MDM2 regulates RB levels during genotoxic stress.

The retinoblastoma tumour suppressor protein (RB) regulates a number of diverse cellular functions including differentiation, angiogenesis, chromatin remodelling, senescence and apoptosis. The best-characterised function of RB is cell cycle regulation, and it has been considered a phosphoprotein regulated by cyclin-dependent kinases. In its hypophosphorylated form, RB binds the transcription factor E2F1, arresting the cell cycle in the G1 phase. Here, we show that MDM2 controls the cell cycle through synthesis and degradation of RB protein in a cell cycle condition-dependent fashion. MDM2 induces G1 cell cycle arrest by enhancing the translation of the RB mRNA under genotoxic stress. Translation requires direct interaction between the RB mRNA and the MDM2 protein that accompanies the RB mRNA to the polysomes. However, MDM2 ubiquitinates and degrades RB protein at the G2/M phase under genotoxic stress. The ATM phosphomimetic mutant MDM2(S395D) corroborates that the effect on the RB levels is dependent on the DNA damage. These results provide the basis of a dual regulatory mechanism by which MDM2 controls cell cycle progression during DNA damage.

Presence of Copy Number Variants Associated With Esotropia in Patients With Exotropia.

Importance: Strabismus is a common ocular disorder of childhood. There is a clear genetic component to strabismus, but it is not known if esotropia and exotropia share genetic risk factors. Objective: To determine whether genetic duplications associated with esotropia are also associated with exotropia. Design, Setting, and Participants: This was a cross-sectional study conducted from November 2005 to December 2023. Individuals with constant or intermittent exotropia of any magnitude or a history of surgery for exotropia were recruited from pediatric ophthalmic practices. Data were analyzed from March to December 2023. Exposure: Genetic duplication. Main Outcomes and Measures: Presence of genetic duplications at 2p11.2, 4p15.2, and 10q11.22 assessed by digital droplet polymerase chain reaction. Orthoptic measurements and history of strabismus surgery were performed. Results: A total of 234 individuals (mean [SD] age, 19.5 [19.0] years; 127 female [54.3%]) were included in this study. The chromosome 2 duplication was present in 1.7% of patients with exotropia (4 of 234; P = .40), a similar proportion to the 1.4% of patients with esotropia (23 of 1614) in whom it was previously reported and higher than the 0.1% of controls (4 of 3922) previously reported (difference, 1.6%; 95% CI, 0%-3.3%; P < .001). The chromosome 4 duplication was present in 3.0% of patients with exotropia (7 of 234; P = .10), a similar proportion to the 1.7% of patients with esotropia (27 of 1614) and higher than the 0.2% of controls (6 of 3922) in whom it was previously reported (difference, 2.8%; 95% CI, 0.6%-5.0%; P < .001). The chromosome 10 duplication was present in 6.0% of patients with exotropia (14 of 234; P = .08), a similar proportion to the 4% of patients with esotropia (64 of 1614) and higher than the 0.4% of controls (18 of 3922) in whom it was previously reported (difference, 5.6%; 95% CI, 2.5%-8.6%; P < .001). Individuals with a duplication had higher mean (SD) magnitude of deviation (31 [13] vs 22 [14] prism diopters [PD]; difference, 9 PD; 95% CI, 1-16 PD; P = .03), were more likely to have constant (vs intermittent) exotropia (70% vs 29%; difference, 41%; 95% CI, 20.8%-61.2%; P < .001), and had a higher rate of exotropia surgery than those without a duplication (58% vs 34%; difference, 24%; 95% CI, 3%-44%; P = .02). Conclusions and Relevance: In this cross-sectional study, results suggest that the genetic duplications on chromosomes 2, 4, and 10 were risk factors for exotropia as well as esotropia. These findings support the possibility that esotropia and exotropia have shared genetic risk factors. Whether esotropia or exotropia develops in the presence of these duplications may be influenced by other shared or independent genetic variants or by environmental factors.

Retinoblastoma: from discovery to clinical management.

