ArticleOncogene2016
Combined loss of PUMA and p21 accelerates c-MYC-driven lymphoma development considerably less than loss of one allele of p53.
Article in Oncogene, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
23 citing papers in PubMed, 38 citations in OpenAlex.
- p53: from understanding its structure to advances in therapeutic targeting.Signal transduction and targeted therapy · 2026Review
- PUMA-induced apoptosis drives bone marrow failure and genomic instability in telomerase-deficient mice.Cell death and differentiation · 2026Article
- Extra centrosomes delay DNA damage-driven tumorigenesis.Science advances · 2024Article
- Apoptotic cell death in disease-Current understanding of the NCCD 2023.Cell death and differentiation · 2023Review
- At a Crossroads to Cancer: How p53-Induced Cell Fate Decisions Secure Genome Integrity.International journal of molecular sciences · 2021Review
- Article
- p53-intact cancers escape tumor suppression through loss of long noncoding RNA Dino.Cell reports · 2021Article
- p53 and Tumor Suppression: It Takes a Network.Trends in cell biology · 2021Review
- Consequences of Zmat3 loss in c-MYC- and mutant KRAS-driven tumorigenesis.Cell death & disease · 2020Article
- Tanshinone IIA Ameliorates Progression of CAD Through Regulating Cardiac H9c2 Cells Proliferation and Apoptosis by miR-133a-3p/EGFR Axis.Drug design, development and therapy · 2020Article
- Cross-talk between Myc and p53 in B-cell lymphomas.Chronic diseases and translational medicine · 2019Article
- p21 in Cancer Research.Cancers · 2019Review
- Profiling molecular regulators of recurrence in chemorefractory triple-negative breast cancers.Breast cancer research : BCR · 2019Article
- Discussion of some 'knowns' and some 'unknowns' about the tumour suppressor p53.Journal of molecular cell biology · 2019Article
- DNA repair processes are critical mediators of p53-dependent tumor suppression.Nature medicine · 2018Article
- Deciphering p53 signaling in tumor suppression.Current opinion in cell biology · 2018Review
- How does p53 induce apoptosis and how does this relate to p53-mediated tumour suppression?Cell death and differentiation · 2018Review
- Cell cycle arrest through indirect transcriptional repression by p53: I have a DREAM.Cell death and differentiation · 2018Review
- Inhibition of coiled coil domain containing protein 69 enhances platinum-induced apoptosis in ovarian cancer cells.Oncotarget · 2017Article
- The proline rich domain of p53 is dispensable for MGMT-dependent DNA repair and cell survival following alkylation damage.Cell death and differentiation · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The tumor suppressor p53 is mutated in ~50% of human cancers. P53 is activated by a range of stimuli and regulates several cellular processes, including apoptotic cell death, cell cycle arrest, senescence and DNA repair. P53 induces apoptosis via transcriptional induction of the BH3-only proteins PUMA (p53-upregulated modulator of apoptosis) and NOXA, and cell cycle arrest via p21. Induction of these processes was proposed to be critical for p53-mediated tumor suppression. It is therefore surprising that mice lacking PUMA, NOXA and p21, as well as mice bearing mutations in p53 that impair the transcriptional activation of these genes, are not tumor prone, unlike mice lacking p53 function, which spontaneously develop tumors with 100% incidence. These p53 target genes and the processes they regulate may, however, impact differently on tumor development depending on the oncogenic drivers. For example, loss of PUMA enhances c-MYC-driven lymphoma development in mice, but, interestingly, the acceleration was less impressive compared with that caused by the loss of even a single p53 allele. Different studies have reported that loss of p21 can accelerate, delay or have no impact on tumorigenesis. In an attempt to resolve this controversy, we examined whether loss of p21-mediated cell cycle arrest cooperates with PUMA deficiency in accelerating lymphoma development in Eμ-Myc mice (overexpressing c-MYC in B-lymphoid cells). We found that Eμ-Myc mice lacking both p21 and PUMA (Eμ-Myc;Puma(-/-);p21(-/-)) developed lymphoma at a rate comparable to Eμ-Myc;Puma(-/-) animals, notably with considerably longer latency than Eμ-Myc;p53(+/-)mice. Loss of p21 had no impact on the numbers, cycling or survival of pre-leukemic Eμ-Myc B-lymphoid cells, even when PUMA was lost concomitantly. These results demonstrate that even in the context of deregulated c-MYC expression, p53 must suppress tumor development by activating processes apart from, or in addition to, PUMA-mediated apoptosis and p21-induced cell cycle arrest.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.