E2F and Ras synergize in transcriptionally activating p14ARF expression

The INK4a/ARF locus, which is frequently inactivated in human tumors, encodes two distinct tumor suppressive proteins, ARF and p16INK4a. ARF stabilizes and activates p53 by negating the effects of mdm2 on p53. Furthermore, its function is not restricted to the p53 pathway and it also inhibits cell proliferation in cells lacking p53. Expression of ARF is up-regulated in response to a number of oncogenic stimuli including E2F1. We show here that while oncogenic Ras does not significantly affect p1(4AR)F expression in normal human cells it activates p1(4AR)F in cells containing deregulated E2F. Moreover, oncogenic Ras and E2F1 synergize in activating p1(4AR)F expression. Activation of p1(4AR)F promoter by E2F1 persists in the absence of the consensus E2F-binding sites in this promoter, indicating that this activation also occurs through non- canonical binding sites. The activation by oncogenic Ras requires both E2F and Sp-1 activity, demonstrating the complex regulation of p14(ARF) in response to oncogenic stimuli.     

Oncogenic ras and p53 cooperate to induce cellular senescence

Oncogenic activation of the mitogen-activated protein (MAP) kinase cascade in murine fibroblasts initiates a senescence-like cell cycle arrest that depends on the ARF/p53 tumor suppressor pathway. To investigate whether p53 is sufficient to induce senescence, we introduced a conditional murine p53 allele (p53(val135)) into p53-null mouse embryonic fibroblasts and examined cell proliferation and senescence in cells expressing p53, oncogenic Ras, or both gene products. Conditional p53 activation efficiently induced a reversible cell cycle arrest but was unable to induce features of senescence. In contrast, coexpression of oncogenic ras or activated mek1 with p53 enhanced both p53 levels and activity relative to that observed for p53 alone and produced an irreversible cell cycle arrest that displayed features of cellular senescence. p19(ARF) was required for this effect, since p53(-/-) ARF(-/-) double-null cells were unable to undergo senescence following coexpression of oncogenic Ras and p53. Although the levels of exogenous p53 achieved in ARF-null cells were relatively low, the stabilizing effects of p19(ARF) on p53 could not explain the cooperation between oncogenic Ras and p53 in promoting senescence. Hence, enforced p53 expression without oncogenic ras in p53(-/-) mdm2(-/-) double-null cells produced extremely high p53 levels but did not induce senescence. Taken together, our results indicate that oncogenic activation of the MAP kinase pathway in murine fibroblasts converts p53 into a senescence inducer through both quantitative and qualitative mechanisms.     

E2F and Ras Synergize in Transcriptionally Activating p14ARF Expression

The INK4a/ARF locus, which is frequently inactivated in human tumors, encodes two distinct tumor suppressive proteins, ARF and p16^INK4a. ARF stabilizes and activates p53 by negating the effects of mdm2 on p53. Furthermore, its function is not restricted to the p53 pathway and it also inhibits cell proliferation in cells lacking p53. Expression of ARF is up-regulated in response to a number of oncogenic stimuli including E2F1. We show here that while oncogenic Ras does not significantly affect p14^ARF expression in normal human cells it activates p14^ARF in cells containing deregulated E2F. Moreover, oncogenic Ras and E2F1 synergize in activating p14^ARF expression. Activation of p14^ARF promoter by E2F1 persists in the absence of the consensus E2F-binding sites in this promoter, indicating that this activation also occurs through non- canonical binding sites. The activation by oncogenic Ras requires both E2F and Sp-1 activity, demonstrating the complex regulation of p14^ARF in response to oncogenic stimuli.     

