4.5 Article

Reduced abundance of the E3 ubiquitin ligase E6AP contributes to decreased expression of the INK4/ARF locus in non-small cell lung cancer

期刊

SCIENCE SIGNALING
卷 10, 期 461, 页码 -

出版社

AMER ASSOC ADVANCEMENT SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1126/scisignal.aaf8223

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) of Australia [NHMRC 1063389, 1026990]
  2. Cancer Council Victoria [1085154]
  3. Victorian Endowment for Science, Knowledge, and Innovation award
  4. Victorian Cancer Agency-Richard Pratt Fellowship [Pratt14002]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The tumor suppressor p16(INK4a), one protein encoded by the INK4/ARF locus, is frequently absent in multiple cancers, including non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Whereas increased methylation of the encoding gene (CDKN2A) accounts for its loss in a third of patients, no molecular explanation exists for the remainder. We unraveled an alternative mechanism for the silencing of the INK4/ARF locus involving the E3 ubiquitin ligase and transcriptional cofactor E6AP (also known as UBE3A). We found that the expression of three tumor suppressor genes encoded in the INK4/ARF locus (p15(INK4b), p16(INK4a), and p19(ARF)) was decreased in E6AP(-/-) mouse embryo fibroblasts. E6AP induced the expression of the INK4/ARF locus at the transcriptional level by inhibiting CDC6 transcription, a gene encoding a key repressor of the locus. Luciferase assays revealed that E6AP inhibited CDC6 expression by reducing its E2F1-dependent transcription. Chromatin immunoprecipitation analysis indicated that E6AP reduced the amount of E2F1 at the CDC6 promoter. In a subset of NSCLC samples, an E6AP-low/CDC6-high/p16(INK4a)-low protein abundance profile correlated with low methylation of the gene encoding p16(INK4a) (CDKN2A) and poor patient prognosis. These findings define a previously unrecognized tumor-suppressive role for E6AP in NSCLC, reveal an alternative silencing mechanism of the INK4/ARF locus, and reveal E6AP as a potential prognostic marker in NSCLC.

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