Regulating the genome surveillance system: miRNAs and the p53 super family

The p53 gene super family consists of three members; TP53, TP63 and TP73, encoding proteins p53, p63 and p73. Whilst p63 appears to have an essential role in embryonic development with a less clear role in carcinogenesis, irregularities in p53 and p73 signalling are implicated in tumour formation. As such, p53 is a tumour suppressor which is mutated in over 50% cancers and p73 was recently formally classified as a tumour suppressor based on data showing p73 deficient mice generate spontaneous tumours similar to those observed in p53 null mice. Dysregulation of both p53 and p73 has been correlated with cancer progression in many cell types and although mutation of these genes is often observed, some form of p53/p73 deregulation likely occurs in all tumour cells. The discovery that complementary micro RNAs (miRNAs) are able to target both of these genes provides a potential new means of perturbing p53/p73 signalling networks in cancer cells. Here we summarise the current literature regarding the involvement of miRNAs in the modulation of p53 family proteins and cancer development and detail the use of in silico methods to reveal key miRNA targets.     

p73 in apoptosis

The TP53 tumour-suppressor gene belongs to a family that includes the two recently identified homologues TP63 and TP73. Overexpression of p73 can activate typical p53-responsive genes and induce apoptosis like p53. In addition, activation of p73 has been implicated in apoptotic cell death induced by aberrant cell proliferation and some forms of DNA-damage. These data together with the localization of TP73 on chromosome 1p36, a region frequently deleted in a variety of human cancers, led to the hypothesis that p73 has tumour suppressor activity just like p53. However, despite its proapoptotic activity in vitro, the lack of tumour-formation in p73 knock-out mice and primary human tumour data demonstrating overexpression of wild-type p73 currently argue against p73 being a classical tumour suppressor. Interestingly, in contrast to TP53, TP73 gives rise to a complex pattern of pro- and antiapoptotic p73 isoforms generated by differential splicing and alternative promoter usage. Therefore further insight into the function and regulation of these structurally and functionally diverse p73 proteins is needed to elucidate the role of TP73 for apoptosis and human tumorigenesis.     

Role of the newer p53 family proteins in malignancy

The most recently identified members of the p53 family, p63 and p73, share certain structural and functional similarities with p53. Both p63 and p73 can bind to canonical p53-DNA-binding sites, transactivate the promoters of known p53 target genes and induce apoptosis. Despite these similarities there are many important differences. In contrast to p53, p63 and p73 give rise to multiple distinct protein isoforms that have different functional properties. Upstream signaling pathways involved in the activation of p63 and p73 differ from those involved in p53 activation. Only a subset of the DNA damaging agents that induce p53 can induce p73. Cellular and viral oncoproteins can discriminate between p53 and the newer family members. In addition, the levels of p63 and p73 are affected by certain states of cellular differentiation. Finally, it is becoming clear that the newest members of the p53 family are not classical tumor suppressor genes. In contrast to the high prevalence of p53 mutations in human cancers, p63 and p73 mutations are rare. Indeed, levels of p73 increase during malignant progression. In addition, unlike p53-/- mice, mice lacking p63 and p73 do not develop tumors, but instead have significant developmental abnormalities. Mutations in p63 have also been detected in humans with the ectodermal dysplastic syndrome EEC. Further studies are required to determine whether qualitative or quantitative differences in the expression of p63 and p73 isoforms are important in the development of human cancers.     

