The histone variant macroH2A1.1 regulates RNA polymerase II-paused genes within defined chromatin interaction landscapes.

The histone variant macroH2A1.1 plays a role in cancer development and metastasis. To determine the underlying molecular mechanisms, we mapped the genome-wide localization of endogenous macroH2A1.1 in the human breast cancer cell line MDA-MB-231. We demonstrate that macroH2A1.1 specifically binds to active promoters and enhancers in addition to facultative heterochromatin. Selective knock down of macroH2A1.1 deregulates the expression of hundreds of highly active genes. Depending on the chromatin landscape, macroH2A1.1 acts through two distinct molecular mechanisms. The first mitigates excessive transcription by binding over domains including the promoter and the gene body. The second stimulates expression of RNA polymerase II (Pol II)-paused genes, including genes regulating mammary tumor cell migration. In contrast to the first mechanism, macroH2A1.1 specifically associates with the transcription start site of Pol II-paused genes. These processes occur in a predefined local 3D genome landscape, but do not require rewiring of enhancer-promoter contacts. We thus propose that macroH2A1.1 serves as a transcriptional modulator with a potential role in assisting the conversion of promoter-locked Pol II into a productive, elongating Pol II.

Fra-1 regulates its target genes via binding to remote enhancers without exerting major control on chromatin architecture in triple negative breast cancers.

The ubiquitous family of dimeric transcription factors AP-1 is made up of Fos and Jun family proteins. It has long been thought to operate principally at gene promoters and how it controls transcription is still ill-understood. The Fos family protein Fra-1 is overexpressed in triple negative breast cancers (TNBCs) where it contributes to tumor aggressiveness. To address its transcriptional actions in TNBCs, we combined transcriptomics, ChIP-seqs, machine learning and NG Capture-C. Additionally, we studied its Fos family kin Fra-2 also expressed in TNBCs, albeit much less. Consistently with their pleiotropic effects, Fra-1 and Fra-2 up- and downregulate individually, together or redundantly many genes associated with a wide range of biological processes. Target gene regulation is principally due to binding of Fra-1 and Fra-2 at regulatory elements located distantly from cognate promoters where Fra-1 modulates the recruitment of the transcriptional co-regulator p300/CBP and where differences in AP-1 variant motif recognition can underlie preferential Fra-1- or Fra-2 bindings. Our work also shows no major role for Fra-1 in chromatin architecture control at target gene loci, but suggests collaboration between Fra-1-bound and -unbound enhancers within chromatin hubs sometimes including promoters for other Fra-1-regulated genes. Our work impacts our view of AP-1.

Hypoxia differently modulates the release of mitochondrial and nuclear DNA.

BACKGROUND: We investigated the influence of hypoxia on the concentration of mitochondrial and nuclear cell-free DNA (McfDNA and NcfDNA, respectively). METHOD: By an ultra-sensitive quantitative PCR-based assay, McfDNA and NcfDNA were measured in the supernatants of different colorectal cell lines, and in the plasma of C57/Bl6 mice engrafted with TC1 tumour cells, in normoxic or hypoxic conditions. RESULTS: Our data when setting cell culture conditions highlighted the higher stability of McfDNA as compared to NcfDNA and revealed that cancer cells released amounts of nuclear DNA equivalent to the mass of a chromosome over a 6-h duration of incubation. In cell model, hypoxia induced a great increase in NcfDNA and McfDNA concentrations within the first 24 h. After this period, cfDNA total concentrations remained stable in hypoxia consecutive to a decrease of nuclear DNA release, and noteworthy, to a complete inhibition of daily mitochondrial DNA release. In TC1-engrafted mice submitted to intermittent hypoxia, plasma NcfDNA levels are much higher than in mice bred in normoxia, unlike plasma McfDNA concentration that is not impacted by hypoxia. CONCLUSION: This study suggests that hypoxia negatively modulates nuclear and, particularly, mitochondrial DNA releases in long-term hypoxia, and revealed that the underlying mechanisms are differently regulated.

Transcriptional complexity and roles of Fra-1/AP-1 at the uPA/Plau locus in aggressive breast cancer.

