4.8 Article

Phosphorylation Regulates c-Myc's Oncogenic Activity in the Mammary Gland

Journal

CANCER RESEARCH
Volume 71, Issue 3, Pages 925-936

Publisher

AMER ASSOC CANCER RESEARCH
DOI: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-10-1032

Keywords

-

Categories

Funding

  1. Department of Defense [BC061306]
  2. Susan G. Komen Breast Cancer Foundation [BCTR0201697, BCTR0706821]
  3. NIH [1 R01 CA129040-01]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Expression of the c-Myc oncoprotein is affected by conserved threonine 58 (T58) and serine 62 (S62) phosphorylation sites that help to regulate c-Myc protein stability, and altered ratios of T58 and S62 phosphorylation have been observed in human cancer. Here, we report the development of 3 unique c-myc knock-in mice that conditionally express either c-Myc(WT) or the c-Myc(T58A) or c-Myc(S62A) phosphorylation mutant from the constitutively active ROSA26 locus in response to Cre recombinase to study the role of these phosphorylation sites in vivo. Using a mammary-specific Cre model, we found that expression of c-Myc(WT) resulted in increased mammary gland density, but normal morphology and no tumors at the level expressed from the ROSA promoter. In contrast, c-Myc(T58A) expression yielded enhanced mammary gland density, hyperplastic foci, cellular dysplasia, and mammary carcinoma, associated with increased genomic instability and suppressed apoptosis relative to c-Myc(WT). Alternatively, c-Myc(S62A) expression reduced mammary gland density relative to control glands, and this was associated with increased genomic instability and normal apoptotic function. Our results indicate that specific activities of c-Myc are differentially affected by T58 and S62 phosphorylation. This model provides a robust platform to interrogate the role that these phosphorylation sites play in c-Myc function during development and tumorigenesis. Cancer Res; 71(3); 925-36. (C)2011 AACR.

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