Genome-wide CRISPR screens identify novel regulators of wild-type and mutant p53 stability

Tumour suppressor p53 (TP53) is the most frequently mutated gene in cancer. Several hotspot p53 mutants not only lose tumour suppressive capabilities, but also function in a dominant-negative manner, suppressing canonical wild-type p53 function. Furthermore, some hotspot p53 mutants promote oncogenesis by gain-of-function mechanisms. Levels of p53 are regulated predominantly through regulation of protein stability and while wild-type p53 is normally kept at very low levels at steady-state, p53 mutants are often stabilized in tumours, which may be vital for their oncogenic properties. Here, we systematically profiled the factors that regulate protein stability of wild-type and mutant p53 using marker-based genome-wide CRISPR screens. We found that most proteins that regulate wild-type p53 also regulate a subset of p53 mutants with the exception of p53 R337H regulators, which are largely private to this mutant. Mechanistically, we identified FBXO42 as a novel positive regulator of a subset of p53 mutants comprising R273H, R248Q and R248W. We show that FBXO42 acts together with CCDC6 to regulate USP28-mediated p53 stabilization. Our work also identifies C16orf72 as a negative regulator of the stability of wild-type p53 and of all p53 mutants tested. C16orf72 is amplified in breast cancer, and we show that C16orf72 regulates p53 levels in mammary epithelium of mice and its overexpression results in accelerated breast cancer with reduced p53 levels. Together, this work provides a network view of the processes that regulate p53 stability, which might provide clues for reinforcing wild-type p53 or targeting mutant p53 in cancer.

[1]  G. Wahl,et al.  Loss of epigenetic regulation disrupts lineage integrity, reactivates multipotency and promotes breast cancer , 2021, bioRxiv.

[2]  M. Tyers,et al.  A novel p53 regulator, C16ORF72/TAPR1, buffers against telomerase inhibition , 2021, Aging cell.

[3]  John A. Bachman,et al.  shinyDepMap, a tool to identify targetable cancer genes and their functional connections from Cancer Dependency Map data , 2021, eLife.

[4]  Anna Luisa Di Stefano,et al.  Pathway-based classification of glioblastoma uncovers a mitochondrial subtype with therapeutic vulnerabilities , 2021, Nature Cancer.

[5]  Eiru Kim,et al.  Improved analysis of CRISPR fitness screens and reduced off-target effects with the BAGEL2 gene essentiality classifier , 2020, bioRxiv.

[6]  Shashank Srivastava,et al.  Coessential Genetic Networks Reveal the Organization and Constituents of a Dynamic Cellular Stress Response , 2019, bioRxiv.

[7]  D. Durocher,et al.  Identifying chemogenetic interactions from CRISPR screens with drugZ , 2019, Genome Medicine.

[8]  D. Durocher,et al.  A consensus set of genetic vulnerabilities to ATR inhibition , 2019, bioRxiv.

[9]  Aviad Tsherniak,et al.  Mutational processes shape the landscape of TP53 mutations in human cancer , 2018, Nature Genetics.

[10]  Anne-Claude Gingras,et al.  The Shieldin complex mediates 53BP1-dependent DNA repair , 2018, Nature.

[11]  W. Klapper,et al.  TRRAP is essential for regulating the accumulation of mutant and wild-type p53 in lymphoma. , 2018, Blood.

[12]  Martin A. M. Reijns,et al.  CRISPR screens identify genomic ribonucleotides as a source of PARP-trapping lesions , 2018, Nature.

[13]  Zhiyi Liu,et al.  Targeting deubiquitinase USP28 for cancer therapy , 2018, Cell Death & Disease.

[14]  Phillip G. Montgomery,et al.  Defining a Cancer Dependency Map , 2017, Cell.

[15]  D. Durocher,et al.  Evaluation and Design of Genome-Wide CRISPR/SpCas9 Knockout Screens , 2017, G3: Genes, Genomes, Genetics.

[16]  P. Hieter,et al.  Synthetic lethality and cancer , 2017, Nature Reviews Genetics.

[17]  B. Cravatt,et al.  A Screen for Protein-Protein Interactions in Live Mycobacteria Reveals a Functional Link between the Virulence-Associated Lipid Transporter LprG and the Mycolyltransferase Antigen 85A. , 2017, ACS infectious diseases.

[18]  Anushya Muruganujan,et al.  PANTHER version 11: expanded annotation data from Gene Ontology and Reactome pathways, and data analysis tool enhancements , 2016, Nucleic Acids Res..

