4.7 Article

Elevated FANCA expression determines a worse prognosis in chronic lymphocytic leukemia and interferes with p53 function

Journal

FASEB JOURNAL
Volume 33, Issue 9, Pages 10477-10489

Publisher

FEDERATION AMER SOC EXP BIOL
DOI: 10.1096/fj.201802439RR

Keywords

CLL; ATM; NEDD8; NUB1L

Funding

  1. Instituto de Salud Carlos III [PI17/01688]
  2. European Development Regional Fund (FEDER)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) is characterized by a failure in the mechanisms of apoptosis that leads to an accumulation of mature B cells in peripheral blood, bone marrow, and lymphoid organs. The molecular basis of CLL remains unknown. Certain cytogenetic and molecular markers determine a bad prognosis in CLL. Fanconi anemia complementation (FANC) proteins have been related to chromosomal instability and alterations in the mechanisms of p53 activation, control of cell cycle, and apoptosis. We investigated the role of certain FANC proteins in CLL. Our data identified a group of patients with CLL with high expression of FANCA in peripheral B-CLL cells and we established its relationship with the deletion of 11q23 and a worse prognosis. When we investigated the molecular mechanisms of this bad prognosis, we observed a reduction in the expression of 2 p53 target genes, p21 and increment Np73, in CLL primary cells transfected with FANCA. Functional studies demonstrated an impairment of p53 by FANCA. Moreover, we obtained evidence of a cooperation between FANCA and the NEDD8-interacting protein NUB1L in the destabilization of p53. For the first time, FANCA is reported as a bad prognosis marker by a mechanism other than its role in the Fanconi anemia-breast cancer DNA repair pathway.-Bravo-Navas, S., Yanez, L., Romon, i., Pipaon, C. Elevated FANCA expression determines a worse prognosis in chronic lymphocytic leukemia and interferes with p53 function.

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