2015), 312–321.
22. 22 Tong, Q., et al. An acetyl–methyl switch drives a conformational change in p53. Structure, 23, 2015 322-231.
23. 23 Boehme, K.A., Blattner, C., Regulation of p53 – insights into a complex process. Crit. Rev. Biochem. Mol. Biol. 44 (2009), 367–392.
24. 24 Brooks, C.L., Gu, W., The impact of acetylation and deacetylation on the p53 pathway. Protein Cell 2 (2011), 456–462.
25. 25 Brooks, C.L., Gu, W., p53 regulation by ubiquitin. FEBS Lett. 585 (2011), 2803–2809.
26. 26 Dos Santos, H.G., et al. Functional diversification after gene duplication: paralog specific regions of structural disorder and phosphorylation in p53, p63, and p73. PLoS ONE, 11, 2016, e0151961.
27. 27 Maisse, C., et al. p73 and p63 protein stability: the way to regulate function?. Biochem. Pharmacol. 66 (2003), 1555–1561.
28. 28 Zdzalik, M., et al. Interaction of regulators Mdm2 and Mdmx with transcription factors p53, p63 and p73. Cell Cycle 9 (2010), 4584–4591.
29. 29 Olivier, M., et al. TP53 mutations in human cancers: origins, consequences, and clinical use. Cold Spring Harb. Perspect. Biol., 2, 2010, a001008.
30. 30 McKinney, K., et al. p53 linear diffusion along DNA requires its C terminus. Mol. Cell 16 (2004), 413–424.
31. 31 Tafvizi, A., et al. Tumor suppressor p53 slides on DNA with low friction and high stability. Biophys. J. 95 (2008), L01–L03.
32. 32 Tafvizi, A., et al. A single-molecule characterization of p53 search on DNA. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 108 (2011), 563–568.
33. 33 Khazanov, N., Levy, Y., Sliding of p53 along DNA can be modulated by its oligomeric state and by cross-talks between its constituent domains. J. Mol. Biol. 408 (2011), 335–355.
34. 34 Vuzman, D., Levy, Y., Intrinsically disordered regions as affinity tuners in protein–DNA interactions. Mol. Biosyst. 8 (2012), 47–57.
35. 2+ at millimolar concentrations. J. Mol. Biol. 427 (2015), 2663–2678.
36. 36 McKinney, K., Prives, C., Efficient specific DNA binding by p53 requires both its central and C-terminal domains as revealed by studies with high-mobility group 1 protein. Mol. Cell. Biol. 22 (2002), 6797–6808.
37. 37 Göhler, T., et al. Specific interaction of p53 with target binding sites is determined by DNA conformation and is regulated by the C-terminal domain. J. Biol. Chem. 277 (2002), 41192–41203.
38. 38 Espinosa, J.M., Emerson, B.M., Transcriptional regulation by p53 through intrinsic DNA/chromatin binding and site-directed cofactor recruitment. Mol. Cell 8 (2001), 57–69.
39. 39 Palecek, E., et al. Enhancement of p53 sequence-specific binding by DNA supercoiling. Oncogene 23 (2004), 2119–2127.
40. 40 Kim, H., et al. p53 requires an intact C-terminal domain for DNA binding and transactivation. J. Mol. Biol. 415 (2012), 843–854.
41. 41 Gilbert, N., Allan, J., Supercoiling in DNA and chromatin. Curr. Opin. Genet. Dev. 25 (2014), 15–21.
42. 42 Brázda, V., et al. Cruciform structures are a common DNA feature important for regulating biological processes. BMC Mol. Biol. 5 (2011), 12–33.
43. 43 Alvarez, M., et al. Context-dependent transcription: all politics is local. Gene 313 (2003), 43–57.
44. 44 Laptenko, O., et al. The p53C terminus controls site-specific DNA binding and promotes structural changes within the central DNA binding domain. Mol. Cell 57 (2015), 1034–1046.
45. 45 Lidor, N.E., et al. p53 binds preferentially to genomic regions with high DNA-encoded nucleosome occupancy. Genome Res. 20 (2010), 1361–1368.
46. 46 Sammons, M.A., et al. TP53 engagement with the genome occurs in distinct local chromatin environments via pioneer factor activity. Genome Res. 25 (2015), 179–188.
47. 47 Laptenko, O., et al. p53 binding to nucleosomes within the p21 promoter in vivo leads to nucleosome loss and transcriptional activation. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 108 (2011), 10385–10390.
48. 48 Hamard, P.J., et al. p53 basic C terminus regulates p53 functions through DNA binding modulation of subset of target genes. J. Biol. Chem. 287 (2012), 22397–22407.
49. 49 Mougiakos, I., et al. Next generation prokaryotic engineering: the CRISPR-Cas toolkit. Trends Biotechnol. 34 (2016), 575–587.