[19]  A. Gingras,et al.  Parallel Exploration of Interaction Space by BioID and Affinity Purification Coupled to Mass Spectrometry. , 2017, Methods in molecular biology.

[20]  Wenwei Hu,et al.  A novel mutant p53 binding partner BAG5 stabilizes mutant p53 and promotes mutant p53 GOFs in tumorigenesis , 2016, Cell Discovery.

[21]  H. Lockstone,et al.  53BP1 Integrates DNA Repair and p53-Dependent Cell Fate Decisions via Distinct Mechanisms , 2016, Molecular cell.

[22]  Dmitriy Sonkin,et al.  TP53 Variations in Human Cancers: New Lessons from the IARC TP53 Database and Genomics Data , 2016, Human mutation.

[23]  Hyungwon Choi,et al.  SAINTq: Scoring protein‐protein interactions in affinity purification – mass spectrometry experiments with fragment or peptide intensity data , 2016, Proteomics.

[24]  G. Sluder,et al.  A USP28–53BP1–p53–p21 signaling axis arrests growth after centrosome loss or prolonged mitosis , 2016, The Journal of cell biology.

[25]  Kenneth H. Roux,et al.  An improved smaller biotin ligase for BioID proximity labeling , 2016, Molecular biology of the cell.

[26]  I. Hertz-Picciotto,et al.  Role of p53, Mitochondrial DNA Deletions, and Paternal Age in Autism: A Case-Control Study , 2016, Pediatrics.

[27]  D. Durocher,et al.  High-Resolution CRISPR Screens Reveal Fitness Genes and Genotype-Specific Cancer Liabilities , 2015, Cell.

[28]  Wenwei Hu,et al.  BAG2 promotes tumorigenesis through enhancing mutant p53 protein levels and function , 2015, eLife.

[29]  Amber L. Couzens,et al.  BioID-based Identification of Skp Cullin F-box (SCF)β-TrCP1/2 E3 Ligase Substrates* , 2015, Molecular & Cellular Proteomics.

[30]  D. Proia,et al.  Improving survival by exploiting tumor dependence on stabilized mutant p53 for treatment , 2015, Nature.

[31]  V. Belyĭ,et al.  Pontin, a new mutant p53-binding protein, promotes gain-of-function of mutant p53 , 2015, Cell Death and Differentiation.

[32]  Anne-Claude Gingras,et al.  Proximity biotinylation and affinity purification are complementary approaches for the interactome mapping of chromatin-associated protein complexes. , 2015, Journal of proteomics.

[33]  Jun S. Liu,et al.  MAGeCK enables robust identification of essential genes from genome-scale CRISPR/Cas9 knockout screens , 2014, Genome Biology.

[34]  Yan Zhang,et al.  Profiling human protein degradome delineates cellular responses to proteasomal inhibition and reveals a feedback mechanism in regulating proteasome homeostasis , 2014, Cell Research.

[35]  P. Blanchette,et al.  Interaction of Adenovirus Type 5 E4orf4 with the Nuclear Pore Subunit Nup205 Is Required for Proper Viral Gene Expression , 2014, Journal of Virology.

[36]  G. Lozano,et al.  The Mdm Network and Its Regulation of p53 Activities: A Rheostat of Cancer Risk , 2014, Human mutation.

[37]  C. Bonaïti‐pellié,et al.  Drastic Effect of Germline TP53 Missense Mutations in Li–Fraumeni Patients , 2013, Human mutation.

[38]  K. Vousden,et al.  p53 mutations in cancer , 2013, Nature Cell Biology.

[39]  Carol Prives,et al.  Mutant p53: one name, many proteins. , 2012, Genes & development.

[40]  Brian Burke,et al.  A promiscuous biotin ligase fusion protein identifies proximal and interacting proteins in mammalian cells , 2012, The Journal of cell biology.

[41]  A. Bagashev,et al.  Role of p53 in Neurodegenerative Diseases , 2011, Neurodegenerative Diseases.

[42]  I. Shih,et al.  Immunohistochemical staining patterns of p53 can serve as a surrogate marker for TP53 mutations in ovarian carcinoma: an immunohistochemical and nucleotide sequencing analysis , 2011, Modern Pathology.

[43]  Kathryn Roeder,et al.  Multiple Recurrent De Novo CNVs, Including Duplications of the 7q11.23 Williams Syndrome Region, Are Strongly Associated with Autism , 2011, Neuron.

[44]  S. Egan,et al.  Cooperation between Pik3ca and p53 mutations in mouse mammary tumor formation. , 2011, Cancer research.

