Investigation and prediction of the severity of p53 mutants using parameters from structural calculations

A method has been developed to predict the effects of mutations in the p53 cancer suppressor gene. The new method uses novel parameters combined with previously established parameters. The most important parameter is the stability measure of the mutated structure calculated using molecular modelling. For each mutant, a severity score is reported, which can be used for classification into deleterious and nondeleterious. Both structural features and sequence properties are taken into account. The method has a prediction accuracy of 77% on all mutants and 88% on breast cancer mutations affecting WAF1 promoter binding. When compared with earlier methods, using the same dataset, our method clearly performs better. As a result of the severity score calculated for every mutant, valuable knowledge can be gained regarding p53, a protein that is believed to be involved in over 50% of all human cancers.

[1]  Ronald Eugene Shaffer,et al.  Multi‐ and Megavariate Data Analysis. Principles and Applications, I. Eriksson, E. Johansson, N. Kettaneh‐Wold and S. Wold, Umetrics Academy, Umeå, 2001, ISBN 91‐973730‐1‐X, 533pp. , 2002 .

[2]  W. Kabsch,et al.  Dictionary of protein secondary structure: Pattern recognition of hydrogen‐bonded and geometrical features , 1983, Biopolymers.

[3]  J. Bond,et al.  Detailed computational study of p53 and p16: using evolutionary sequence analysis and disease-associated mutations to predict the functional consequences of allelic variants , 2003, Oncogene.

[4]  P. Meisel.  Margaret O. Dayhoff: Atlas of Protein Sequence and Structure 1969 (Volume 4) XXIV u. 361 S., 21 Ausklapptafeln, 68 Abb. und zahlreiche Tabellen. National Biomedical Research Foundation, Silver Spring/Maryland 1969. Preis $ 12,50 , 1971 .

[5]  Ruben Abagyan,et al.  ICM—A new method for protein modeling and design: Applications to docking and structure prediction from the distorted native conformation , 1994, J. Comput. Chem..

[6]  H. Scheraga,et al.  Energy parameters in polypeptides. 10. Improved geometrical parameters and nonbonded interactions for use in the ECEPP/3 algorithm, with application to proline-containing peptides , 1994 .

[7]  András Fiser,et al.  Modeling mutations in protein structures , 2007, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[8]  S. Chanock,et al.  The devil is in the DNA , 2007, Nature Genetics.

[9]  B. Matthews.  Comparison of the predicted and observed secondary structure of T4 phage lysozyme. , 1975, Biochimica et biophysica acta.

[10]  S. Henikoff,et al.  Accounting for human polymorphisms predicted to affect protein function. , 2002, Genome research.

[11]  Rodrigo Lopez,et al.  Multiple sequence alignment with the Clustal series of programs , 2003, Nucleic Acids Res..

[12]  S. Henikoff,et al.  Predicting deleterious amino acid substitutions. , 2001, Genome research.

[13]  D. Chasman,et al.  Predicting the functional consequences of non-synonymous single nucleotide polymorphisms: structure-based assessment of amino acid variation. , 2001, Journal of molecular biology.

[14]  K A Schulman,et al.  Mathematical Models in Decision Analysis , 1997, Infection Control & Hospital Epidemiology.

[15]  G. Parmigiani,et al.  The Consensus Coding Sequences of Human Breast and Colorectal Cancers , 2006, Science.

[16]  Shunsuke Kato,et al.  Computational approaches for predicting the biological effect of p53 missense mutations: a comparison of three sequence analysis based methods , 2006, Nucleic acids research.

[17]  M. O. Dayhoff,et al.  Atlas of protein sequence and structure , 1965 .

[18]  R. Abagyan,et al.  Biased probability Monte Carlo conformational searches and electrostatic calculations for peptides and proteins. , 1994, Journal of molecular biology.

[19]  J. Rodgers,et al.  Thirteen ways to look at the correlation coefficient , 1988 .

[20]  E. Birney,et al.  Patterns of somatic mutation in human cancer genomes , 2007, Nature.

[21]  S. Kato,et al.  Understanding the function–structure and function–mutation relationships of p53 tumor suppressor protein by high-resolution missense mutation analysis , 2003, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[22]  C Béroud,et al.  p53 Website and analysis of p53 gene mutations in human cancer: Forging a link between epidemiology and carcinogenesis , 2000, Human mutation.

[23]  Andreas Daffertshofer,et al.  PCA in studying coordination and variability: a tutorial. , 2004, Clinical biomechanics.

[24]  Piero Fariselli,et al.  Predicting protein stability changes from sequences using support vector machines , 2005, ECCB/JBI.

[25]  A. Zharkikh,et al.  Comprehensive statistical study of 452 BRCA1 missense substitutions with classification of eight recurrent substitutions as neutral , 2005, Journal of Medical Genetics.

[26]  Vladimir N. Vapnik,et al.  The Nature of Statistical Learning Theory , 2000, Statistics for Engineering and Information Science.

[27]  B. Persson,et al.  Molecular model of human CYP21 based on mammalian CYP2C5: structural features correlate with clinical severity of mutations causing congenital adrenal hyperplasia. , 2006, Molecular endocrinology.

[28]  D C Richardson,et al.  The kinemage: A tool for scientific communication , 1992, Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society.

[29]  Alison L. Cuff,et al.  Integrating mutation data and structural analysis of the TP53 tumor‐suppressor protein , 2002, Human mutation.

[30]  J. Trent,et al.  WAF1, a potential mediator of p53 tumor suppression , 1993, Cell.

[31]  M. Michael Gromiha,et al.  CUPSAT: prediction of protein stability upon point mutations , 2006, Nucleic Acids Res..

[32]  M. Tang,et al.  Preferential Formation of Benzo[a]pyrene Adducts at Lung Cancer Mutational Hotspots in P53 , 1996, Science.

[33]  P. Jeffrey,et al.  Crystal structure of a p53 tumor suppressor-DNA complex: understanding tumorigenic mutations. , 1994, Science.

[34]  Olivier Michielin,et al.  Structural assessment of single amino acid mutations: application to TP53 function , 2006, Human mutation.

[35]  Thierry Soussi,et al.  Assessing TP53 status in human tumours to evaluate clinical outcome , 2001, Nature Reviews Cancer.

[36]  M. Barenboim,et al.  Statistical geometry approach to the study of functional effects of human nonsynonymous SNPs , 2005, Human mutation.

[37]  R. Doolittle,et al.  A simple method for displaying the hydropathic character of a protein. , 1982, Journal of molecular biology.

[38]  E. Birney,et al.  Patterns of somatic mutation in human cancer genomes , 2007, Nature.

[39]  J. M. Zimmerman,et al.  The characterization of amino acid sequences in proteins by statistical methods. , 1968, Journal of theoretical biology.

[40]  J. Moult,et al.  SNPs, protein structure, and disease , 2001, Human mutation.

[41]  Yuelan Wang,et al.  Prediction of functional nonsynonymous single nucleotide polymorphisms in human G-protein-coupled receptors , 2008, Journal of Human Genetics.

[42]  L. Serrano,et al.  Predicting changes in the stability of proteins and protein complexes: a study of more than 1000 mutations. , 2002, Journal of molecular biology.