The ARF/Oncogene Pathway Activates p53 Acetylation within the DNA Binding Domain

Stabilization of the p53 tumor suppressor is a critical event in the response to various forms of cellular stress. Two distinct signaling pathways are thought to lead to this stabilization, depending on the type of cellular stress encountered. Genotoxic stress, such as chromosomal breaks or lesions induced by chemotherapeutic agents, result in the activation of the well-characterized DNA damage response pathway. Conversely, cellular stress that results from the aberrant activation of oncogenes triggers p53 stabilization via the induction of the p19ARF pathway. While activation of the DNA damage pathway ultimately causes a complex array of post-translational modifications on p53, activation few if any modifications have been demonstrated to occur following activation of the p19ARF pathway. We and others have recently identified a novel modification on p53, acetylation of lysine 120 within the DNA binding domain. This acetylation event is eliminated by tumor-derived mutations in p53 and its presence is required for the tumor suppressor apoptotic function of p53. We demonstrate here that both the DNA damage response pathway and the p19ARF/oncogene stress pathway induce the acetylation of p53 at lysine 120.     

Opposing effects of Ras on p53: transcriptional activation of mdm2 and induction of p19ARF

Mdm2 acts as a major regulator of the tumor suppressor p53 by targeting its destruction. Here, we show that the mdm2 gene is also regulated by the Ras-driven Raf/MEK/MAP kinase pathway, in a p53-independent manner. Mdm2 induced by activated Raf degrades p53 in the absence of the Mdm2 inhibitor p19ARF. This regulatory pathway accounts for the observation that cells transformed by oncogenic Ras are more resistant to p53-dependent apoptosis following exposure to DNA damage. Activation of the Ras-induced Raf/MEK/MAP kinase may therefore play a key role in suppressing p53 during tumor development and treatment. In primary cells, Raf also activates the Mdm2 inhibitor p19ARF. Levels of p53 are therefore determined by opposing effects of Raf-induced p19ARF and Mdm2.     

Regulation of Lef-mediated transcription and p53-dependent pathway by associating beta-catenin with CBP/p300

CBP and its homologue p300 play significant roles in cell differentiation, cell cycle, and anti-oncogenesis. We demonstrated that beta-catenin, recently known as a potent oncogene, and CBP/p300 are associated through its CH3 region, which is a primary target of adenoviral oncoprotein E1A and various nuclear proteins, such as p53, cyclin E, and AP-1, and both are colocalized in the nuclear bodies. CBP/p300 potentiated Lef-mediated transactivation of beta-catenin, and E1A, a potent inhibitor of CBP/p300, repressed its transactivation. Furthermore, overexpression of stable beta-catenin mutant competitively suppressed the p53-dependent pathway. These may be a key mechanism of beta-catenin involved in oncogenic events underlying disruption of tumor suppressor function through CBP/p300.     

Immortalization of human mammary epithelial cells is associated with inactivation of the p14ARF-p53 pathway

Inactivation of the ARF-p53 tumor suppressor pathway leads to immortalization of murine fibroblasts. The role of this pathway in immortalization of human epithelial cells is not clear. We analyzed the functionality of the p14(ARF)-p53 pathway in human mammary epithelial cells (MEC) immortalized by human papillomavirus 16 (HPV16) E6, the p53 degradation-defective E6 mutant Y54D, or hTERT. E6-MEC or E6Y54D-MEC maintains high-level expression of p14(ARF). Late-passage hTERT-immortalized MEC express p53 but down-regulate p14(ARF). Enforced expression of p14(ARF) induces p53-dependent senescence in hTERT-MEC, while both E6-MEC and E6Y54D-MEC are resistant. We show that E6Y54D inhibits p14(ARF)-induced activation of p53 without inactivation of the p53-dependent DNA damage response. Hence, p53 degradation and inhibition of p14(ARF) signaling to p53 are independent functions of HPV16 E6. Our observations imply that long-term proliferation of MEC requires inactivation of the p14(ARF)-p53 pathway.     

