4.7 Article

Deletion of the RNA-binding proteins ZFP36L1 and ZFP36L2 leads to perturbed thymic development and T lymphoblastic leukemia

期刊

NATURE IMMUNOLOGY
卷 11, 期 8, 页码 717-U84

出版社

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/ni.1901

关键词

-

资金

  1. Cancer Research UK
  2. Addenbrooke's Charitable Trust
  3. Medical Research Council
  4. Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council [BB/C506121/1]
  5. US National Institutes of Health [R01CA120196, R01CA129382]
  6. European College of Obstetrics and Gynaecology tumor bank [U24 CA114737]
  7. Leukemia & Lymphoma Society
  8. Fonds voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek-Vlaanderen
  9. Belgian American Educational Foundation
  10. BBSRC [BBS/E/B/0000H190, BB/F02066X/1] Funding Source: UKRI
  11. MRC [G0601618] Funding Source: UKRI
  12. Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council [BB/C506121/1, BBS/E/B/0000M983, BBS/E/B/0000H190, BB/F02066X/1] Funding Source: researchfish
  13. Medical Research Council [G0601618] Funding Source: researchfish

向作者/读者索取更多资源

ZFP36L1 and ZFP36L2 are RNA-binding proteins (RBPs) that interact with AU-rich elements in the 3' untranslated region of mRNA, which leads to mRNA degradation and translational repression. Here we show that mice that lacked ZFP36L1 and ZFP36L2 during thymopoiesis developed a T cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia (T-ALL) dependent on the oncogenic transcription factor Notch1. Before the onset of T-ALL, thymic development was perturbed, with accumulation of cells that had passed through the beta-selection checkpoint without first expressing the T cell antigen receptor beta-chain (TCR beta). Notch1 expression was higher in untransformed thymocytes in the absence of ZFP36L1 and ZFP36L2. Both RBPs interacted with evolutionarily conserved AU-rich elements in the 3' untranslated region of Notch1 and suppressed its expression. Our data establish a role for ZFP36L1 and ZFP36L2 during thymocyte development and in the prevention of malignant transformation.

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

4.7
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