4.8 Article

Roles of heat shock factor 1 and 2 in response to proteasome inhibition: consequence on p53 stability

Journal

ONCOGENE
Volume 29, Issue 29, Pages 4216-4224

Publisher

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/onc.2010.171

Keywords

heat shock factor; MG132; proteasome; gankyrin; p53

Funding

  1. Canceropole Grand Ouest
  2. CNRS
  3. French Ministry of Higher Education and Research (MENRT)
  4. 'Association pour la Recherche sur le Cancer' (ARC)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

A single heat shock factor (HSF), mediating the heat shock response, exists from yeast to Drosophila, whereas several related HSFs have been found in mammals. This raises the question of the specific or redundant functions of the different members of the HSF family and in particular of HSF1 and HSF2, which are both ubiquitously expressed. Using immortalized mouse embryonic fibroblasts (iMEFs) derived from wild-type, Hsf1(-/-), Hsf2(-/-) or double-mutant mice, we observed the distinctive behaviors of these mutants with respect to proteasome inhibition. This proteotoxic stress reduces to the same extent the viability of Hsf1(-/-)- and Hsf2(-/-)-deficient cells, but through different underlying mechanisms. Contrary to Hsf2(-/-) cells, Hsf1(-/-) cells are unable to induce pro-survival heat shock protein expression. Conversely, proteasome activity is lower in Hsf2(-/-) cells and the expression of some proteasome subunits, such as Psmb5 and gankyrin, is decreased. As gankyrin is an oncoprotein involved in p53 degradation, we analyzed the status of p53 in HSF-deficient iMEFs and observed that it was strongly stabilized in Hsf2(-/-) cells. This study points a new role for HSF2 in the regulation of protein degradation and suggests that pan-HSF inhibitors could be valuable tools to reduce chemoresistance to proteasome inhibition observed in cancer therapy. Oncogene ( 2010) 29, 4216-4224; doi: 10.1038/onc.2010.171; published online 24 May 2010

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available