The BCl-2 family has long been identified for its role in apoptosis. Following the initial discovery of BCL-2 in the context of B-cell lymphoma in the 1980s, a number of homologous proteins have since been identified. The members of the Bcl-2 family are designated as such due to their BCL-2 homology (BH) domains and involvement in apoptosis regulation. The BH domains facilitate the family members’ interactions with each other and can indicate pro- or anti-apoptotic function. Traditionally, these proteins are categorised into one of the three subfamilies; anti-apoptotic, BH3-only (pro-apoptotic), and pore-forming or ‘executioner’ (pro-apoptotic) proteins. Each of the BH3-only or anti-apoptotic proteins has a distinct pattern of activation, localisation and response to cell death or survival stimuli. All of these can vary across cell or stress types, or developmental stage, and this can cause the delineation of the roles of BCL-2 family members. Added to this complexity is the presence of relatively uncharacterised isoforms of many of the BCL-2 family members. There is a gap in our knowledge regarding the function of BCL-2 family isoforms. BH domain status is not always predictive or indicative of protein function, and several other important sequences, which can contribute to apoptotic activity have been identified. While therapeutic strategies targeting the BCL-2 family are constantly under development, it is imperative that we understand the molecules, which we are attempting to target. This review, discusses our current knowledge of anti-apoptotic BCL-2 family isoforms. With significant improvements in the potential for splicing therapies, it is important that we begin to understand the distinctions of the BCL-2 family, not limited to just the mechanisms of apoptosis control, but in their roles outside of apoptosis.

The frequency of mutations in most breast cancer panel genes among individuals selected for possible hereditary breast cancer is low and, in many cases, similar or even lower than that observed among cancer-free population controls. Although multigene panels can significantly aid in cancer risk management and expedite clinical translation of new genes, they equally have the potential to provide clinical misinformation and harm at the individual level if the data are not interpreted cautiously.

Mutation of p53 is a common feature of cancer. Breast cancer is the most common malignancy that develops in women; however, somatic mutation of p53 is rare, suggesting that p53 becomes inactivated by other mechanisms. p53 is expressed as smaller isoforms, some of which inhibit wild-type p53. There are no studies that have examined the relative expression of all isoforms in this disease. We have analysed the relative messenger RNA expression of the p53 isoforms, Δ40, Δ133, β and γ in a panel of 6 breast cancer cell lines, 148 breast cancers specimens and 31 matched normal adjacent tissues by semi-quantitative real-time reverse transcription-PCR and analysed their relationship to clinical features and outcome. We have identified several important clinical associations, particularly with Δ40p53, which was expressed at levels that were ~50-fold higher than the least expressed isoform p53γ. Δ40p53 was significantly upregulated in tumour tissue when compared with the normal breast and was significantly associated with an aggressive breast cancer subtype-triple negative. Additionally, p53β expression was significantly negatively associated with tumour size and positively associated with disease-free survival, where high levels of p53β were protective, particularly in patients with a mutation in p53, suggesting p53β may counteract the damage inflicted by mutant p53. In conclusion, the relative expression of p53 isoforms is related to clinical features of breast cancer and outcome. These results have implications for the stratification of breast cancer based on p53 function and may provide an alternate explanation for deregulated p53 signalling in breast cancer.