p14ARF activates a Tip60-dependent and p53-independent ATM/ATR/CHK pathway in response to genotoxic stress

p14ARF is a tumor suppressor that controls a well-described p53/Mdm2-dependent checkpoint in response to oncogenic signals. Here, new insights into the tumor-suppressive function of p14ARF are provided. We previously showed that p14ARF can induce a p53-independent G2 cell cycle arrest. In this study, we demonstrate that the activation of ATM/ATR/CHK signaling pathways contributes to this G2 checkpoint and highlight the interrelated roles of p14ARF and the Tip60 protein in the initiation of this DNA damage-signaling cascade. We show that Tip60 is a new direct p14ARF binding partner and that its expression is upregulated and required for ATM/CHK2 activation in response to p14ARF. Strikingly, both p14ARF and Tip60 products accumulate following a cell treatment with alkylating agents and are absolutely required for ATM/CHK2 activation in this setting. Moreover, and consistent with p14ARF being a determinant of CHK2 phosphorylation in lung carcinogenesis, a strong correlation between p14ARF and phospho-CHK2 (Thr68) protein expression is observed in human lung tumors (P < 0.00006). Overall, these data point to a novel regulatory pathway that mediates the p53-independent negative-cell-growth control of p14ARF. Inactivation of this pathway is likely to contribute to lung carcinogenesis.     

p53 and p21 form an inducible barrier that protects cells against cyclin E-cdk2 deregulation

BACKGROUND: Cyclin E, in conjunction with its catalytic partner cdk2, is rate limiting for entry into the S phase of the cell cycle. Cancer cells frequently contain mutations within the cyclin D-Retinoblastoma protein pathway that lead to inappropriate cyclin E-cdk2 activation. Although deregulated cyclin E-cdk2 activity is believed to directly contribute to the neoplastic progression of these cancers, the mechanism of cyclin E-induced neoplasia is unknown. RESULTS: We studied the consequences of deregulated cyclin E expression in primary cells and found that cyclin E initiated a p53-dependent response that prevented excess cdk2 activity by inducing expression of the p21Cip1 cdk inhibitor. The increased p53 activity was not associated with increased expression of the p14ARF tumor suppressor. Instead, cyclin E led to increased p53 serine15 phosphorylation that was sensitive to inhibitors of the ATM/ATR family. When either p53 or p21cip1 was rendered nonfunctional, then the excess cyclin E became catalytically active and caused defects in S phase progression, increased ploidy, and genetic instability. CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that p53 and p21 form an inducible barrier that protects cells against the deleterious consequences of cyclin E-cdk2 deregulation. A response that restrains cyclin E deregulation is likely to be a general protective mechanism against neoplastic transformation. Loss of this response may thus be required before deregulated cyclin E can become fully oncogenic in cancer cells. Furthermore, the combination of excess cyclin E and p53 loss may be particularly genotoxic, because cells cannot appropriately respond to the cell cycle anomalies caused by excess cyclin E-cdk2 activity.     

ARF directly binds DP1: interaction with DP1 coincides with the G1 arrest function of ARF

The tumor suppressor ARF inhibits cell growth in response to oncogenic stress in a p53-dependent manner. Also, there is an increasing appreciation of ARF's ability to inhibit cell growth via multiple p53-independent mechanisms, including its ability to regulate the E2F pathway. We have investigated the interaction between the tumor suppressor ARF and DP1, the DNA binding partner of the E2F family of factors (E2Fs). We show that ARF directly binds to DP1. Interestingly, binding of ARF to DP1 results in an inhibition of the interaction between DP1 and E2F1. Moreover, ARF regulates the association of DP1 with its target gene, as evidenced by a chromatin immunoprecipitation assay with the dhfr promoter. By analyzing a series of ARF mutants, we demonstrate a strong correlation between ARF's ability to regulate DP1 and its ability to cause cell cycle arrest. S-phase inhibition by ARF is preceded by an inhibition of the E2F-activated genes. Moreover, we provide evidence that ARF inhibits the E2F-activated genes independently of p53 and Mdm2. Also, the interaction between ARF and DP1 is enhanced during oncogenic stress and "culture shock." Taken together, our results show that DP1 is a critical direct target of ARF.