The p53 family member p63 exists as two major protein variants (TAp63 and ΔNp63) with distinct expression patterns and functional properties. Whilst downstream target genes of p63 have been studied intensively, how p63 variants are themselves controlled has been relatively neglected. Here, we review advances in understanding ΔNp63 and TAp63 regulation, highlighting their distinct pathways. TAp63 has roles in senescence and metabolism, and in germ cell genome maintenance, where it is activated post‐transcriptionally by phosphorylation cascades after DNA damage. The function and regulation of TAp63 in mesenchymal and haematopoietic cells is less clear but may involve epigenetic control through DNA methylation. ΔNp63 functions to maintain stem/progenitor cells in various epithelia and is overexpressed in squamous and certain other cancers. ΔNp63 is transcriptionally regulated through multiple enhancers in concert with chromatin modifying proteins. Many signalling pathways including growth factors, morphogens, inflammation, and the extracellular matrix influence ΔNp63 levels, with inconsistent results reported. There is also evidence for reciprocal regulation, including ΔNp63 activating its own transcription. ΔNp63 is downregulated during cell differentiation through transcriptional regulation, while post‐transcriptional events cause proteasomal degradation. Throughout the review, we identify knowledge gaps and highlight discordances, providing potential explanations including cell‐context and cell–matrix interactions. Identifying individual p63 variants has roles in differential diagnosis and prognosis, and understanding their regulation suggests clinically approved agents for targeting p63 that may be useful combination therapies for selected cancer patients. © 2021 The Pathological Society of Great Britain and Ireland. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Backgroundp63, a member of the p53 protein family, plays key roles in epithelial development and carcinogenesis. In breast cancer, p63 expression has been found predominantly in basal-A (epithelial-type) triple-negative breast carcinomas (TNBC). To investigate the functional role of p63 in basal-A TNBC, we created MDA-MB-468 cell lines with inducible expression of the two major N-terminal p63 isoforms, TAp63α and ∆Np63α.ResultsTAp63α did not have significant effect on gene expression profile and cell phenotype, whilst the main effect of ΔNp63α was reduction of cell adhesion. Gene expression profiling revealed genes involved in cell adhesion and migration whose expression relies on overexpression of ΔNp63α. Reduced cell adhesion also led to decreased cell proliferation in vitro and in vivo. Similar data were obtained in another basal-A cell line, BT-20, but not in BT-549 basal-B (mesenchymal-like) TNBC cells.ConclusionsIn basal-A TNBC cells, ∆Np63α has much stronger effects on gene expression than TAp63α. Although p63 is mentioned mostly in connection with breast cell differentiation and stem cell regulation, we showed that a major effect of p63 is regulation of cell adhesion, a process important in metastasis and invasion of tumour cells. That this effect is not seen in mesenchymal-type TNBC cells suggests lineage-dependent functions, mirroring the expression of ∆Np63α in primary human breast cancers.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12885-016-2808-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

The TP63 gene encodes two major protein variants; TAp63 contains a p53-like transcription domain and consequently has tumor suppressor activities whereas ΔNp63 lacks this domain and acts as an oncogene. The two variants show distinct expression patterns in normal tissues and tumors, with lymphocytes and lymphomas/leukemias expressing TAp63, and basal epithelial cells and some carcinomas expressing high levels of ΔNp63, most notably squamous cell carcinomas (SCC). Whilst the transcriptional functions of TAp63 and ΔNp63 isoforms are known, the mechanisms involved in their regulation are poorly understood. Using squamous epithelial cells that contain high levels of ΔNp63 and low/undetectable TAp63, the DNA demethylating agent decitabine (5-aza-2’-deoxycytidine, 5-dAza) caused a dose-dependent increase in TAp63, with a simultaneous reduction in ΔNp63, indicating DNA methylation-dependent regulation at the isoform-specific promoters. The basal cytokeratin KRT5, a direct ΔNp63 transcriptional target, was also reduced, confirming functional alteration of p63 activity after DNA demethylation. We also showed high level methylation of three CpG sites in the TAP63 promoter in these cells, which was reduced by decitabine. DNMT1 depletion using inducible shRNAs partially replicated these effects, including an increase in the ratio of TAP63:ΔNP63 mRNAs, a reduction in ΔNp63 protein and reduced KRT5 mRNA levels. Finally, high DNA methylation levels were found at the TAP63 promoter in clinical SCC samples and matched normal tissues. We conclude that DNA methylation at the TAP63 promoter normally silences transcription in squamous epithelial cells, indicating DNA methylation as a therapeutic approach to induce this tumor suppressor in cancer. That decitabine simultaneously reduced the oncogenic activity of ΔNp63 provides a “double whammy” for SCC and other p63-positive carcinomas. Whilst a variety of mechanisms may be involved in producing the opposite effects of DNA demethylation on TAp63 and ΔNp63, we propose an “either or” mechanism in which TAP63 transcription physically interferes with the ability to initiate transcription from the downstream ΔNP63 promoter on the same DNA strand. This mechanism can explain the observed inverse expression of p63 isoforms in normal cells and cancer.

