Abstract

TP53 is conventionally thought to prevent cancer formation and progression to metastasis, while mutant TP53 has transforming activities. However, in the clinic, TP53 mutation status does not accurately predict cancer progression. Here we report, based on clinical analysis corroborated with experimental data, that the p53 isoform Δ133p53β promotes cancer cell invasion, regardless of TP53 mutation status. Δ133p53β increases risk of cancer recurrence and death in breast cancer patients. Furthermore Δ133p53β is critical to define invasiveness in a panel of breast and colon cell lines, expressing WT or mutant TP53. Endogenous mutant Δ133p53β depletion prevents invasiveness without affecting mutant full-length p53 protein expression. Mechanistically WT and mutant Δ133p53β induces EMT. Our findings provide explanations to 2 long-lasting and important clinical conundrums: how WT TP53 can promote cancer cell invasion and reciprocally why mutant TP53 gene does not systematically induce cancer progression.

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Gilles Gadea

    CNRS, Centre de Recherche de Biochimie Macromoléculaire de Montpellier, Montpellier, France
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Nikola Arsic

    CNRS, Centre de Recherche de Biochimie Macromoléculaire de Montpellier, Montpellier, France
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Kenneth Fernandes

    Division of Cancer Research, University of Dundee, Dundee, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Alexandra Diot

    Division of Cancer Research, University of Dundee, Dundee, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Sébastien M Joruiz

    Division of Cancer Research, University of Dundee, Dundee, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Samer Abdallah

    CNRS, Centre de Recherche de Biochimie Macromoléculaire de Montpellier, Montpellier, France
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Valerie Meuray

    Division of Cancer Research, University of Dundee, Dundee, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Stéphanie Vinot

    CNRS, Centre de Recherche de Biochimie Macromoléculaire de Montpellier, Montpellier, France
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  9. Christelle Anguille

    CNRS, Centre de Recherche de Biochimie Macromoléculaire de Montpellier, Montpellier, France
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  10. Judit Remenyi

    Division of Cancer Research, University of Dundee, Dundee, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  11. Marie P Khoury

    Division of Cancer Research, University of Dundee, Dundee, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  12. Philip R Quinlan

    Division of Cancer Research, University of Dundee, Dundee, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  13. Colin A Purdie

    Division of Cancer Research, University of Dundee, Dundee, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  14. Lee B Jordan

    Division of Cancer Research, University of Dundee, Dundee, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  15. Frances V Fuller-Pace

    Division of Cancer Research, University of Dundee, Dundee, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-5859-2932
  16. Marion de Toledo

    Université Montpellier, Montpellier, France
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  17. Maïlys Cren

    Université Montpellier, Montpellier, France
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  18. Alastair M Thompson

    Division of Cancer Research, University of Dundee, Dundee, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  19. Jean-Christophe Bourdon

    Division of Cancer Research, University of Dundee, Dundee, United Kingdom
    For correspondence
    j.bourdon@dundee.ac.uk
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  20. Pierre Roux

    CNRS, Centre de Recherche de Biochimie Macromoléculaire de Montpellier, Montpellier, France
    For correspondence
    pierre.roux@crbm.cnrs.fr
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-0671-5413

Funding

Breast Cancer Campaign (2012MaySF127)

  • Jean-Christophe Bourdon

The funders had no role in study design, data collection and interpretation, or the decision to submit the work for publication.

Reviewing Editor

  1. Joaquín M Espinosa, University of Colorado School of Medicine, United States

Ethics

Human subjects: Samples were examined following Local Research EthicsCommittee approval under delegated authority by the Tayside Tissue Bank(www.taysidetissuebank.org).

Version history

  1. Received: January 29, 2016
  2. Accepted: September 13, 2016
  3. Accepted Manuscript published: September 15, 2016 (version 1)
  4. Version of Record published: October 17, 2016 (version 2)
  5. Version of Record updated: March 30, 2017 (version 3)

Copyright

© 2016, Gadea et al.