50. 50 Boettcher, M., McManus, M.T., Choosing the right tool for the job: RNAi, TALEN, or CRISPR. Mol. Cell 58 (2015), 575–585.
51. 51 Ayed, A., et al. Latent and active p53 are identical in conformation. Nat. Struct. Biol. 8 (2001), 756–760.
52. 52 D'Abramo, M., et al. The p53 tetramer shows an induced-fit interaction of the C-terminal domain with the DNA-binding domain. Oncogene 35 (2016), 3272–3281.
53. 53 Bourdon, J.C., et al. p53 isoforms can regulate p53 transcriptional activity. Genes Dev. 19 (2005), 2122–2137.
54. 54 Marcel, V., et al. Biological functions of p53 isoforms through evolution: lessons from animal and cellular models. Cell Death Differ. 18 (2011), 1815–1824.
55. 55 Marcel, V., et al. Modulation of p53β and p53γ expression by regulating the alternative splicing of TP53 gene modifies cellular response. Cell Death Differ. 21 (2014), 1377–1387.
56. null cell lines. PLoS ONE, 8, 2013, e56276.
57. 57 Cho, Y., et al. Crystal structure of a p53 tumor suppressor–DNA complex: understanding tumorigenic mutations. Science 265 (1994), 346–355.
58. 58 Rippin, T.M., et al. Recognition of DNA by p53 core domain and location of intermolecular contacts of cooperative binding. J. Mol. Biol. 319 (2002), 351–358.
59. 59 Kitayner, M., et al. Structural basis of DNA recognition by p53 tetramers. Mol. Cell 22 (2006), 741–753.
60. 60 Cañadillas, J.M., et al. Solution structure of p53 core domain: structural basis for its instability. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 103 (2006), 2109–2114.
61. 61 Petty, T.J., et al. An induced fit mechanism regulates p53 DNA binding kinetics to confer sequence specificity. EMBO J. 30 (2011), 2167–2176.
62. 62 Okorokov, A.L., et al. The structure of p53 tumor suppressor protein reveals the basis for its functional plasticity. EMBO J. 25 (2006), 5191–5200.
63. 63 Wells, M., et al. Structure of tumor suppressor p53 and its intrinsically disordered N-terminal transactivation domain. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 105 (2008), 5762–5767.
64. 64 Melero, R., et al. Electron microscopy studies on the quaternary structure of p53 reveal different binding modes for p53 tetramers in complex with DNA. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 108 (2011), 557–562.
65. 65 Wu, D., et al. Visualizing the path of DNA through proteins using DREEM imaging. Mol. Cell 61 (2016), 315–323.
66. 66 Nudler, E., et al. Spatial organization of transcription elongation complex in Escherichia coli. Science 281 (1998), 424–428.
67. 67 Parshin, A., et al. DksA regulates RNA polymerase in Escherichia coli through a network of interactions in the secondary channel that includes Sequence Insertion 1. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 112 (2015), E6862–E6871.
68. 68 Arlt, C., et al. Structure of full-length p53 tumor suppressor probed by chemical cross-linking and mass spectrometry. Proteomics 15 (2015), 2746–2755.
69. 69 Gu, B., Zhu, W.G., Surf the post-translational modification network of p53 regulation. Int. J. Biol. Sci. 8 (2012), 672–684.
70. 70 Meek, D.W., Anderson, C.W., Posttranslational modification of p53: cooperative integrators of function. Cold Spring Harb. Perspect. Biol., 1, 2009, a000950.
71. 71 Kruse, J.P., Gu, W., SnapShot: p53 posttranslational modifications. Cell, 133, 2008, 930.
72. 72 DeHart, C.J., et al. Extensive post-translational modification of active and inactivated forms of endogenous p53. Mol. Cell Proteomics 13 (2014), 1–17.
73. 73 Toledo, F., Wahl, G.M., Regulating the p53 pathway: in vitro hypotheses, in vivo veritas. Nat. Rev. Cancer 6 (2006), 909–923.
74. 74 Pant, V., Lozano, G., Limiting the power of p53 through the ubiquitin proteasome pathway. Genes Dev. 28 (2014), 1739–1751.
75. 75 Kussie, P.H., et al. Structure of the MDM2 oncoprotein bound to the p53 tumor suppressor transactivation domain. Science 274 (1996), 948–953.
76. 76 Poyurovsky, M.V., et al. The C terminus of p53 binds the N-terminal domain of MDM2. Nat. Struct. Mol. Biol. 17 (2010), 982–989.
77. 77 Bruins, W., et al. Increased sensitivity to UV radiation in mice with a p53 point mutation at Ser389. Mol. Cell Biol. 24 (2004), 8884–8894.
78. 78 Feng, L., et al. Functional analysis of the roles of posttranslational modifications at the p53C terminus in regulating p53 stability and activity. Mol. Cell Biol. 25 (2005), 5389–5395.