Plau codes for the urokinase-type plasminogen activator (uPA), critical in cancer metastasis. While the mechanisms driving its overexpression in tumorigenic processes are unknown, it is regulated by the AP-1 transcriptional complex in diverse situations. The AP-1 component Fra-1 being overexpressed in aggressive breast cancers, we have addressed its role in the overexpression of Plau in the highly metastatic breast cancer model cell line MDA-MB231 using ChIP, pharmacological and RNAi approaches. Plau transcription appears controlled by 2 AP-1 enhancers located -1.9 (ABR-1.9) and -4.1 kb (ABR-4.1) upstream of the transcription start site (TSS) of the uPA-coding mRNA, Plau-001, that bind Fra-1. Surprisingly, RNA Pol II is not recruited only at the Plau-001 TSS but also upstream in the ABR-1.9 and ABR-4.1 region. Most Pol II molecules transcribe short and unstable RNAs while tracking down toward the TSS, where there are converted into Plau-001 mRNA-productive species. Moreover, a minority of Pol II molecules transcribes a low abundance mRNA of unknown function called Plau-004 from the ABR-1.9 domain, whose expression is tempered by Fra-1. Thus, we unveil a heretofore-unsuspected transcriptional complexity at Plau in a reference metastatic breast cancer cell line with pleiotropic effects for Fra-1, providing novel information on AP-1 transcriptional action.

Multiple Fra-1-bound enhancers showing different molecular and functional features can cooperate to repress gene transcription.

BACKGROUND: How transcription factors (TFs) down-regulate gene expression remains ill-understood, especially when they bind to multiple enhancers contacting the same gene promoter. In particular, it is not known whether they exert similar or significantly different molecular effects at these enhancers. RESULTS: To address this issue, we used a particularly well-suited study model consisting of the down-regulation of the TGFB2 gene by the TF Fra-1 in Fra-1-overexpressing cancer cells, as Fra-1 binds to multiple enhancers interacting with the TGFB2 promoter. We show that Fra-1 does not repress TGFB2 transcription via reducing RNA Pol II recruitment at the gene promoter but by decreasing the formation of its transcription-initiating form. This is associated with complex long-range chromatin interactions implicating multiple molecularly and functionally heterogeneous Fra-1-bound transcriptional enhancers distal to the TGFB2 transcriptional start site. In particular, the latter display differential requirements upon the presence and the activity of the lysine acetyltransferase p300/CBP. Furthermore, the final transcriptional output of the TGFB2 gene seems to depend on a balance between the positive and negative effects of Fra-1 at these enhancers. CONCLUSION: Our work unveils complex molecular mechanisms underlying the repressive actions of Fra-1 on TGFB2 gene expression. This has consequences for our general understanding of the functioning of the ubiquitous transcriptional complex AP-1, of which Fra-1 is the most documented component for prooncogenic activities. In addition, it raises the general question of the heterogeneity of the molecular functions of TFs binding to different enhancers regulating the same gene.

New roles for AP-1/JUNB in cell cycle control and tumorigenic cell invasion via regulation of cyclin E1 and TGF-ß2.

BACKGROUND: JUNB transcription factor contributes to the formation of the ubiquitous transcriptional complex AP-1 involved in the control of many physiological and disease-associated functions. The roles of JUNB in the control of cell division and tumorigenic processes are acknowledged but still unclear. RESULTS: Here, we report the results of combined transcriptomic, genomic, and functional studies showing that JUNB promotes cell cycle progression via induction of cyclin E1 and repression of transforming growth factor (TGF)-ß2 genes. We also show that high levels of JUNB switch the response of TGF-ß2 stimulation from an antiproliferative to a pro-invasive one, induce endogenous TGF-ß2 production by promoting TGF-ß2 mRNA translation, and enhance tumor growth and metastasis in mice. Moreover, tumor genomic data indicate that JUNB amplification associates with poor prognosis in breast and ovarian cancer patients. CONCLUSIONS: Our results reveal novel functions for JUNB in cell proliferation and tumor aggressiveness through regulation of cyclin E1 and TGF-ß2 expression, which might be exploited for cancer prognosis and therapy.

Heterodimerization with different Jun proteins controls c-Fos intranuclear dynamics and distribution.

