Cited by 543Cancer-related Molecular PathwaysHeat shock proteins researchProtein Structure and Dynamics

Gain of function of mutant p53 by coaggregation with multiple tumor suppressors

Xu, Jie, Reumers, Joke, Couceiro, José R, De Smet, Frederik, Gallardo, Rodrigo, Rudyak, Stanislav, Cornelis, Ann, Rozenski, Jef +6 more·2011·Nature Chemical Biology

Abstract

Many p53 missense mutations possess dominant-negative activity and oncogenic gain of function. We report that for structurally destabilized p53 mutants, these effects result from mutant-induced coaggregation of wild-type p53 and its paralogs p63 and p73, thereby also inducing a heat-shock response. Aggregation of mutant p53 resulted from self-assembly of a conserved aggregation-nucleating sequence within the hydrophobic core of the DNA-binding domain, which becomes exposed after mutation. Suppressing the aggregation propensity of this sequence by mutagenesis abrogated gain of function and restored activity of wild-type p53 and its paralogs. In the p53 germline mutation database, tumors carrying aggregation-prone p53 mutations have a significantly lower frequency of wild-type allele loss as compared to tumors harboring nonaggregating mutations, suggesting a difference in clonal selection of aggregating mutants. Overall, our study reveals a novel disease mechanism for mutant p53 gain of function and suggests that, at least in some respects, cancer could be considered an aggregation-associated disease.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/nchembio.546

Cites

48 of 48 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Xu, J., Reumers, J., Couceiro, J. R., De Smet, F., Gallardo, R., Rudyak, S., Cornelis, A., Rozenski, J., Zwolinska, A., Marine, J.-C., Lambrechts, D., Suh, Y.-A., Rousseau, F., & Schymkowitz, J.
Affiliations
  • Vrije Universiteit Brussel (BE)
  • Rega Institute for Medical Research (BE)
  • Vlaams Instituut voor Biotechnologie (BE)
  • The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center (US)
Corresponding author
Schymkowitz, Joost
Venue
Nature Chemical Biology
Published
2011-03-27
Volume
7
Issue
5
Pages
285-295
ISSN
  • 1552-4450 (ISSN-L)
  • 1552-4469
OpenAlex
W1967058595
Cited by
543
References
48
Citations by year
2026: 19 · 2025: 31 · 2024: 36 · 2023: 32 · 2022: 53 · 2021: 41 · 2020: 43 · 2019: 37 · 2018: 42 · 2017: 24 · 2016: 46 · 2015: 30 · 2014: 39 · 2013: 29 · 2012: 29
FWCI
16.84
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Nature Chemical Biology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Lirias (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Cancer-related Molecular Pathways
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Heat shock proteins research
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Protein Structure and Dynamics
Keywords
mutant p53, gain-of-function, p63, p73, heat shock response, clonal selection, germline p53 mutation
MeSH terms
Tumor Protein p73, Animals, DNA-Binding Proteins, Humans, Mutation, Neoplasms, Nuclear Proteins, Protein Conformation, Transcription Factors, Tumor Cells, Cultured, Trans-Activators, Genes, p53, Tumor Suppressor Protein p53, Spectroscopy, Fourier Transform Infrared, Spectrometry, Mass, Electrospray Ionization, Tumor Suppressor Proteins, Mice, Hydrophobic and Hydrophilic Interactions

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review