Wild-type p53 is normally expressed at
low levels and inactive due to the action of MDM2, an E3 ubiquitin ligase that
binds p53 and promotes its degradation [1,2]. However, p53 is stabilized in
response to various stresses, such as DNA damage or inappropriate oncogene
signaling, that might otherwise predispose a normal cell toward tumorigenesis
[3]. The stress-induced stabilization of p53 results from disruption of
p53-MDM2 binding. The majority of stabilized p53 accumulates in the nucleus
where it functions as a transcription factor, activating expression of genes
that induce either apoptosis or cell cycle arrests that can be either transient
(quiescence) or permanent (senescence). Thus, p53 eliminates cells with
potentially cancer-promoting lesions by inhibiting their growth or causing them
to die. mTOR is a cytoplasmic kinase whose activity is often elevated in
cancer [4]. mTOR converts signals from activated growth factor receptors into
downstream events that promote cell proliferation and survival. Previous
studies have demonstrated cross-talk between the p53 and mTOR signaling
pathways. For example, p53 can activate expression of several genes, including
TSC2, PTEN, IGF-BP3, and others, whose protein products can directly or
indirectly inhibit mTOR activity [5]. These observations make sense given that
p53 is a tumor suppressor and mTOR has more an oncogenic role in promoting
cancer cell survival and proliferation. However, more recent studies indicate
that the outcome of mTOR signaling can be context-dependent. Thus, while mTOR
signaling promotes proliferation and survival under normal conditions, mTOR
signaling can promote senescence under conditions in which the cell cycle is
blocked [6,7]. These observations support mTOR as a hub for receipt of
multiple inputs that ultimately determine cell fate. When conditions are
favorable mTOR activation promotes proliferation and survival, however, in the
context of conflicting signals (e.g. growth factor signaling vs. cell cycle
arrest), the effect of mTOR
activation is permanent cell cycle exit
(senescence). P21 is a cyclin-cdk inhibitor, transcriptional target of p53,
and potent inducer of senescence [8,9]. Blagosklonny and colleagues noted
that in some cases p53 induction did not induce senescence while ectopic
expression of p21 did [10]. This led to them to question the role of p53 in
the senescence program, and whether p53 may actively suppress senescence. To
address this, they used a cell line in which p21 was expressed from an
inducible (IPTG-driven) promoter [11]. In this cell line, transient p21
expression induced by IPTG caused the cells to undergo a senescent arrest
characterized by flat-cell phenotype, expression of senescence-associated beta
galactosidase, and a complete loss of proliferative potential after IPTG
removal [12]. To test the effect of p53 on this senescent arrest, the authors
first induced p21 by IPTG, and then induced p53 expression in the same cells by
addition of Nutlin-3a, a small molecule MDM2 antagonist and potent p53
stabilizer. Remarkably, cells in which p53 was induced by Nutlin-3a were able
to resume cycling and fully recover after IPTG removal. These results indicated
that p53 expression converted the senescence response in these cells to
quiescence. The suppression of senescence they observed was associated with
p53-dependent inhibition of mTOR activity [12]. In the current issue of Aging,
Korotchkina et al. [13] demonstrate that shRNA-mediated knockdown of TSC2, a
negative regulator of mTOR and p53 target gene [5], imposed senescence in these
Nutlin-3a treated cells. The results support a model in which p53 can suppress
senescence through upregulation of TSC2 and inhibition of mTOR.Our lab has also examined responses to p53
activation by Nutlin-3a. Our original report demonstrated that Nutlin-3a
promoted a non-permanent, tetraploid G1-arrest in two different p53 wild-type
cancer cell lines (HCT116 and U2OS). Both cell lines underwent
endoreduplication after Nutlin-3a removal, giving rise to tetraploid clones
resistant to therapy-induced apoptosis [14]. More recently, we demonstrated
that Nutlin-3a could promote a tetraploid G1-arrest in multiple p53 wild-type
cell lines [15]. However, some cell lines underwent endoreduplication to
relatively high extents after Nutlin-3a removal while other cell lines did
not. The resistance to endoreduplication observed in some cell lines was
associated with a prolonged 4N arrest after Nutlin-3a removal. Knockdown of
either p53 or p21 immediately after Nutlin-3a removal could drive
endoreduplication in otherwise resistant 4N cells. Finally, 4N arrested cells
had diminished p53 expression, but retained high levels of p21. Moreover,
these cells expressed senescence-associated beta galactosidase, had a flattened
cell phenotype, and underwent a permanent proliferation block (senescence)
after Nutlin-3a removal. These findings demonstrated that transient Nultin-3a
treatment can promote senescence in 4N cells of certain cell lines associated
with persistent p21 expression and resistance to endoreduplication. In terms
of a model, the results suggest p53 is required to initiate Nutlin-3a-induced
senescence by increasing p21 expression, but is not required to maintain
senescence. In light of the findings by Blagosklonny and colleagues, we would
speculate that the diminished level of p53 restores mTOR activity in these 4N
cells, and that mTOR activity, as well as elevated p21, are required for their
senescent arrest.
