Article

Pharmacological activation of p53 in cancer cells.

Department of Dermatology, The University of Alabama at Birmingham, Volker Hall, Room 509, 1530 3rd Avenue South, Birmingham, Alabama 35294-0019, USA.
Current pharmaceutical design (Impact Factor: 3.29). 03/2011; 17(6):631-9. DOI: 10.2174/138161211795222595
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Tumor suppressor p53 is a transcription factor that regulates a large number of genes and guards against genomic instability. Under multiple cellular stress conditions, p53 functions to block cell cycle progression transiently unless proper DNA repair occurs. Failure of DNA repair mechanisms leads to p53-mediated induction of cell death programs. p53 also induces permanent cell cycle arrest known as cellular senescence. During neoplastic progression, p53 is often mutated and fails to efficiently perform these functions. It has been observed that cancers carrying a wild-type p53 may also have interrupted downstream p53 regulatory signaling leading to disruption in p53 functions. Therefore, strategies to reactivate p53 provide an attractive approach for blocking tumor pathogenesis and its progression. p53 activation may also lead to regression of existing early neoplastic lesions and therefore may be important in developing cancer chemoprevention protocols. A large number of small molecules capable of reactivating p53 have been developed and some are progressing through clinical trials for prospective human applications. However, several questions remain to be answered at this stage. For example, it is not certain if pharmacological activation of p53 will restore all of its multifaceted biological responses, assuming that the targeted cell is not killed following p53 activation. It remains to be demonstrated whether the distinct biological effects regulated by specific post-translationally modified p53 can effectively be restored by refolding mutant p53. Mutant p53 can be classified as a loss-of-function or gain-of-function protein depending on the type of mutation. It is also unclear whether reactivation of mutant p53 has similar consequences in cells carrying gain-of-function and loss-of-function p53 mutants. This review provides a description of various pharmacological approaches tested to activate p53 (both wild-type and mutant) and to assess the effects of activated p53 on neoplastic progression.

0 Followers
 · 
107 Views
  • Leukemia & lymphoma 02/2014; DOI:10.3109/10428194.2013.873539 · 2.61 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The p53 tumor suppressor gene encodes a homo-tetrameric transcription factor which is activated in response to a variety of cellular stressors, including DNA damage and oncogene activation. p53 mutations occur in more than 50% of human cancers. Although p53 has been shown to regulate Wnt signaling, the underlying mechanisms are not well understood. Here we show that silencing p53 in colon cancer cells led to increased expression of Aha1, a co-chaperone of Hsp90. Increased Aha1 levels were associated with enhanced interactions with Hsp90 resulting in increased Hsp90 ATPase activity. Moreover, increased Hsp90 ATPase activity resulted in increased phosphorylation of Akt and GSK3β, leading to enhanced expression of Wnt target genes including Axin-2, c-Myc and Naked-1. Significantly, levels of Aha1, Hsp90 ATPase activity, Akt and GSK3β phosphorylation and expression of Wnt target genes were increased in the colons of p53 null as compared to p53 wild type mice. Using p53 heterozygous mutant epithelial cells from Li-Fraumeni syndrome patients, we show that a monoallelic mutation of p53 was sufficient to activate the Aha1/Hsp90 ATPase axis leading to stimulation of Wnt signaling and increased expression of Axin-2, c-Myc and Naked-1 in these cells. Pharmacologic intervention with CP-31398, a p53 rescue agent, inhibited recruitment of Aha1 to Hsp90 and suppressed Wnt-mediated gene expression in colon cancer cells. Taken together, this study provides new insights into the mechanism by which p53 regulates Wnt signaling and raises the intriguing possibility that p53 status may affect the efficacy of anti-cancer therapies targeting Hsp90 ATPase.
    Journal of Biological Chemistry 01/2014; 289(10). DOI:10.1074/jbc.M113.532523 · 4.60 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The aryl hydrocarbon receptor (AhR), a client protein of heat shock protein 90 (Hsp90), is a ligand activated transcription factor that plays a role in polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon (PAH) induced carcinogenesis. Tobacco smoke activates AhR signaling leading to increased transcription of CYP1A1 and CYP1B1, which encode proteins that convert PAHs to mutagens. Recently, p53 was found to regulate Hsp90 ATPase activity via effects on activator of Hsp90 ATPase (Aha1). It's possible, therefore, that AhR-dependent expression of CYP1A1 and CYP1B1 might be affected by p53 status. The main objective of this study was to determine if p53 modulated AhR-dependent gene expression and PAH metabolism. Here we show that silencing p53 led to elevated Aha1 levels, increased Hsp90 ATPase activity and enhanced CYP1A1 and CYP1B1 expression. Overexpression of wild type p53 suppressed levels of CYP1A1 and CYP1B1. The significance of Aha1 in mediating these p53-dependent effects was determined. Silencing of Aha1 led to reduced Hsp90 ATPase activity and down regulation of CYP1A1 and CYP1B1. In contrast, overexpressing Aha1 was associated with increased Hsp90 ATPase activity and elevated levels of CYP1A1 and CYP1B1. Using p53 heterozygous mutant epithelial cells from Li-Fraumeni Syndrome patients, we show that monoallelic mutation of p53 was associated with elevated levels of CYP1A1 and CYP1B1 under both basal conditions and following treatment with benzo[a]pyrene. Treatment with CP-31398, a p53 rescue compound, suppressed benzo[a]pyrene-mediated induction of CYP1A1 and CYP1B1 and the formation of DNA adducts. Collectively, our results suggest that p53 affects AhR-dependent gene expression, PAH metabolism and possibly carcinogenesis.
    Cancer Prevention Research 04/2014; 7(6). DOI:10.1158/1940-6207.CAPR-14-0051 · 5.27 Impact Factor