DNA damage induced p53 stabilization: no indication for an involvement of p53 phosphorylation
Abstract
Abundance and activity of p53 are predominantly regulated posttranslationally. Structural disturbance in transcribed genes induced by radiation, e.g. DNA damage, or by transcriptional inhibitors cause p53 protein stabilization by a yet unknown mechanism. Using stable and transient transfections for the analysis of p53 mutant proteins, we have ruled out a role in stabilization by UV, gamma irradiation or actinomycin C for the following putative phosphorylation sites in the p53 protein: serines 6, 9, 15, 33, 315 and 392, and threonine 18. By double mutation combinations of phosphorylations were also ruled out; 6,9; 15,18; 15,37. These mutations eliminate modifications by casein kinases I and II, DNA-PK, ATM, CDK and JNK. Also the 30 carboxyterminal amino acids are not required for induced p53 stabilization. Thus neither phosphorylations of individual amino acids nor interactions of the carboxyterminus of p53 with cellular macromolecules appear to play a role in the stabilization process. The only single prerequisite for induced stabilization of p53 is its prior destabilization by Mdm2. However, the level of active Mdm2 must be controlled carefully: overexpression of Mdm2 inhibits UV induced p53 stabilization.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Mutation of multiple p53 phosphorylation sites including S15 and S20 did not abrogate p53 stabilization after DNA damage in cell culture.
“Mutation of multiple phosphorylation sites including S15 and S20 did not abrogate p53 stabilization after DNA damage in cell culture (Ashcroft et al, 1999;Blattner et al, 1999;Dumaz and Meek, 1999).”
From ATM activates p53 by regulating MDM2 oligomerization and E3 processivity (2009) · cites this paper as Blattner et al, 1999
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 67 · Cited by 151
- Authors
- Blattner, C., Tobiasch, E., Litfen, M., Rahmsdorf, H. J., & Herrlich, P.
- Affiliations
- Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (DE)
- Venue
- Oncogene
- Published
- 1999-03-04
- Volume
- 18
- Issue
- 9
- Pages
- 1723-1732
- ISSN
- 0950-9232 (ISSN-L)
- 1476-5594
- OpenAlex
- W2330189712
- Cited by
- 151
- References
- 67
- Citations by year
- 2022: 1 · 2021: 1 · 2019: 3 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 7 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 3
- FWCI
- 8.69
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Oncogene (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Cancer-related Molecular Pathways
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › DNA Repair Mechanisms
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Heat shock proteins research
- Keywords
- p53 stabilization, DNA damage, p53 phosphorylation, MDM2, post-translational regulation, casein kinase 1, casein kinase 2, DNA-dependent protein kinase, ATM, cyclin-dependent kinases, JNK, UV irradiation, gamma irradiation, actinomycin C, transcription inhibitors, mutant p53
- MeSH terms
- Animals, Binding Sites, DNA Damage, Gene Expression Regulation, Nuclear Proteins, Phosphorylation, Proto-Oncogene Proteins, Transcription, Genetic, Transfection, Tumor Suppressor Protein p53, 3T3 Cells, Mice, Proto-Oncogene Proteins c-mdm2
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