79. 79 Simeonova, I., et al. Mutant mice lacking the p53 C-terminal domain model telomere syndromes. Cell Rep. 3 (2013), 2046–2058.
80. 80 Hamard, P.J., et al. The C terminus of p53 regulates gene expression by multiple mechanisms in a target- and tissue-specific manner in vivo. Genes Dev. 27 (2013), 1868–1885.
81. 81 Krummel, K.A., et al. The C-terminal lysines fine-tune P53 stress responses in a mouse model but are not required for stability control or transactivation. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 102 (2005), 10188–10193.
82. 82 Liu, G., et al. The p53-Mdm2 network in progenitor cell expansion during mouse postnatal development. J. Pathol. 213 (2007), 360–368.
83. 83 Abbas, H.A., et al. Mdm2 is required for survival of hematopoietic stem cells/progenitors via dampening of ROS-induced p53 activity. Cell Stem Cell 7 (2010), 606–617.
84. 84 Mendrysa, S.M., et al. Mdm2 is critical for inhibition of p53 during lymphopoiesis and the response to ionizing irradiation. Mol. Cell Biol. 23 (2003), 462–472.
85. 85 Wang, Y.V., et al. Fine-tuning p53 activity through C-terminal modification significantly contributes to HSC homeostasis and mouse radiosensitivity. Genes Dev. 25 (2011), 1426–1438.
86. 86 Chan, W.M., et al. Ubiquitination of p53 at multiple sites in the DNA-binding domain. Mol. Cancer Res. 4 (2006), 15–25.
87. 87 Tsvetkov, P., et al. Ubiquitin-independent p53 proteasomal degradation. Cell Death Differ. 17 (2010), 103–108.
88. 88 Gu, W., Roeder, R.G., Activation of p53 sequence-specific DNA binding by acetylation of the p53 C-terminal domain. Cell 90 (1997), 595–606.
89. 89 Anderson, M.E., et al. Reciprocal interference between the sequence-specific core and nonspecific C-terminal DNA binding domains of p53: implications for regulation. Mol. Cell Biol. 17 (1997), 6255–6264.
90. 90 Luo, J., et al. Acetylation of p53 augments its site-specific DNA binding both in vitro and in vivo. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 101 (2004), 2259–2264.
91. 91 Menendez, D., et al. Diverse stresses dramatically alter genome-wide p53 binding and transactivation landscape in human cancer cells. Nucleic Acids Res. 41 (2013), 7286–7301.
92. 92 Ito, A., et al. p300/CBP-mediated p53 acetylation is commonly induced by p53-activating agents and inhibited by MDM2. EMBO J. 20 (2001), 1331–1340.
93. 93 Thompson, T., et al. Phosphorylation of p53 on key serines is dispensable for transcriptional activation and apoptosis. J. Biol Chem. 279 (2004), 53015–53022.
94. 94 Cesková, P., et al. On the mechanism of sequence-specific DNA- dependent acetylation of p53: the acetylation motif is exposed upon DNA binding. J. Mol. Biol. 357 (2006), 442–456.
95. 95 Rajagopalan, S., et al. Mechanistic differences in the transcriptional activation of p53 by 14-3-3 isoforms. Nucleic Acids Res. 38 (2010), 893–906.
96. 96 van Dieck, J., et al. Posttranslational modifications affect the interaction of S100 proteins with tumor suppressor p53. J. Mol. Biol. 394 (2009), 922–930.
97. 97 An, W., et al. Ordered cooperative functions of PRMT1, p300, and CARM1 in transcriptional activation by p53. Cell 117 (2004), 735–748.
98. 98 Wu, S.Y., et al. Phospho switch triggers Brd4 chromatin binding and activator recruitment for gene-specific targeting. Mol. Cell 49 (2013), 843–857.
99. 99 Wu, Y., et al. Phosphorylation of p53 by TAF1 inactivates p53- dependent transcription in the DNA damage response. Mol. Cell 53 (2014), 63–74.
100. 100 Todeschini, A.L., et al. Transcription factors: specific DNA binding and specific gene regulation. Trends Genet. 30 (2014), 211–219.
101. 101 Lee, T.I., Young, R.A., Transcriptional regulation and its misregulation in disease. Cell 152 (2013), 1237–1251.
102. 102 Dunker, A.K., et al. Intrinsic protein disorder in complete genomes. Genome Inform. Ser. Workshop Genome Inform. 11 (2000), 161–171.
103. 103 Liu, J., et al. Intrinsic disorder in transcription factors. Biochemistry 45 (2006), 6873–6888.
104. 104 Mészáros, B., et al. Molecular principles of the interactions of disordered proteins. J. Mol. Biol. 372 (2007), 549–561.
105. 105 Vacic, V., et al. Characterization of molecular recognition features, MoRFs, and their binding partners. J. Proteome Res. 6 (2007), 2351–2366.