The c-Fos proto-oncogenic transcription factor defines a multigene family controlling many processes both at the cell and the whole organism level. To bind to its target AP-1/12-O-tetradecanoylphorbol-13-acetate-responsive element or cAMP-responsive element DNA sequences in gene promoters and exert its transcriptional part, c-Fos must heterodimerize with other bZip proteins, its best studied partners being the Jun proteins (c-Jun, JunB, and JunD). c-Fos expression is regulated at many transcriptional and post-transcriptional levels, yet little is known on how its localization is dynamically regulated in the cell. Here we have investigated its intranuclear mobility using fluorescence recovery after photobleaching, genetic, and biochemical approaches. Whereas monomeric c-Fos is highly mobile and distributed evenly with nucleolar exclusion in the nucleus, heterodimerization with c-Jun entails intranuclear redistribution and dramatic reduction in mobility of c-Fos caused by predominant association with the nuclear matrix independently of any binding to AP-1/12-O-tetradecanoylphorbol-13-acetate-responsive element or cAMP-responsive element sequences. In contrast to c-Jun, dimerization with JunB does not detectably affect c-Fos mobility. However, dimerization with JunB affects intranuclear distribution with significant differences in the localization of c-Fos.c-Jun and c-Fos.JunB dimers. Moreover, c-Jun and JunB exert comparable effects on another Fos family member, Fra-1. Thus, we report a novel regulation, i.e. differentially regulated intranuclear mobility and distribution of Fos proteins by their Jun partners, and suggest the existence of intranuclear storage sites for latent c-Fos.c-Jun AP-1 complexes. This may affect the numerous physiopathological functions these transcription factors control.

Ubiquitin-independent proteasomal degradation of Fra-1 is antagonized by Erk1/2 pathway-mediated phosphorylation of a unique C-terminal destabilizer.

Fra-1, a transcription factor that is phylogenetically and functionally related to the proto-oncoprotein c-Fos, controls many essential cell functions. It is expressed in many cell types, albeit with differing kinetics and abundances. In cells reentering the cell cycle, Fra-1 expression is transiently stimulated albeit later than that of c-Fos and for a longer time. Moreover, Fra-1 overexpression is found in cancer cells displaying high Erk1/2 activity and has been linked to tumorigenesis. One crucial point of regulation of Fra-1 levels is controlled protein degradation, the mechanism of which remains poorly characterized. Here, we have combined genetic, pharmacological, and signaling studies to investigate this process in nontransformed cells and to elucidate how it is altered in cancer cells. We report that the intrinsic instability of Fra-1 depends on a single destabilizer contained within the C-terminal 30 to 40 amino acids. Two serines therein, S252 and S265, are phosphorylated by kinases of the Erk1/2 pathway, which compromises protein destruction upon both normal physiological induction and tumorigenic constitutive activation of this cascade. Our data also indicate that Fra-1, like c-Fos, belongs to a small group of proteins that may, under certain circumstances, undergo ubiquitin-independent degradation by the proteasome. Our work reveals both similitudes and differences between Fra-1 and c-Fos degradation mechanisms. In particular, the presence of a single destabilizer within Fra-1, instead of two that are differentially regulated in c-Fos, explains the much faster turnover of the latter when cells traverse the G(0)/G(1)-to-S-phase transition. Finally, our study offers further insights into the signaling-regulated expression of the other Fos family proteins.

Ubiquitin-independent degradation of proteins by the proteasome.

The proteasome is the main proteolytic machinery of the cell and constitutes a recognized drugable target, in particular for treating cancer. It is involved in the elimination of misfolded, altered or aged proteins as well as in the generation of antigenic peptides presented by MHC class I molecules. It is also responsible for the proteolytic maturation of diverse polypeptide precursors and for the spatial and temporal regulation of the degradation of many key cell regulators whose destruction is necessary for progression through essential processes, such as cell division, differentiation and, more generally, adaptation to environmental signals. It is generally believed that proteins must undergo prior modification by polyubiquitin chains to be addressed to, and recognized by, the proteasome. In reality, however, there is accumulating evidence that ubiquitin-independent proteasomal degradation may have been largely underestimated. In particular, a number of proto-oncoproteins and oncosuppressive proteins are privileged ubiquitin-independent proteasomal substrates, the altered degradation of which may have tumorigenic consequences. The identification of ubiquitin-independent mechanisms for proteasomal degradation also poses the paramount question of the multiplicity of catabolic pathways targeting each protein substrate. As this may help design novel therapeutic strategies, the underlying mechanisms are critically reviewed here.

