4.8 Article

Role of the translocation partner in protection against AID-dependent chromosomal translocations

出版社

NATL ACAD SCIENCES
DOI: 10.1073/pnas.0908946107

关键词

B lymphocyte; c-myc; cancer; immunoglobulin

资金

  1. NIH [AI037526]
  2. NIH, National Cancer Institute and the Center for Cancer Research

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Chromosome translocations between Ig (Ig) and non-Ig genes are frequently associated with B-cell lymphomas in humans and mice. The best characterized of these is c-myc/IgH translocation, which is associated with Burkitt's lymphoma. These translocations are caused by activation-induced cytidine deaminase (AID), which produces double-strand DNA breaks in both genes. c-myc/IgH translocations are rare events, in part because ATM, p53, and p19 actively suppress them. To further define the mechanism of protection against the accumulation of cells that bear c-myc/IgH translocation, we assayed B cells from mice that carry mutations in cell-cycle and apoptosis regulator proteins that act downstream of p53. We find that PUMA, Bim, and PKC delta are required for protection against c-myc/IgH translocation, whereas Bcl-XL and BAFF enhance c-myc/IgH translocation. Whether these effects are general or specific to cmyc/IgH translocation and whether AID produces dsDNA breaks in genes other than c-myc and Ig is not known. To examine these questions, we developed an assay for translocation between IgH and Ig beta, both of which are somatically mutated by AID. Ig beta/IgH, like c-myc/IgH translocations, are AID-dependent, and AID is responsible for lesions on IgH and the non-IgH translocation partners. However, ATM, p53, and p19 do not protect against Ig beta/IgH translocations. Instead, B cells are protected against Ig beta/IgH translocations by a BAFF-and PKC delta-dependent pathway. We conclude that AID-induced double-strand breaks in non-Ig genes other than c-myc lead to their translocation, and that at least two nonoverlapping pathways protect against translocations in primary B cells.

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