The retinoblastoma gene (RB1) was the first tumour suppressor cloned; the role of its protein product (RB) as the principal driver of the G1 checkpoint in cell cycle control has been extensively studied. However, many other RB functions are continuously reported. Its role in senescence, DNA repair and apoptosis, among others, is indications of the significance of RB in a vast network of cellular interactions, explaining why RB loss or its malfunction is one of the leading causes of a large number of paediatric and adult cancers. RB was first reported in retinoblastoma, a common intraocular malignancy in the paediatric population worldwide. Currently, its diagnosis is clinical, and in nondeveloped countries, where the incidence is higher, it is performed in advanced stages of the disease, compromising the integrity of the eye and the patient's life. Even though new treatments are being continuously developed, enucleation is still a major choice due to the late disease stage diagnosis and treatments costs. Research into biomarkers is our best option to improve the chances of good results in the treatment and hopes of patients' good quality of life. Here, we recapitulated the history of the disease and the first treatments to put the advances in its clinical management into perspective. We also review the different functions of the protein and the progress in the search for biomarkers. It is clear that there is still a long way to go, but we should offer these children and their families a better way to deal with the disease with the community's effort.

Analysis of the p53 pathway in peripheral blood of retinoblastoma patients; potential biomarkers.

Loss of retinoblastoma (RB) function in the cone cells during retina development is necessary but not sufficient for retinoblastoma development. It has been reported that in the absence of RB activity, a retinoma is generated, and the onset of retina cancer occurs until the p53 pathway is altered. Unlike other types of cancer, in retinoblastoma the p53 tumour suppressor is mostly wild type, although its two primary regulators, MDMX and MDM2, are commonly dysregulated. A mutated RB form is inherited in around 35% of the cases, but normally two, somatic mutations are needed to alter the RB function. Here we investigated the mRNA levels of RB, p53, MDMX and MDM2 in peripheral blood samples of retinoblastoma patients to monitor the pathway status of p53 in somatic cells. We sought to investigate the involvement of these genes in the development of retina cancer, with the aim of identifying biomarkers for early diagnosis of this disease.

p53 promotes its own polyubiquitination by enhancing the HDM2 and HDMX interaction.

HDM2 and HDMX are two homologs essential for controlling p53 tumor suppressor activity under normal conditions. Both proteins bind different sites on the p53 N-terminus, and while HDM2 has E3 ubiquitin ligase activity towards p53, HDMX does not. Nevertheless, HDMX is required for p53 polyubiquitination and degradation, but the underlying molecular mechanism remains unclear. Alone, HDMX and HDM2 interact via their respective C-terminal RING domains but here we show that the presence of p53 induces an N-terminal interface under normal cellular conditions. This results in an increase in HDM2-mediated p53 polyubiquitination and degradation. The HDM2 inhibitor Nutlin-3 binds the N-terminal p53 binding pocket and is sufficient to induce the HDM2-HDMX interaction, suggesting that the mechanism depends on allosteric changes that control the multiprotein complex formation. These results demonstrate an allosteric interchange between three different proteins (HDMX-HDM2-p53) and help to explain the molecular mechanisms of HDM2-inhibitory drugs.

Gpn1 and Gpn3 associate tightly and their protein levels are mutually dependent in mammalian cells.

Gpn1 and Gpn3 are GTPases individually required for nuclear targeting of RNA polymerase II. Here we show that whereas Gpn3-EYFP distributed between the cytoplasm and cell nucleus, it was mainly cytoplasmic when coexpressed with Gpn1-Flag. Gpn3-Flag retained Gpn1-EYFP in the cytoplasm. However, Gpn3-EYFP/Gpn1-Flag nucleocytoplasmic shuttling was revealed after inhibiting nuclear export with leptomycin B. All Gpn3-EYFP coimmunoprecipitated with Gpn1-Flag, and all Gpn1-EYFP with Gpn3-Flag. Importantly, most endogenous Gpn1 and Gpn3 also associate. Gpn1-Gpn3 interaction was essential to maintain steady-state protein levels of both GTPases. We propose that most Gpn1 and Gpn3 associate, are mobilized, and function as a protein complex.