4.7 Article

PTPN2 negatively regulates oncogenic JAK1 in T-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia

期刊

BLOOD
卷 117, 期 26, 页码 7090-7098

出版社

AMER SOC HEMATOLOGY
DOI: 10.1182/blood-2010-10-314286

关键词

-

资金

  1. Fonds voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek (National Fund for Scientific Research)-Vlaanderen [G.0287.07]
  2. Foundation against Cancer [SCIE2006-34]
  3. European Research Council
  4. Katholieke Universiteit Leuven
  5. Federal Office for Scientific, Technical and Cultural Affairs, Belgium
  6. French program Carte d'Identite des Tumeurs (Ligue Contre le Cancer)
  7. Canceropole d'Ile de France
  8. Associazione Italiana per la Ricerca sul Cancro [IG 2009-8803]
  9. Actions de Recherche Concertees
  10. Communaute Francaise de Belgique
  11. Direction de la Recherche Scientifique [ARC 09/14-021]
  12. association Laurette Fugain
  13. regional committee of the Ligue contre le Cancer,

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We have recently reported inactivation of the tyrosine phosphatase PTPN2 (also known as TC-PTP) through deletion of the entire gene locus in similar to 6% of T-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia (T-ALL) cases. T-ALL is an aggressive disease of the thymocytes characterized by the step-wise accumulation of chromosomal abnormalities and gene mutations. In the present study, we confirmed the strong association of the PTPN2 deletion with TLX1 and NUP214-ABL1 expression. In addition, we found cooperation between PTPN2 deletion and activating JAK1 gene mutations. Activating mutations in JAK1 kinase occur in similar to 10% of human T-ALL cases, and aberrant kinase activity has been shown to confer proliferation and survival advantages. Our results reveal that some JAK1 mutation-positive T-ALLs harbor deletions of the tyrosine phosphatase PTPN2, a known negative regulator of the JAK/STAT pathway. We provide evidence that down-regulation of Ptpn2 sensitizes lymphoid cells to JAK1-mediated transformation and reduces their sensitivity to JAK inhibition. (Blood. 2011;11(26):7090-7098)

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