Implications / Questions
The findings of Blagosklonny and
colleagues have obvious clinical implications, particularly regarding the use
of Nutlin-3a or other MDM2 antagonists in cancer therapy. Nutlin-3a is in preclinical
stages of develop-ment and has tremendous potential as a therapeutic agent
against p53 wild-type cancers. Indeed, Nutlin-3a treatment inhibited the
growth of multiple p53 wild-type humantumor cell lines grown as xenografts in
nude mice [16,17], and Nutlin-3a causes a pronounced cell cycle arrest or
apoptotic response in p53 wild-type cancer cell lines [17,18]. However, if
p53 activation by Nutlin-3a can suppress senescence in cancer cells and cause
them to arrest in a quiescent state, then these cells could recover after
treatment and resume cycling. This would conceivably limit the effectiveness
of Nutlin-3a-based therapies. In this issue of Aging it was reported that the
status of the mTOR pathway can determine, at least in part, the choice between
senescence and quiescence in Nutlin-3a and p53-arrested cells [13]. In fact,
Nutlin-3a failed to inhibit mTOR in melanoma-derived cell lines and mouse
embryo fibroblasts that undergo senescence as their primary response to p53
activation. The findings imply that Nutlin-3a could be effective as a single
treatment agent, but only against cancers in which p53 fails to inhibit or only
partially inhibits mTOR. Studies to determine the molecular basis for why p53
can inhibit mTOR in some cell lines but not others will be closely watched.Nutlin-3a stabilizes p53 in a
non-genotoxic fashion without inducing DNA damage [19], and a question that
arises is the extent to which the findings of Blagosklonny's group can be
generalized to the p53 stress response. The stabilization and activation of
p53 in response to DNA damaging stress result from post-translational
modifications (phosphorylations) in p53 and MDM2 that disrupt their interaction
[3]. These same modifications can also influence promoter selectivity, thus
directing p53 to different target genes [20,21]. DNA damage can also activate
signaling pathways independent of p53 that influence transcript-tion, DNA
repair, etc. Blagosklonny and colleagues increased p53 expression through
mostly non-genotoxic mechanisms (Nutlin-3a treatment, Ad-p53 infection) and
showed this p53 could suppress senescence through mTOR inhibition [6,7,12].
It remains to be seen the extent to which p53 induction in the context of a
larger DNA damage response similarly suppresses senescence. On a related note,
Nutlin-3a has also been considered as a combinatorial agent for therapy with
DNA damaging chemotherapeutic drugs. Thus, it will be important to clarify the
extent to which p53 induced by combination Nutlin plus DNA damaging stress
suppresses senescence.A final question is why p53 would suppress
senescence and favor quiescence. A quiescent-like arrest mediated by p53 has
been well described. In response to low levels of DNA damage p53 induces
transient G1 and G2-phase arrests that allow cells time to repair their DNA
[22]. Once DNA repair is complete, cells can resume entry into S-phase and
mitosis. In this context, quiescence allows the cells to recover from whatever
stress is inducing p53. Blagosklonny and colleagues showed p53 induction by
Nutlin-3a suppressed senescence and favored quiescence, suggesting p53 was
functioning in a way to allow stress recovery. Again, since Nutlin-3a induces
p53 in a non-genotoxic fashion, it would be interesting to know whether this is
a property specific to p53 induced by non-genotoxic means or, in the case of
low level DNA damage, whether it is a property of p53 molecules that have not
been subject to damage-induced modifications.
Authors: Zhaohui Feng; Wenwei Hu; Elisa de Stanchina; Angelika K Teresky; Shengkan Jin; Scott Lowe; Arnold J Levine Journal: Cancer Res Date: 2007-04-01 Impact factor: 12.701
Authors: Christian Tovar; James Rosinski; Zoran Filipovic; Brian Higgins; Kenneth Kolinsky; Holly Hilton; Xiaolan Zhao; Binh T Vu; Weiguo Qing; Kathryn Packman; Ola Myklebost; David C Heimbrook; Lyubomir T Vassilev Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2006-01-27 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Thelma Thompson; Christian Tovar; Hong Yang; Daisy Carvajal; Binh T Vu; Qunli Xu; Geoffrey M Wahl; David C Heimbrook; Lyubomir T Vassilev Journal: J Biol Chem Date: 2004-10-06 Impact factor: 5.157
Authors: William H Chappell; Stephen L Abrams; Richard A Franklin; Michelle M LaHair; Giuseppe Montalto; Melchiorre Cervello; Alberto M Martelli; Ferdinando Nicoletti; Saverio Candido; Massimo Libra; Jerry Polesel; Renato Talamini; Michele Milella; Agostino Tafuri; Linda S Steelman; James A McCubrey Journal: Cell Cycle Date: 2012-11-16 Impact factor: 4.534
Authors: William H Chappell; Brian D Lehmann; David M Terrian; Stephen L Abrams; Linda S Steelman; James A McCubrey Journal: Cell Cycle Date: 2012-11-27 Impact factor: 4.534
Authors: Albert E Berman; Olga V Leontieva; Venkatesh Natarajan; James A McCubrey; Zoya N Demidenko; Mikhail A Nikiforov Journal: Oncotarget Date: 2012-12
Authors: James A McCubrey; Linda S Steelman; William H Chappell; Stephen L Abrams; Giuseppe Montalto; Melchiorre Cervello; Ferdinando Nicoletti; Paolo Fagone; Grazia Malaponte; Maria C Mazzarino; Saverio Candido; Massimo Libra; Jörg Bäsecke; Sanja Mijatovic; Danijela Maksimovic-Ivanic; Michele Milella; Agostino Tafuri; Lucio Cocco; Camilla Evangelisti; Francesca Chiarini; Alberto M Martelli Journal: Oncotarget Date: 2012-09