1991
DOI: 10.1016/0006-291x(91)91263-c
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Inhibition and enhancement of eukaryotic gene expression by potential non-B DNA sequences

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

1
6
0
1

Year Published

1997
1997
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
8
1
1

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 20 publications
(8 citation statements)
references
References 35 publications
1
6
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Generally, CA-repeats are purine-pyrimidine alternating sequences and hence have the potential to assume Z-DNA conformation, a left-handed double-helix structure that is thermodynamically unfavorable compared to B-DNA conformation. Z-DNA conformation has been described as negatively affecting transcriptional activity[36], [43]. Consistently, we showed that GF100472 regulated C3 promoter activity in a length-dependent manner: the longer the CA-repeat, the lower the transcriptional activity.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 84%
“…Generally, CA-repeats are purine-pyrimidine alternating sequences and hence have the potential to assume Z-DNA conformation, a left-handed double-helix structure that is thermodynamically unfavorable compared to B-DNA conformation. Z-DNA conformation has been described as negatively affecting transcriptional activity[36], [43]. Consistently, we showed that GF100472 regulated C3 promoter activity in a length-dependent manner: the longer the CA-repeat, the lower the transcriptional activity.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 84%
“…The existence of proteins whose interaction with DNA is based on conformation ± but not sequence-speci®c ± recognition has been documented (Bianchi et al, 1988;Herbert et al, 1993;Leith and Russel, 1993;Pearson et al, 1995;Solaro et al, 1995). Transcriptional regulation of many genes involves conformational changes in DNA (Delic et al, 1991;Hanke et al, 1995;Iyer and Struhl, 1995;Spiro et al, 1995;Michelotti et al, 1996), and binding of some transcription factors depends on the conformation of DNA within or adjacent to their binding sites (Grigoriev et al, 1992;Spiro et al, 1993;Hu et al, 1994;May®eld and Miller, 1994). At the level of the p53 protein, modi®cations of the p53 carboxy-terminal regulatory domain either by posttranslational modifications, alternative splicing (Kulesz-Martin et al, 1994;Flaman et al, 1996), or by binding of proteins mimicking the e ect of PAb421 binding would provide another level for determining the speci®city for transactivation of the ever growing list of potential p53 target genes.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Large individual differences in the ability to modulate the quantitative level of HMOX-1 activity in response to a given stimulus have been described, which correlate with differences in the length of a microsatellite (GT)n repeat in the 5′ flanking region of the HMOX-1 gene (Exner et al 2004; Hirai et al 2003; Yamada et al 2000). The purine–pyrimidine alternating sequence in the (GT)n repeat has the potential to assume Z-DNA conformation, a left-handed double-helix structure that is thermodynamically unfavorable compared with B-DNA conformation (Rich et al 1984) and has been described as negatively affecting transcriptional activity (Delic et al 1991; Naylor and Clark 1990). Yamada and co-workers demonstrated by transient-transfection assay in cultured cell lines that the larger the number of (GT)n repeats in the HMOX-1 gene promoter, the lower is the HMOX-1 inducibility by ROS (Yamada et al 2000).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%