Tumor Suppressor Proteins in Cancers

A special issue of Cancers (ISSN 2072-6694). This special issue belongs to the section "Cancer Biomarkers".

Deadline for manuscript submissions: closed (30 April 2022) | Viewed by 7572

Special Issue Editors


E-Mail Website1 Website2
Guest Editor
Department of Molecular Biosciences, The University of Kansas, Lawrence, KS, USA
Interests: APC; tumor suppressors; colon cancer; beta-catenin; Wnt; signal transduction; RNA-binding protein

E-Mail Website
Guest Editor
Radiation Oncology, University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City, KS, USA
Interests: genomic and chromosomal instability; tumor microenvironment; therapeutic response; radiotherapy; breast and ovarian cancer

Special Issue Information

Dear Colleagues,

More than half a century ago, in 1969, somatic cell hybrid studies by Henry Harris, George Klein, and colleagues provided evidence that cellular factors could regulate the activity of oncogenes in a dominant manner. In 1971, Alfred Knudson proposed that retinoblastomas were caused by two mutational events. It took another dozen years before, in 1983, Webster Cavenee, Ray White, and colleagues provided experimental proof for this “two hit” theory. Two years later, in 1985, Eric Stanbridge proposed naming this newly emerging class of cancer-associated genes “tumor suppressors”. After initial evidence placed tumor protein P53 in the oncogene category, in 1989, Arnold Levine and Bert Vogelstein et al. provided clear evidence that P53 has tumor suppressive activity. Tumor suppressor gene mutations are often associated with familial cancer syndromes. As a result of this new knowledge, the 1990s saw the identification of a number of tumor suppressor genes including APC, NF-1 and -2, VHL, BRCA1 and 2, PTCH, and PTEN. To date, more than 40 tumor suppressor genes have been cloned. Over the past four decades, we have come to understand that tumor suppressors are key regulators of many fundamental cellular processes and that the mutation or dysregulation of one or more tumor suppressors is a key event in the pathogenesis of most human cancers. This Special Issue of Cancers celebrates the long and rich history of tumor suppressor biology and highlights the importance of this class of genes in understanding and addressing current obstacles in cancer treatment. We invite submissions focused on the basic biology or clinical and therapeutic implications of tumor suppressors. Related reviews are also welcome.

Prof. Dr. Kristi L. Neufeld
Dr. Shane Stecklein
Guest Editors

Manuscript Submission Information

Manuscripts should be submitted online at www.mdpi.com by registering and logging in to this website. Once you are registered, click here to go to the submission form. Manuscripts can be submitted until the deadline. All submissions that pass pre-check are peer-reviewed. Accepted papers will be published continuously in the journal (as soon as accepted) and will be listed together on the special issue website. Research articles, review articles as well as short communications are invited. For planned papers, a title and short abstract (about 100 words) can be sent to the Editorial Office for announcement on this website.

Submitted manuscripts should not have been published previously, nor be under consideration for publication elsewhere (except conference proceedings papers). All manuscripts are thoroughly refereed through a single-blind peer-review process. A guide for authors and other relevant information for submission of manuscripts is available on the Instructions for Authors page. Cancers is an international peer-reviewed open access semimonthly journal published by MDPI.

Please visit the Instructions for Authors page before submitting a manuscript. The Article Processing Charge (APC) for publication in this open access journal is 2900 CHF (Swiss Francs). Submitted papers should be well formatted and use good English. Authors may use MDPI's English editing service prior to publication or during author revisions.

Keywords

  • tumor suppressor
  • cancer

Published Papers (3 papers)

Order results
Result details
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:

Research

Jump to: Review

17 pages, 2888 KiB  
Article
Mutant p53 Depletion by Novel Inhibitors for HSP40/J-Domain Proteins Derived from the Natural Compound Plumbagin
by Mohamed Alalem, Mrinalini Bhosale, Atul Ranjan, Satomi Yamamoto, Atsushi Kaida, Shigeto Nishikawa, Alejandro Parrales, Sana Farooki, Shrikant Anant, Subhash Padhye and Tomoo Iwakuma
Cancers 2022, 14(17), 4187; https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/cancers14174187 - 29 Aug 2022
Cited by 10 | Viewed by 1999
Abstract
Accumulation of missense mutant p53 (mutp53) in cancers promotes malignant progression. DNAJA1, a member of HSP40 (also known as J-domain proteins: JDPs), is shown to prevent misfolded or conformational mutp53 from proteasomal degradation. Given frequent addiction of cancers to oncogenic mutp53, depleting mutp53 [...] Read more.
Accumulation of missense mutant p53 (mutp53) in cancers promotes malignant progression. DNAJA1, a member of HSP40 (also known as J-domain proteins: JDPs), is shown to prevent misfolded or conformational mutp53 from proteasomal degradation. Given frequent addiction of cancers to oncogenic mutp53, depleting mutp53 by DNAJA1 inhibition is a promising approach for cancer therapy. However, there is no clinically available inhibitor for DNAJA1. Our in silico molecular docking study with a natural compound-derived small molecule library identified a plumbagin derivative, PLIHZ (plumbagin–isoniazid analog), as a potential compound binding to the J domain of DNAJA1. PLIHZ efficiently reduced the levels of DNAJA1 and several conformational mutp53 with minimal impact on DNA contact mutp53 and wild-type p53 (wtp53). An analog, called PLTFBH, which showed a similar activity to PLIHZ in reducing DNAJA1 and mutp53 levels, inhibited migration of cancer cells specifically carrying conformational mutp53, but not DNA contact mutp53, p53 null, and wtp53, which was attenuated by depletion of DNAJA1 or mutp53. Moreover, PLTFBH reduced levels of multiple other HSP40/JDPs with tyrosine 7 (Y7) and/or tyrosine 8 (Y8) but failed to deplete DNAJA1 mutants with alanine substitution of these amino acids. Our study suggests PLTFBH as a potential inhibitor for multiple HSP40/JDPs. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Tumor Suppressor Proteins in Cancers)
Show Figures

