4.8 Article

Regulation of MDM4 (MDMX) function by p76MDM2: a new facet in the control of p53 activity

期刊

ONCOGENE
卷 29, 期 44, 页码 5935-5945

出版社

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/onc.2010.324

关键词

p53; MDM4; MDM2; p76(MDM2); p90(MDM2)

资金

  1. Associazione Italiana Ricerca sul Cancro (AIRC), Ministero della Sanita

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Under basal growth conditions, p53 function is tightly controlled by the members of MDM family, MDM2 and MDM4. The Mdm2 gene codes, in addition to the full-length p90(MDM2), for a short protein, p76(MDM2) that lacks the p53-binding domain. Despite this property and at variance with p90(MDM2), this protein acts positively toward p53, although the molecular mechanism remains elusive. Here, we report that p76(MDM2) antagonizes MDM4 inhibitory function. We show that p76(MDM2) possesses intrinsic ubiquitinating and degrading activity, and through these activities controls MDM4 levels. Furthermore, the presence of p76(MDM2) decreases the association of MDM4 with p53 and p90(MDM2), and antagonizes p53 degradation by the heterodimer MDM4/ p90(MDM2). The p76(MDM2)-mediated regulation of MDM4 occurs in the cytoplasm, under basal growth conditions. Conversely, upon DNA damage, phosphorylation of MDM4Ser403 dissociates p76(MDM2) and prevents MDM4 degradation. The overall negative control of MDM4 by p76(MDM2) reflects on p53 function as p76(MDM2) impairs MDM4-mediated inhibition of p53 activity. In agreement with the positive role of p76(MDM2) toward p53, the p76(MDM2)/p90(MDM2) ratio significantly decreases in a group of thyroid tumor samples compared with normal counterparts. Overall, these findings reveal a new mechanism in the control of p53 basal activity that may account for the distinct sensitivity of tissues to stress signals depending on the balance among MDM proteins. Moreover, these data suggest an onco-suppressive function for a product of the Mdm2 gene. Oncogene (2010) 29, 5935-5945; doi:10.1038/onc.2010.324; published online 9 August 2010

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