HDMX and its homologue HDM2 are two essential proteins for the cell; after genotoxic stress, both are phosphorylated near to their RING domain, specifically at serine 403 and 395, respectively. Once phosphorylated, both can bind the p53 mRNA and enhance its translation; however, both recognise p53 protein and provoke its degradation under normal conditions. HDM2 has been well-recognised as an E3 ubiquitin ligase, whereas it has been reported that even with the high similarity between the RING domains of the two homologs, HDMX does not have the E3 ligase activity. Despite this, HDMX is needed for the proper p53 poly-ubiquitination. Phosphorylation at serine 395 changes the conformation of HDM2, helping to explain the switch in its activity, but no information on HDMX has been published. Here we study the conformation of HDMX and its phospho-mimetic mutant S403D, investigate its E3 ligase activity and dissect its binding with p53. We show that phospho-mutation does not change the conformation of the protein, but HDMX is indeed an E3 ubiquitin ligase in vitro; however, in vivo, no activity was found. We speculated that HDMX is regulated by induced fit, being able to switch activity accordingly to the specific partner as p53 protein, p53 mRNA or HDM2. Our results aim to contribute to the elucidation of the contribution of the HDMX to p53 regulation.

No abstract

Human keratin 36 (K36) is a member of the hair keratin family and is a marker of hair cortex differentiation. The human KRT36 gene is located on the long arm of chromosome 17 and belongs to the cluster of structurally unrelated acidic hair keratins. Recently, it has been reported that KRT36 mRNA is specifically expressed in normal tongue epithelium and downregulated in squamous cell carcinomas of the mobile tongue. Furthermore, KRT36 levels have been reported to be downregulated in clinically normal mobile tongue tissue that is adjacent to tumours, suggesting it could be a marker of pre-neoplastic changes. However, the exact role and the potential role of K36 in tongue tumour formation remains unclear. The aim of the present study was to investigate expression of K36 in a series of squamous cell carcinomas of the mobile tongue, normal mobile tongue and a small panel of other human tissues (normal tissue from the appendix, cervix, hair, lip, mamilla, nail, oesophagus, skin, thymus and vagina) and selected cancer tissue (cervical cancer, melanoma and basal cell carcinoma). Affinity purified polyclonal antibodies against K36 were generated and used for immunohistochemical analysis. The results revealed that in the normal tongue, K36 was detected specifically in the filiform papillae of the dorsal surface of the tongue. Additionally, none of the tongue cancer tissue samples were K36-positive. Immunostaining also revealed that K36 was expressed in nail beds, Hassal's corpuscles in the thymus and the hair cortex. However, K36 was not expressed in the squamous epithelia of the skin, cervix and oesophagus, and the squamous cells of cervical carcinomas, basal cell carcinoma or melanoma. The present data indicated that K36 may be inactivated in tumours of the tongue. However, whether this is part of the tumoural process or if it is an effect of the tumour itself remains to be elucidated.