Figure 1

20 pages, 3340 KiB  
Article
APC and TP53 Mutations Predict Cetuximab Sensitivity across Consensus Molecular Subtypes
by Ramya Thota, Mingli Yang, Lance Pflieger, Michael J. Schell, Malini Rajan, Thomas B. Davis, Heiman Wang, Angela Presson, Warren Jack Pledger and Timothy J. Yeatman
Cancers 2021, 13(21), 5394; https://0-doi-org.brum.beds.ac.uk/10.3390/cancers13215394 - 27 Oct 2021
Cited by 6 | Viewed by 2563
Abstract
Recently, it was suggested that consensus molecular subtyping (CMS) may aide in predicting response to EGFR inhibitor (cetuximab) therapies. We recently identified that APC and TP53 as two tumor suppressor genes, when mutated, may enhance cetuximab sensitivity and may represent easily measured biomarkers [...] Read more.
Recently, it was suggested that consensus molecular subtyping (CMS) may aide in predicting response to EGFR inhibitor (cetuximab) therapies. We recently identified that APC and TP53 as two tumor suppressor genes, when mutated, may enhance cetuximab sensitivity and may represent easily measured biomarkers in tumors or blood. Our study aimed to use APC and TP53 mutations (AP) to refine the CMS classification to better predict responses to cetuximab. In total, 433 CRC tumors were classified into CMS1-4 subtypes. The cetuximab sensitivity (CTX-S) signature scores of AP vs. non-AP tumors were determined across each of the CMS classes. Tumors harboring combined AP mutations were predominantly enriched in the CMS2 class, and to a lesser degree, in the CMS4 class. On the other hand, AP mutated CRCs had significantly higher CTX-S scores compared to non-AP CRCs across all CMS classes. Similar results were also obtained in independent TCGA tumor collections (n = 531) and in PDMR PDX/PDO/PDC models (n = 477). In addition, the in vitro cetuximab growth inhibition was preferentially associated with the CMS2 cell lines harboring A/P genotypes. In conclusion, the AP mutation signature represents a convenient biomarker that refines the CMS classification to identify CRC subpopulations predicted to be sensitive to EGFR targeted therapies. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Tumor Suppressor Proteins in Cancers)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Review

Jump to: Research

18 pages, 1629 KiB  
Review
Regulating the p53 Tumor Suppressor Network at PML Biomolecular Condensates
by Magdalena C. Liebl and Thomas G. Hofmann
Cancers 2022, 14(19), 4549; https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers14194549 - 20 Sep 2022
Cited by 8 | Viewed by 2299
Abstract
By forming specific functional entities, nuclear biomolecular condensates play an important function in guiding biological processes. PML biomolecular condensates, also known as PML nuclear bodies (NBs), are macro-molecular sub-nuclear organelles involved in central biological processes, including anti-viral response and cell fate control upon [...] Read more.
By forming specific functional entities, nuclear biomolecular condensates play an important function in guiding biological processes. PML biomolecular condensates, also known as PML nuclear bodies (NBs), are macro-molecular sub-nuclear organelles involved in central biological processes, including anti-viral response and cell fate control upon genotoxic stress. PML condensate formation is stimulated upon cellular stress, and relies on protein–protein interactions establishing a PML protein meshwork capable of recruiting the tumor suppressor p53, along with numerous modifiers of p53, thus balancing p53 posttranslational modifications and activity. This stress-regulated process appears to be controlled by liquid–liquid phase separation (LLPS), which may facilitate regulated protein-unmixing of p53 and its regulators into PML nuclear condensates. In this review, we summarize and discuss the molecular mechanisms underlying PML nuclear condensate formation, and how these impact the biological function of p53 in driving the cell death and senescence responses. In addition, by using an in silico approach, we identify 299 proteins which share PML and p53 as binding partners, thus representing novel candidate proteins controlling p53 function and cell fate decision-making at the level of PML nuclear biocondensates. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Tumor Suppressor Proteins in Cancers)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Back to TopTop