4.7 Article

Oncogene-Induced Senescence Does Not Require the p16INK4a or p14ARF Melanoma Tumor Suppressors

Journal

JOURNAL OF INVESTIGATIVE DERMATOLOGY
Volume 129, Issue 8, Pages 1983-1991

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1038/jid.2009.5

Keywords

-

Categories

Funding

  1. National Health and Medical Research Council of Australia (NHMRC) [402761]
  2. Health Department of NSW
  3. Australian Cancer Research Foundation
  4. Cancer Institute of NSW
  5. Cameron Melanoma Research, Melanoma and Skin Cancer Research Institute, University of Sydney
  6. German Academic Exchange Service (DAAD).

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Oncogene-induced senescence is considered to act as a potent barrier to cell transformation, and has been seen in vivo during the early stages of tumor development. Human nevus cells frequently express oncogenic N-RAS or B-RAF, and are thought to be permanently growth arrested. Many studies have suggested that the p16(INK4a) and, to a lesser extent, the p14ARF tumor suppressor proteins act as critical triggers of oncogene-induced senescence in nevi, and thus these proteins represent major inhibitors of progression to melanoma. There have also been reports, however, showing that p16(INK4a) and/or p14ARF is not sufficient to execute the oncogene-induced senescence program. In this study, we examined the impact of melanoma-associated N-RAS(Q61K) on melanocyte senescence and utilized RNA-interference vectors to directly assess the individual contribution of human p14ARF and p16(INK4a) genes to the N-RAS-induced senescence program. We formally show that cultured human melanocytes can initiate an effective oncogene-mediated senescence program in the absence of INK4a/ARF-encoded proteins. Our data are consistent with observations showing that senescent nevus cells do not always express p16(INK4a), and highlight the need to thoroughly explore INK4a/ARF-independent molecular pathways of senescence in human melanocytes.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available