ASPP1 and ASPP2: common activators of p53 family members

We recently showed that ASPP1 and ASPP2 stimulate the apoptotic function of p53. We show here that ASPP1 and ASPP2 also induce apoptosis independently of p53. By binding to p63 and p73 in vitro and in vivo, ASPP1 and ASPP2 stimulate the transactivation function of p63 and p73 on the promoters of Bax, PIG3, and PUMA but not mdm2 or p21(WAF-1/CIP1). The expression of ASPP1 and ASPP2 also enhances the apoptotic function of p63 and p73 by selectively inducing the expression of endogenous p53 target genes, such as PIG3 and PUMA, but not mdm2 or p21(WAF-1/CIP1). Removal of endogenous p63 or p73 with RNA interference demonstrated that (16) the p53-independent apoptotic function of ASPP1 and ASPP2 is mediated mainly by p63 and p73. Hence, ASPP1 and ASPP2 are the first two identified common activators of all p53 family members. All these results suggest that ASPP1 and ASPP2 could suppress tumor growth even in tumors expressing mutant p53.     

Of flies and men; p53, a tumour suppressor

The completion of the Drosophila genome sequencing project [Science 287 (2000) 2185] has reconfirmed the fruit fly as a model organism to study human disease. Comparison studies have shown that two thirds of genes implicated in human cancers have counterparts in the fly [Curr. Opin. Genet. Dev. 11 (2001) 274; J. Cell Biol. 150 (2000) F23], including the tumour suppressor, p53. The suitability of the fruit fly to study the function of the tumour suppressor p53 is further exemplified by the lack of p53 family members within the fly genome, i.e., no homologues to p63 and p73 have been identified. Hence, there is no redundancy between family members greatly facilitating the analysis of p53 function. In addition, studying p53 in Drosophila provides an opportunity to learn about the evolution of tumour suppressors. Here, we will discuss what is known about Drosophila p53 in relation to human p53.     

p63 and p73: roles in development and tumor formation

The tumor suppressor p53 is critically important in the cellular damage response and is the founding member of a family of proteins. All three genes regulate cell cycle and apoptosis after DNA damage. However, despite a remarkable structural and partly functional similarity among p53, p63, and p73, mouse knockout studies revealed an unexpected functional diversity among them. p63 and p73 knockouts exhibit severe developmental abnormalities but no increased cancer susceptibility, whereas this picture is reversed for p53 knockouts. Neither p63 nor p73 is the target of inactivating mutations in human cancers. Genomic organization is more complex in p63 and p73, largely the result of an alternative internal promoter generating NH2-terminally deleted dominant-negative proteins that engage in inhibitory circuits within the family. Deregulated dominant-negative p73 isoforms might play an active oncogenic role in some human cancers. Moreover, COOH-terminal extensions specific for p63 and p73 enable further unique protein-protein interactions with regulatory pathways involved in development, differentiation, proliferation, and damage response. Thus, p53 family proteins take on functions within a wide biological spectrum stretching from development (p63 and p73), DNA damage response via apoptosis and cell cycle arrest (p53, TAp63, and TAp73), chemosensitivity of tumors (p53 and TAp73), and immortalization and oncogenesis (DeltaNp73).     

p73 and p63 are homotetramers capable of weak heterotypic interactions with each other but not with p53.

Mutations in the p53 tumor suppressor gene are the most frequent genetic alterations found in human cancers. Recent identification of two human homologues of p53 has raised the prospect of functional interactions between family members via a conserved oligomerization domain. Here we report in vitro and in vivo analysis of homo- and hetero-oligomerization of p53 and its homologues, p63 and p73. The oligomerization domains of p63 and p73 can independently fold into stable homotetramers, as previously observed for p53. However, the oligomerization domain of p53 does not associate with that of either p73 or p63, even when p53 is in 15-fold excess. On the other hand, the oligomerization domains of p63 and p73 are able to weakly associate with one another in vitro. In vivo co-transfection assays of the ability of p53 and its homologues to activate reporter genes showed that a DNA-binding mutant of p53 was not able to act in a dominant negative manner over wild-type p73 or p63 but that a p73 mutant could inhibit the activity of wild-type p63. These data suggest that mutant p53 in cancer cells will not interact with endogenous or exogenous p63 or p73 via their respective oligomerization domains. It also establishes that the multiple isoforms of p63 as well as those of p73 are capable of interacting via their common oligomerization domain.