Our system is currently under heavy load due to increased usage. We're actively working on upgrades to improve performance. Thank you for your patience.
2001
DOI: 10.1038/sj.onc.1204139
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A transcriptional activation function of p53 is dispensable for and inhibitory of its apoptotic function

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
2

Citation Types

3
51
0
1

Year Published

2002
2002
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
7
2

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 72 publications
(55 citation statements)
references
References 39 publications
3
51
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…We have been unable to test this directly since transcriptional inhibitors such as DRB and actinomycin D themselves affect p53 function and/or the state of phosphorylation of 4E-BP1 (Loreni et al, 2000;David-Pfeuty et al, 2001). Further studies, for example using mutant forms of p53 which are deficient in transcriptional transactivation or selectively defective in the ability to induce different sets of genes (Haupt et al, 1995;Ding et al, 2000;Kokontis et al, 2001), will therefore be required to establish the mechanism by which p53 controls translation as part of its function as a key factor in growth regulation and tumorigenesis. (Johnson et al, 1993).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We have been unable to test this directly since transcriptional inhibitors such as DRB and actinomycin D themselves affect p53 function and/or the state of phosphorylation of 4E-BP1 (Loreni et al, 2000;David-Pfeuty et al, 2001). Further studies, for example using mutant forms of p53 which are deficient in transcriptional transactivation or selectively defective in the ability to induce different sets of genes (Haupt et al, 1995;Ding et al, 2000;Kokontis et al, 2001), will therefore be required to establish the mechanism by which p53 controls translation as part of its function as a key factor in growth regulation and tumorigenesis. (Johnson et al, 1993).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The c-myc oncogene can switch p53-dependent response to DNA damage from cell-cycle arrest to apoptosis by inhibiting p21 transactivation (Seoane et al, 2002). Similarly, p53 point mutants unable to transactivate p21 have been found to be more potent inducers of apoptosis than wild-type p53 (Bissonnette and Hunting, 1998;Kokontis et al, 2001). …”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Many studies have indicated p53 being an important integral part of these checkpoints (Bargonetti and Manfredi, 2002). Accumulated p53 in response to DNA damage or through experimental overexpression has been shown to cause growth arrest at G1 (Agami and Bernards, 2000;Wesierska-Gadek and Schmid, 2000;Willers et al, 2000) and/or G2 (Agarwal et al, 1995;Taylor et al, 1999;Taylor and Stark, 2001;Nakamura et al, 2002) or to induce apoptosis (Vousden, 2000;Kokontis et al, 2001). In some cases, overexpression of the wt p53 induces cellular senescence (Sugrue et al, 1997;Dubrez et al, 2001;Jung et al, 2001).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%