4.8 Article

Limited Mitochondrial Permeabilization Causes DNA Damage and Genomic Instability in the Absence of Cell Death

期刊

MOLECULAR CELL
卷 57, 期 5, 页码 860-872

出版社

CELL PRESS
DOI: 10.1016/j.molcel.2015.01.018

关键词

-

资金

  1. Royal Society, an EU
  2. BBSRC [BB/K008374/1]
  3. European Union
  4. Science Foundation Ireland [09-RFP-BIC2375]
  5. EMBO [ALTF 55-2013]
  6. l'Association pour la recherche sur le cancer (ARC)
  7. Cancer Research UK
  8. Science Foundation Ireland (SFI) [09/RFP/BIC2375] Funding Source: Science Foundation Ireland (SFI)
  9. Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council [BB/K008374/1] Funding Source: researchfish
  10. Cancer Research UK [22311] Funding Source: researchfish
  11. Medical Research Council [G0802755] Funding Source: researchfish
  12. BBSRC [BB/K008374/1] Funding Source: UKRI
  13. MRC [G0802755] Funding Source: UKRI

向作者/读者索取更多资源

During apoptosis, the mitochondrial outer membrane is permeabilized, leading to the release of cytochrome c that activates downstream caspases. Mitochondrial outer membrane permeabilization (MOMP) has historically been thought to occur synchronously and completely throughout a cell, leading to rapid caspase activation and apoptosis. Using a new imaging approach, we demonstrate that MOMP is not an all-or-nothing event. Rather, we find that a minority of mitochondria can undergo MOMP in a stress-regulated manner, a phenomenon we term minority MOMP.'' Crucially, minority MOMP leads to limited caspase activation, which is insufficient to trigger cell death. Instead, this caspase activity leads to DNA damage that, in turn, promotes genomic instability, cellular transformation, and tumorigenesis. Our data demonstrate that, in contrast to its well-established tumor suppressor function, apoptosis also has oncogenic potential that is regulated by the extent of MOMP. These findings have important implications for oncogenesis following either physiological or therapeutic engagement of apoptosis.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据