SUMOylation regulates nucleo-cytoplasmic shuttling of Elk-1.

The transcription factor Elk-1 is a nuclear target of mitogen-activated protein kinases and regulates immediate early gene activation by extracellular signals. We show that Elk-1 is also conjugated to SUMO on either lysines 230, 249, or 254. Mutation of all three sites is necessary to fully block SUMOylation in vitro and in vivo. This Elk-1 mutant, Elk-1(3R), shuttles more rapidly to nuclei of Balb/C cells fused to transfected HeLa cells. Coexpression of SUMO-1 or -2 strongly reduces shuttling by Elk-1 without affecting that of Elk-1(3R), indicating that SUMOylation regulates nuclear retention of Elk-1. Accordingly, overexpression of Elk-1(3R) in PC12 cells, where cytoplasmic relocalization of Elk-1 has been linked to differentiation, enhances neurite extension relative to Elk-1. The effect of Elk-1, but not of the 3R mutant, was blocked upon cotransfection with SUMO-1 or -2 and enhanced by coexpression with mutant Ubc-9. Thus, SUMO conjugation is a novel regulator of Elk-1 function through the control of its nuclear-cytoplasmic shuttling.

The AP-1 transcriptional complex: Local switch or remote command?

The ubiquitous family of AP-1 dimeric transcription complexes is involved in virtually all cellular and physiological functions. It is paramount for cells to reprogram gene expression in response to cues of many sorts and is involved in many tumorigenic processes. How AP-1 controls gene transcription has largely remained elusive till recently. The advent of the "omics" technologies permitting genome-wide studies of transcription factors has however changed and improved our view of AP-1 mechanistical actions. If these studies confirm that AP-1 can sometimes act as a local transcriptional switch operating in the vicinity of transcription start sites (TSS), they strikingly indicate that AP-1 principally operates as a remote command binding to distal enhancers, placing chromatin architecture dynamics at the heart of its transcriptional actions. They also unveil novel constraints operating on AP-1, as well as novel mechanisms used to regulate gene expression via transcription-pioneering-, chromatin-remodeling- and chromatin accessibility maintenance effects.

AP-1 Signaling by Fra-1 Directly Regulates HMGA1 Oncogene Transcription in Triple-Negative Breast Cancers.

The architectural chromatin protein HMGA1 and the transcription factor Fra-1 are both overexpressed in aggressive triple-negative breast cancers (TNBC), where they both favor epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition, invasion, and metastasis. We therefore explored the possibility that Fra-1 might be involved in enhanced transcription of the HMGA1 gene in TNBCs by exploiting cancer transcriptome datasets and resorting to functional studies combining RNA interference, mRNA and transcriptional run-on assays, chromatin immunoprecipitation, and chromosome conformation capture approaches in TNBC model cell lines. Our bioinformatic analysis indicated that Fra-1 and HMGA1 expressions positively correlate in primary samples of patients with TNBC. Our functional studies showed that Fra-1 regulates HMGA1 mRNA expression at the transcriptional level via binding to enhancer elements located in the last two introns of the gene. Although Fra-1 binding is required for p300/CBP recruitment at the enhancer domain, this recruitment did not appear essential for Fra-1-stimulated HMGA1 gene expression. Strikingly, Fra-1 binding is required for efficient recruitment of RNA Polymerase II at the HMGA1 promoter. This is permitted owing to chromatin interactions bringing about the intragenic Fra-1-binding enhancers and the gene promoter region. Fra-1 is, however, not instrumental for chromatin loop formation at the HMGA1 locus but rather exerts its transcriptional activity by exploiting chromatin interactions preexisting to its binding. IMPLICATIONS: We demonstrate that Fra-1 bound to an intragenic enhancer region is required for RNA Pol II recruitement at the HMGA1 promoter. Thereby, we provide novel insights into the mechanisms whereby Fra-1 exerts its prooncogenic transcriptional actions in the TNBC pathologic context.

