Cited by 21Cancer-related Molecular PathwaysHeat shock proteins researchUbiquitin and proteasome pathways

The phenotype of MDM2 auto-degradation after DNA damage is due to epitope masking by phosphorylation

Open access
Cheng, Qian, Chen, Jiandong·2011·Cell Cycle

Abstract

It is widely accepted that DNA damage induces rapid degradation of MDM2 through phosphorylation, resulting in a transient reduction of MDM2 level. Elimination of MDM2 is a logical mechanism that stabilizes p53. This phenomenon has been reproduced by many independent studies and is frequently referenced. Here we present evidence that only phosphorylation-sensitive antibodies SMP14 and 2A10, but not other MDM2 antibodies, can detect robust down-regulation of MDM2 after DNA damage. Therefore, we conclude that DNA damage does not accelerate MDM2 auto-degradation. SMP14 and 2A10 are frequently used to detect human and mouse MDM2, respectively. While it is not clear whether the discrepancy is entirely due to the use of these antibodies, our results suggest that epitope masking by phosphorylation should be an important consideration when interpreting results of MDM2 analysis by SMP14 and 2A10.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.4161/cc.10.7.15249

Cites

36 of 36 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 37 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Prives C, Hall PA. The p53 pathway. J Pathol 1999; 187:112-26.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Cheng, Q., & Chen, J.
Affiliations
Moffitt Cancer Center (US)
Venue
Cell Cycle
Published
2011-04
Volume
10
Issue
7
Pages
1162-1166
ISSN
  • 1538-4101 (ISSN-L)
  • 1551-4005
OpenAlex
W1986441880
Cited by
21
References
37
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 2 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 3
FWCI
1.89
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Cell Cycle (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health
  • National Cancer Institute (CA141244, R01CA141244)
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 › Ubiquitin and proteasome pathways
Keywords
MDM2, protein degradation, DNA damage, phosphorylation, epitope masking, p53 stabilization, antibody specificity, p53 pathway
MeSH terms
Animals, Antibodies, Epitopes, Cell Line, DNA Damage, Gene Expression Regulation, Humans, Phosphorylation, Blotting, Western, Tumor Suppressor Protein p53, 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