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License permitting unrestricted use and redistribution provided that the original author and source are credited.

Metrics

  • 3,012
    views
  • 606
    downloads
  • 43
    citations

Views, downloads and citations are aggregated across all versions of this paper published by eLife.

Download links

A two-part list of links to download the article, or parts of the article, in various formats.

Downloads (link to download the article as PDF)

Open citations (links to open the citations from this article in various online reference manager services)

Cite this article (links to download the citations from this article in formats compatible with various reference manager tools)

  1. Gilles Gadea
  2. Nikola Arsic
  3. Kenneth Fernandes
  4. Alexandra Diot
  5. Sébastien M Joruiz
  6. Samer Abdallah
  7. Valerie Meuray
  8. Stéphanie Vinot
  9. Christelle Anguille
  10. Judit Remenyi
  11. Marie P Khoury
  12. Philip R Quinlan
  13. Colin A Purdie
  14. Lee B Jordan
  15. Frances V Fuller-Pace
  16. Marion de Toledo
  17. Maïlys Cren
  18. Alastair M Thompson
  19. Jean-Christophe Bourdon
  20. Pierre Roux
(2016)
TP53 drives invasion through expression of its Δ133p53β variant
eLife 5:e14734.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.14734

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.14734

Further reading

    1. Cancer Biology
    Célia Guérin, David Tulasne
    Review Article

    Tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI) directed against MET have been recently approved to treat advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) harbouring activating MET mutations. This success is the consequence of a long characterization of MET mutations in cancers, which we propose to outline in this review. MET, a receptor tyrosine kinase (RTK), displays in a broad panel of cancers many deregulations liable to promote tumour progression. The first MET mutation was discovered in 1997, in hereditary papillary renal cancer (HPRC), providing the first direct link between MET mutations and cancer development. As in other RTKs, these mutations are located in the kinase domain, leading in most cases to ligand-independent MET activation. In 2014, novel MET mutations were identified in several advanced cancers, including lung cancers. These mutations alter splice sites of exon 14, causing in-frame exon 14 skipping and deletion of a regulatory domain. Because these mutations are not located in the kinase domain, they are original and their mode of action has yet to be fully elucidated. Less than five years after the discovery of such mutations, the efficacy of a MET TKI was evidenced in NSCLC patients displaying MET exon 14 skipping. Yet its use led to a resistance mechanism involving acquisition of novel and already characterized MET mutations. Furthermore, novel somatic MET mutations are constantly being discovered. The challenge is no longer to identify them but to characterize them in order to predict their transforming activity and their sensitivity or resistance to MET TKIs, in order to adapt treatment.

    1. Cancer Biology
    2. Genetics and Genomics
    Kevin Nuno, Armon Azizi ... Ravindra Majeti
    Research Article

    Relapse of acute myeloid leukemia (AML) is highly aggressive and often treatment refractory. We analyzed previously published AML relapse cohorts and found that 40% of relapses occur without changes in driver mutations, suggesting that non-genetic mechanisms drive relapse in a large proportion of cases. We therefore characterized epigenetic patterns of AML relapse using 26 matched diagnosis-relapse samples with ATAC-seq. This analysis identified a relapse-specific chromatin accessibility signature for mutationally stable AML, suggesting that AML undergoes epigenetic evolution at relapse independent of mutational changes. Analysis of leukemia stem cell (LSC) chromatin changes at relapse indicated that this leukemic compartment underwent significantly less epigenetic evolution than non-LSCs, while epigenetic changes in non-LSCs reflected overall evolution of the bulk leukemia. Finally, we used single-cell ATAC-seq paired with mitochondrial sequencing (mtscATAC) to map clones from diagnosis into relapse along with their epigenetic features. We found that distinct mitochondrially-defined clones exhibit more similar chromatin accessibility at relapse relative to diagnosis, demonstrating convergent epigenetic evolution in relapsed AML. These results demonstrate that epigenetic evolution is a feature of relapsed AML and that convergent epigenetic evolution can occur following treatment with induction chemotherapy.