4.5 Review

CCAR1 and CCAR2 as gene chameleons with antagonistic duality: Preclinical, human translational, and mechanistic basis

期刊

CANCER SCIENCE
卷 111, 期 10, 页码 3416-3425

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/cas.14579

关键词

apoptosis; CCAR1; CCAR2; cell cycle; DBC1

类别

资金

  1. US National Cancer Institute (NCI) [CA090890, CA122959]
  2. NCI PREVENT [HHSN261201500018I, HHSN26100004, 75N91019D00021]
  3. John S. Dunn Foundation
  4. Texas AAMP
  5. M Chancellor's Research Initiative

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Cell Cycle and Apoptosis Regulator 1 (CCAR1) and Cell Cycle and Apoptosis Regulator 2 (CCAR2) have emerged as key players in physiology and pathophysiology, with critical roles in the DNA damage response, nuclear receptor function, and Wnt signaling, among other activities. Contradictory reports exist on the functional duality of CCAR1 and CCAR2 as either tumor promoters or suppressors, suggesting thatCCAR1andCCAR2have the hallmarks of gene chameleons. We review herein the mechanistic, preclinical, and human translational findings for CCAR1 and CCAR2, based on available RNA and protein expression data from human studies, The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) data mining, gene knockout mouse models, and cell-based assays. Multiple factors contribute to the divergent activities of CCAR1 and CCAR2, including tissue type, mutation/genetic background, protein-protein interactions, dynamic regulation via posttranslational modifications, and alternative RNA splicing. An array of protein partners interact with CCAR1 and CCAR2 in the context of tumor promotion and suppression, including beta-catenin, androgen receptor, p21(Cip1/Waf1), tumor protein p53 (p53), sirtuin 1, and histone deacetylase 3. Genetic changes frequently found in cancer, such asTP53mutation, also serve as critical determinants of survival outcomes in cancer patients. This review seeks to provide the impetus for further investigation into CCAR1 and CCAR2 as potential master regulators of metabolism, aging, and cancer.

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

4.5
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