Ubiquitin-independent- versus ubiquitin-dependent proteasomal degradation of the c-Fos and Fra-1 transcription factors: is there a unique answer?

The Fos family of transcription factors comprises c-Fos, Fra-1, Fra-2 and FosB, which are all intrinsically unstable proteins. Fos proteins heterodimerize with a variety of other transcription factors to control genes encoding key cell regulators. Their best known partners are the Jun family proteins (c-Jun, JunB, and JunD). At the cellular level, Fos-involving dimers control proliferation, differentiation, apoptosis and responses to environmental cues. At the organism level, they play paramount parts in organogenesis, immune responses and cognitive functions, among others. fos family genes are subjected to exquisite, complex and intermingled transcriptional and post-transcriptional regulations, which are necessary to avoid pathological effects. In particular, the Fos proteins undergo to numerous post-translational modifications, such as phosphorylations and sumoylation, regulating their transcriptional activity, their subcellular localization and their turnover. The mechanisms whereby c-Fos and Fra-1 are degraded have been studied in detail. Contrasting with the classical scenario, according to which most unstable key cell regulators are hydrolyzed by the proteasome after conjugation of polyubiquitin chains, the bulk of c-Fos and Fra-1 can be hydrolyzed independently of any prior ubiquitylation in different situations. c-Fos and Fra-1 share a common destabilizing domain whose primary sequence is conserved in Fra-2 and FosB, suggesting that similar breakdown mechanisms might be at play in the latter two proteins. However, a database search indicates that this domain is not found in any other protein, suggesting that the mechanisms underlying Fos protein destruction may be specific to this family. Interestingly, under particular conditions, a fraction of cytoplasmic c-Fos is ubiquitylated, leading to faster turnover. This poses the question of the multiplicity of degradation pathways that can target the same substrate depending on its activation state, its protein partnership and/or its intracellular localization. This issue is discussed here together with the, thus far, overlooked roles of the various proteasomal complexes found in all cells.

Down-regulation of c-Fos/c-Jun AP-1 dimer activity by sumoylation.

The inducible transcriptional complex AP-1, composed of c-Fos and c-Jun proteins, is crucial for cell adaptation to many environmental changes. While its mechanisms of activation have been extensively studied, how its activity is restrained is poorly understood. We report here that lysine 265 of c-Fos is conjugated by the peptidic posttranslational modifiers SUMO-1, SUMO-2, and SUMO-3 and that c-Jun can be sumoylated on lysine 257 as well as on the previously described lysine 229. Sumoylation of c-Fos preferentially occurs in the context of c-Jun/c-Fos heterodimers. Using nonsumoylatable mutants of c-Fos and c-Jun as well as a chimeric protein mimicking sumoylated c-Fos, we show that sumoylation entails lower AP-1 transactivation activity. Interestingly, single sumoylation at any of the three acceptor sites of the c-Fos/c-Jun dimer is sufficient to substantially reduce transcription activation. The lower activity of sumoylated c-Fos is not due to inhibition of protein entry into the nucleus, accelerated turnover, and intrinsic inability to dimerize or to bind to DNA. Instead, cell fractionation experiments suggest that decreased transcriptional activity of sumoylated c-Fos is associated with specific intranuclear distribution. Interestingly, the phosphorylation of threonine 232 observed upon expression of oncogenically activated Ha-Ras is known to superactivate c-Fos transcriptional activity. We show here that it also inhibits c-Fos sumoylation, revealing a functional antagonism between two posttranslational modifications, each occurring within a different moiety of a bipartite transactivation domain of c-Fos. Finally we report that the sumoylation of c-Fos is a dynamic process that can be reversed via multiple mechanisms. This supports the idea that this modification does not constitute a final inactivation step that necessarily precedes protein degradation.

c-Fos proto-oncoprotein is degraded by the proteasome independently of its own ubiquitinylation in vivo.

