From p63 to p53 across p73

Most genes are members of a family. It is generally believed that a gene family derives from an ancestral gene by duplication and divergence. The tumor suppressor p53 was a striking exception to this established rule. However, two new p53 homologs, p63 and p73, have recently been described [1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6]. At the sequence level, p63 and p73 are more similar to each other than each is to p53, suggesting the possibility that the ancestral gene is a gene resembling p63/p73, while p53 is phylogenetically younger [1 and 2].

The complexity of the family has also been enriched by the alternatively spliced forms of p63 and p73, which give rise to a complex network of proteins involved in the control of cell proliferation, apoptosis and development [1, 2, 4, 7, 8 and 9].

In this review we will mainly focus on similarities and differences as well as relationships among p63, p73 and p53.     

p63 and p73 expression in extrahepatic bile duct carcinoma and their clinical significance

p53 plays a pivotal role in the prevention of human tumor formation. p73 and p63 are new members of the p53 tumor suppressor family, which are becoming increasingly recognized as important players in human tumorigenesis. However, the roles of these proteins are not well elucidated in extrahepatic bile duct (EBD) carcinoma. We examined expressions of the p63 and p73 genes and proteins in normal biliary epithelia, biliary dysplasias, and EBD carcinomas using immunohistochemistry and RT-PCR analysis. p63 and p73 proteins were overexpressed in 26.3 and 41.0% of EBD carcinomas, respectively. p63 protein expression was more frequent in tumors with vascular invasion (P = 0.002) and distal location (P = 0.04), while p73 expression was more common in cancers with deeper tumor invasion (P = 0.04). Patients with tumors co-expressing both p63 and p73 were found to have a significantly worse overall survival rate compared to those with either p63 or p73 expression (P < 0.05) as determined in univariate and multivariate analyses. Our results strongly imply that the p53 family members have different functions in EBD carcinomas. Our data also indicate that interactions between p63 and p73 play an important role in tumorigenesis of EBD carcinoma.     

p63 is a suppressor of tumorigenesis and metastasis interacting with mutant p53

p53 mutations, occurring in two-thirds of all human cancers, confer a gain of function phenotype, including the ability to form metastasis, the determining feature in the prognosis of most human cancer. This effect seems mediated at least partially by its ability to physically interact with p63, thus affecting a cell invasion pathway, and accordingly, p63 is deregulated in human cancers. In addition, p63, as an 'epithelial organizer', directly impinges on epidermal mesenchimal transition, stemness, senescence, cell death and cell cycle arrest, all determinant in cancer, and thus p63 affects chemosensitivity and chemoresistance. This demonstrates an important role for p63 in cancer development and its progression, and the aim of this review is to set this new evidence that links p63 to metastasis within the context of the long conserved other functions of p63.     

OCT4 as a target of miR-34a stimulates p63 but inhibits p53 to promote human cell transformation

Human cell transformation is a key step for oncogenic development, which involves multiple pathways; however, the mechanism remains unclear. To test our hypothesis whether cell oncogenic transformation shares some mechanisms with the process of reprogramming non-stem cells to induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSC), we studied the relationship among the key factors for promoting or inhibiting iPSC in radiation-transformed human epithelial cell lines derived from different tissues (lung, breast and colon). We unexpectedly found that p63 and OCT4 were highly expressed (accompanied by low expressed p53 and miR-34a) in all transformed cell lines examined when compared with their non-transformed counterparts. We further elucidated the relationship of these factors: the 3p strand of miR-34a directly targeted OCT4 by binding to the 3′ untranslated region (3′-UTR) of OCT4 and, OCT4, in turn, stimulated p63 but inhibited p53 expression by binding to a specific region of the p63 or p53 promoter. Moreover, we revealed that the effects of OCT4 on promoting cell oncogenic transformation were by affecting p63 and p53. These results support that a positive loop exists in human cells: OCT4 upregulation as a consequence of inhibition of miR-34a, promotes p63 but suppresses p53 expression, which further stimulates OCT4 upregulation by downregulating miR-34a. This functional loop contributes significantly to cell transformation and, most likely, also to the iPSC process.     

p73 and MDM2 confer the resistance of epidermoid carcinoma to cisplatin by blocking p53

p73 responds to DNA damage and exerts its pro-apoptotic function. However, p73 might contribute to the development of drug-resistance in certain tumor cells. In this study, we found that p73 and MDM2 correlate with cisplatin-resistant phenotype of human epidermoid carcinoma-derived cells. p73 and MDM2 were kept at low levels in the cisplatin-sensitive KB-3-1 cells, whereas p53 was induced to be phosphorylated at Ser-15 in response to cisplatin. In contrast, p73 and MDM2 were expressed at higher levels, and cisplatin-mediated p53 phosphorylation was undetectable in the cisplatin-resistant KCP-4 cells. Enforced expression of p73 in KB-3-1 cells caused an accumulation of unphosphorylated form of p53 and MDM2, and conferred the cisplatin resistance. Collectively, our results suggest that a loss of the cisplatin sensitivity is at least in part due to a lack of cisplatin-induced p53 phosphorylation, and p73 might cooperate with MDM2 to be involved in this process.