| Literature DB >> 31689961 |
Mitsuhiro Nakamura1, Takeshi Obata2, Takiko Daikoku3, Hiroshi Fujiwara4.
Abstract
Dysfunction of p53 is observed in the many malignant tumors. In cervical cancer, p53 is inactivated by degradation through the complex with human papilloma virus (HPV) oncoprotein E6 and E6-associated protein (E6AP), an E3 ubiquitin protein ligase. In endometrial cancer, overexpression of p53 in immunohistochemistry is a significant prognostic factor. A discrepancy between p53 overexpression and TP53 mutations is observed in endometrioid endometrial cancer, indicating that the accumulation of p53 protein can be explained by not only gene mutations but also dysregulation of the factors such as ERβ and MDM2. Furthermore, the double-positive expression of immunoreactive estrogen receptor (ER) β and p53 proteins is closely associated with the incidence of metastasis and/or recurrence. High-grade serous ovarian carcinoma (HGSC) arises from secretary cells in the fallopian tube. The secretary cell outgrowth (SCOUT) with TP53 mutations progresses to HGSC via the p53 signature, serous intraepithelial lesion (STIL), and serous intraepithelial carcinoma (STIC), indicating that TP53 mutation is associated with carcinogenesis of HGSC. Clinical application targeting p53 has been approved for some malignant tumors. Gene therapy by the adenovirus-mediated p53 gene transfer system is performed for head and neck cancer. A clinical phase III trial using MDM2/X inhibitors, idasanutlin (RG7388) combined with cytarabine, is being performed involving relapse/refractory acute myeloid leukemia patients. The use of adenoviruses as live vectors which encode wild-type p53 has given promising results in cervical cancer patients.Entities:
Keywords: HPV; STIC; TP53 mutation; cervical cancer; endometrial cancer; gene therapy; ovarian cancer; p53 overexpression; p53 signature
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31689961 PMCID: PMC6862296 DOI: 10.3390/ijms20215482
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Mol Sci ISSN: 1422-0067 Impact factor: 5.923
Figure 1Synergistic functions of E6 and E7 oncoproteins. E6 induces the ubiquitin-dependent proteosomal degradation of p53 by forming a complex with E6 and E6-associated protein (E6AP), resulting in the inhibition of Notch1 and Erb2 expressions. E6 also inhibits transcriptional conjugating factors of p53 such as CBP/p300 and ADA3, and apoptosis-inducing factors such as BAK, far-associated protein with death domain (FADD), and pro-caspase8. E7 inhibits RB, which releases E2F. E2F induces the expression of cyclin-A and E, resulting in cell proliferation. E2F also induces the expression of p14ARF. The complex with p14ARF and human double minute2 (HDM2) represses the p53 degradation, resulting in inducing p53-dependent apoptosis. E7 also inactivates INK4A and rescues E6 from inhibition by INK4A. Up and down arrows, up and down regulation, respectively.
The rate of p53 immunoexpression and prognostic impact in endometrial cancer patients.
| Authors | Histology |
| Positive Rate (%) | Prognostic Factor | Ref |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Kohler et al. | End | 75 | 13 | N/A | [ |
| Non-End | 32 | 38 | |||
| Total | 107 | 21 | |||
| Inoue et al. | End | 126 | 11 | Yes | [ |
| Non-End | 13 | 67 | |||
| Total | 139 | 17 | |||
| Sherman et al. | End | 45 | 20 | N/A | [ |
| Non-End | 46 | 83 | |||
| Total | 91 | 52 | |||
| Kohler et al. | End | 115 | 30 | Yes | [ |
| Non-End | 64 | 44 | |||
| Total | 179 | 36 | |||
| Soong et al. | End | 94 | 19 | Yes | [ |
| Non-End | 28 | 54 | |||
| Total | 122 | 27 | |||
| Strang et al. | All | 183 | 45 | Yes | [ |
| Bamcher-Todesca et al. | Non-End | 23 | 48 | Yes | [ |
| Kouneils et al. | End | 40 | 35 | N/A | [ |
| Non-End | 21 | 76 | |||
| Total | 61 | 49 | |||
| Coronado et al. | End | 87 | 10 | Yes | [ |
| Non-End | 27 | 30 | |||
| Total | 114 | 18 | |||
| Shih et al. | All | 82 | 45 | Yes | [ |
| Suzki et al. | End | 112 | 44 | Yes | [ |
| Jeon et al. | End | 147 | 20 | N.S | [ |
| Non-End | 5 | 40 | |||
| Total | 152 | 20 | |||
| Dupont et al. | End | 99 | 14 | N/A | [ |
| Non-End | 31 | 41 | |||
| Total | 120 | 21 | |||
| Pansare et al. | End | 108 | 17 | Yes | [ |
| Non-End | 41 | 82 | |||
| Total | 149 | 35 | |||
| Urabe et al. | End | 332 | 17 | Yes | [ |
| Edmondson et al. | End | 86 | 28 | Yes | [ |
| Non-End | 28 | 86 | |||
| Total | 114 | 43 | |||
| Obata et al. | End | 154 | 34 | Yes | [ |
| End; Endometrioid |
Figure 2Immunohistochemical localization of p53 proteins in representative cases of endometrial endometrioid carcinoma. A, Grade 1 endometrial endometrioid carcinoma with low-positive p53-staining. B, Grade 2 endometrial endometrioid carcinoma with high-positive p53-staining. Scale bars: 100 μm.
Figure 3Carcinogenesis of ovarian serous carcinoma. Secretory cell outgrowth (SCOUT) occurs from secretory cells in the fallopian tube, expressing PAX2. The p53 signature develops from SCOUT with TP53 mutation. The p53 signature acquires the activity of high proliferation and cellular atypia, resulting in development of serous tubal intraepithelial carcinoma (STIC) via serous tubal intraepithelial lesions (STILs). STIC progresses to ovarian serous carcinoma.