Prior ubiquitinylation of the unstable c-Fos proto-oncoprotein is thought to be required for recognition and degradation by the proteasome. Contradicting this view, we report that, although c-Fos can form conjugates with ubiquitin in vivo, nonubiquitinylatable c-Fos mutants show regulated degradation identical to that of the wild-type protein in living cells under two classical conditions of study: transient c-fos gene expression during the G(0)/G(1) phase transition upon stimulation by mitogens and constitutive expression during asynchronous growth. Moreover, c-Fos destruction during the G(0)/G(1) phase transition is unusual because it depends on two distinct but cumulative mechanisms. We report here that one mechanism involves a C-terminal destabilizer which does not need an active ubiquitin cycle, whereas the other involves an N-terminal destabilizer dependent on ubiquitinylation of an upstream c-Fos breakdown effector. In addition to providing new insights into the mechanisms of c-Fos protein destruction, an important consequence of our work is that ubiquitinylation-dependent proteasomal degradation claimed for a number of proteins should be reassessed on a new experimental basis.

The structural determinants responsible for c-Fos protein proteasomal degradation differ according to the conditions of expression.

c-fos gene is expressed constitutively in a number of tissues as well as in certain tumor cells and is inducible, in general rapidly and transiently, in virtually all other cell types by a variety of stimuli. Its protein product, c-Fos, is a short-lived transcription factor that heterodimerizes with various protein partners within the AP-1 transcription complex via leucine zipper/leucine zipper interactions for binding to specific DNA sequences. It is mostly, if not exclusively, degraded by the proteasome. To localize the determinant(s) responsible for its instability, we have conducted a genetic analysis in which the half-lives of c-Fos mutants and chimeras made with the stable EGFP reporter protein were compared under two experimental conditions taken as example of continous and inducible expression. Those were constitutive expression in asynchronously growing Balb/C 3T3 mouse embryo fibroblasts and transient induction in the same cells undergoing the G0/G1 phase transition upon stimulation by serum. Our work shows that c-Fos is degraded faster in synchronous- than in asynchronous cells. This difference in turnover is primarily accounted for by several mechanisms. First, in asynchronous cells, a unique C-terminal destabilizer is active whereas, in serum-stimulated cells two destabilizers located at both extremities of the protein are functional. Second, heterodimerization and/or binding to DNA accelerates protein degradation only during the G0/G1 phase transition. Adding another level of complexity to turnover control, phosphorylation at serines 362 and 374, which are c-Fos phosphorylation sites largely modified during the G0/G1 phase transition, stabilizes c-Fos much more efficiently in asynchronous than in serum-stimulated cells. In both cases, the reduced degradation rate is due to inhibition of the activity of the C-terminal destabilizer. However, in serum-stimulated cells, this effect is partially masked by the activation of the N-terminal destabilizer and basic domain/leucine zipper-dependent mechanisms. Taken together, our data show that multiple degradation mechanisms, differing according to the conditions of expression, may operate on c-Fos to ensure a proper level and/or timing of expression. Moreover, they also indicate that the half-life of c-Fos during the G0/G1 phase transition is determined by a delicate balance between opposing stabilizing and destabilizing mechanisms operating at the same time.

Mechanisms of delivery of ubiquitylated proteins to the proteasome: new target for anti-cancer therapy?

The proteasome is the main proteolytic machinery of the cell. It is responsible for the basal turnover of many intracellular polypeptides, the elimination of abnormal proteins and the generation of the vast majority of peptides presented by class I major histocompatibility complex molecules. Proteasomal proteolysis is also involved in the control of virtually all cellular functions and major decisions through the spatially and timely regulated destruction of essential cell regulators. Therefore, the elucidation of its molecular mechanisms is crucial for the full understanding of the physiology of cells and whole organisms. Conversely, it is increasingly clear that proteasomal degradation is either altered in numerous pathological situations, including many cancers and diseases resulting from aberrant cell differentiation, or instrumental for the development of these pathologies. This, consequently, makes it an attractive target for therapeutical intervention. There is ample evidence that most cell proteins must be polyubiquitylated prior to proteasomal degradation. If the structure and the mode of functioning of the proteasome, as well as the enzymology of ubiquitylation, are relatively well understood, how substrates are delivered to and recognized by the proteolytic machine has remained mysterious till recently. The recent literature indicates that the mechanisms involved are multiple, complex and exquisitely regulated and provides new potential targets for anti-cancer pharmacological intervention.

