4.7 Article

A novel breast cancer-associated BRIP1 (FANCJ/BACH1) germ-line mutation impairs protein stability and function

期刊

CLINICAL CANCER RESEARCH
卷 14, 期 14, 页码 4672-4680

出版社

AMER ASSOC CANCER RESEARCH
DOI: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-08-0087

关键词

-

类别

资金

  1. NCI NIH HHS [K08 CA108748-04, P50CA105009, P50 CA105009, K08 CA108748] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose: BRCA1-interacting protein 1 (BRIP1; FANCJ/BACH1), which encodes a DNA helicase that interacts with BRCA1, has been suggested to be a low-penetrance breast cancer predisposing gene. We aimed to assess whether BRIP1 mutations contribute to breast cancer susceptibility in our population and, if so, to investigate the effect of such mutation (s) on BRIP1 function. Experimental Design: A series of 49 breast/ovarian cancer families, devoid of a BRCA1/BRCA2 mutation, were screened for BRIP1 mutations. Functional analyses, including coimmunoprecipitation and stability assays, were employed to further characterize a previously unreported variant. Results: Five sequence alterations were identified, of which four had been already described. Herein, we report a novel BRIP1 germ-line mutation identified in a woman with early-onset breast cancer. The mutation consists of a 4-nucleotide deletion (c.2992-2995delAAGA) in BRIP1 exon 20 that causes a shift in the reading frame, disrupts the BRCA1-binding domain of BRIP1, and creates a premature stop codon. Functional analysis of the recombinant mutant protein in transfected cells showed that the truncation interferes with the stability of the protein and with its ability to interact with BRCA1. Loss of the wild-type BRIP1 allele with retention of the mutated one was observed in the patient's breast tumor tissue. Conclusions: These results, by showing that the newly identified BRIP1 c.2992-2995delAAGA mutation is associated with instability and functional impairment of the encoded protein, provide further evidence of a breast cancer - related role for BRIP1.

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