[Proteasomal degradation: from addressing of substrates to therapeutical perspectives]. / La dégradation protéasomique: de l'adressage des protéines aux nouvelles perspectives thérapeutiques.

The proteasome is the main intracellular proteolytic machinery. It is involved in all major cellular functions and decisions. It has long been thought that prior ubiquitinylation of almost all of its substrates was necessary for degradation. It has also long been considered that ubiquitinylation and degradation were two uncoupled mechanisms and that the recruitment of ubiquitinylated species was only performed by specialized subunits of the proteasome. The recent literature questions this simplified view. It also suggests that, on the one hand, the fraction of proteins hydrolyzed by the proteasome independently of their ubiquitinylation has largely been underestimated and, on the other hand, that the recognition of ubiquitinylated proteins involves complex addressing systems. Furthermore, it indicates a higher order structuration of the ubiquitin/proteasome pathway, a fraction of the proteasome and of ubiquitinylation enzymes being engaged in supramolecular complexes. Finally, proteasomal degradation is altered in a number of pathological situations. It, thus, constitutes a therapeutic target and the first applications are emerging.

Evasion from proteasomal degradation by mutated Fos proteins expressed from FBJ-MSV and FBR-MSV osteosarcomatogenic retroviruses.

c-Fos proto-oncoprotein is highly unstable, which is crucial for rapid gene expression shut-off and control of its intrinsic oncogenic potential. It is massively degraded by the proteasome in vivo in various situations. Although there is evidence that c-Fos can be ubiquitinylated in vitro, the unambiguous demonstration that ubiquitinylation is necessary for recognition and subsequent hydrolysis by the proteasome in vivo is still lacking. Moreover, genetic analysis have also indicated that c-Fos can be addressed to the proteasome via different mechanisms depending on the conditions studied. c-Fos has been transduced by two murine osteosarcomatogenic retroviruses under mutated forms which are more stable and more oncogenic. The stabilization is not simply accounted for by simple deletion of a C-terminal c-Fos destabilizer but, rather, by a complex balance between opposing destabilizing and stabilizing mutations. Though mutations in viral Fos proteins confer full resistance to proteasomal degradation, stabilization is limited because mutations also entail sensitivity to (an) unidentified proteolytic system(s). This observation is consistent with the idea that Fos-expressing viruses have evolved gene expression controls that avoid high protein accumulation-linked apoptosis.

Multiple degradation pathways for Fos family proteins.

c-Fos protooncoprotein is a short-lived transcription factor with oncogenic potential. It is massively degraded by the proteasome in vivo under various experimental conditions. Those include consititutive expression in exponentially growing cells and transient induction in cells undergoing the G0/G1 phase transition upon stimulation by serum. Though there is evidence that c-Fos can be ubiquitinylated in vitro, the unambigous demonstration that prior ubiquitinylation is necessary for degradation by the proteasome in vivo is still lacking. c-Jun, one of the main dimerization partners of c-Fos within the AP-1 transcription complex, is also an unstable protein. Its degradation is clearly proteasome dependent. However, several lines of evidence indicate that the mechanisms by which it addresses the proteasome are different from those operating on c-Fos. Moreover, genetic analysis has indicated that c-Fos is addressed to the proteasome via pathways that differ depending on the conditions of expression. c-Fos has been transduced by two murine osteosarcomatogenic retroviruses in mutated forms, which are more stable and more oncogenic. The stabilization is not simply accounted for by simple deletion of one of the main c-Fos destabilizers but, rather, by a complex balance between opposing destabilizing and stabilizing mutations. However, although viral Fos proteins have acquired full resistance to proteasomal degradation, stabilization is limited because the mutations they have accumulated, during or after c-fos gene transduction, confer sensitivity to an unidentified proteolytic system(s). This observation is consistent with the idea that fos-expressing viruses have evolved expression machineries to ensure controlled protein levels in order to maintain an optimal balance between prooncogenic and proapoptotic activities of v-Fos proteins.