[45]  D. Malkin.  Li-fraumeni syndrome. , 2001, Genes & cancer.

[46]  Feng Wang,et al.  Substrate Phosphorylation and Feedback Regulation in JFK-promoted p53 Destabilization* , 2010, The Journal of Biological Chemistry.

[47]  S. Elledge,et al.  A genetic screen identifies the Triple T complex required for DNA damage signaling and ATM and ATR stability. , 2010, Genes & development.

[48]  Y. Xu,et al.  A common gain of function of p53 cancer mutants in inducing genetic instability , 2010, Oncogene.

[49]  V. Rotter,et al.  Mutant p53 gain-of-function in cancer. , 2010, Cold Spring Harbor perspectives in biology.

[50]  Paul Timpson,et al.  Mutant p53 drives metastasis and overcomes growth arrest/senescence in pancreatic cancer , 2010, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[51]  R. Wollman,et al.  A genome-wide siRNA screen reveals diverse cellular processes and pathways that mediate genome stability. , 2009, Molecular cell.

[52]  Luyang Sun,et al.  JFK, a Kelch domain-containing F-box protein, links the SCF complex to p53 regulation , 2009, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[53]  Qikai Xu,et al.  Global Protein Stability Profiling in Mammalian Cells , 2008, Science.

[54]  C. Bonaïti‐pellié,et al.  Molecular basis of the Li–Fraumeni syndrome: an update from the French LFS families , 2008, Journal of Medical Genetics.

[55]  T. Iwakuma,et al.  The inherent instability of mutant p53 is alleviated by Mdm2 or p16INK4a loss. , 2008, Genes & development.

[56]  S. Gygi,et al.  Profiling of UV-induced ATM/ATR signaling pathways , 2007, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[57]  K. Vousden,et al.  Ubiquitination and Degradation of Mutant p53 , 2007, Molecular and Cellular Biology.

[58]  M. Olivier,et al.  Impact of mutant p53 functional properties on TP53 mutation patterns and tumor phenotype: lessons from recent developments in the IARC TP53 database , 2007, Human mutation.

[59]  Anne E Carpenter,et al.  CellProfiler: free, versatile software for automated biological image analysis. , 2007, BioTechniques.

[60]  J. Bargonetti,et al.  Mutant p53 in MDA-MB-231 breast cancer cells is stabilized by elevated phospholipase D activity and contributes to survival signals generated by phospholipase D , 2006, Oncogene.

[61]  T. Mak,et al.  A Role for the Deubiquitinating Enzyme USP28 in Control of the DNA-Damage Response , 2006, Cell.

[62]  G. Blandino,et al.  Mutant p53 gain of function: reduction of tumor malignancy of human cancer cell lines through abrogation of mutant p53 expression , 2006, Oncogene.

[63]  L. Strong,et al.  Gain of Function of a p53 Hot Spot Mutation in a Mouse Model of Li-Fraumeni Syndrome , 2004, Cell.

[64]  T. Jacks,et al.  Mutant p53 Gain of Function in Two Mouse Models of Li-Fraumeni Syndrome , 2004, Cell.

[65]  V. Rotter,et al.  Transactivation of the EGR1 Gene Contributes to Mutant p53 Gain of Function , 2004, Cancer Research.

[66]  M. Burns,et al.  Case-Control Study , 2020, Definitions.

[67]  V. Rotter,et al.  Mutant p53 gain of function: repression of CD95(Fas/APO-1) gene expression by tumor-associated p53 mutants , 2003, Oncogene.

[68]  A. Levine,et al.  Surfing the p53 network , 2000, Nature.

[69]  M. Kapoor,et al.  High metastatic potential in mice inheriting a targeted p53 missense mutation. , 2000, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[70]  A. Levine,et al.  Mutant p53 gain of function: differential effects of different p53 mutants on resistance of cultured cells to chemotherapy , 1999, Oncogene.

[71]  S. Elledge,et al.  Linkage of ATM to cell cycle regulation by the Chk2 protein kinase. , 1998, Science.

[72]  P. Chène.  In vitro analysis of the dominant negative effect of p53 mutants. , 1998, Journal of molecular biology.

[73]  Stephen N. Jones,et al.  Regulation of p53 stability by Mdm2 , 1997, Nature.

[74]  M. Oren,et al.  Mdm2 promotes the rapid degradation of p53 , 1997, Nature.

[75]  D. Evans,et al.  A detailed study of loss of heterozygosity on chromosome 17 in tumours from Li – Fraumeni patients carrying a mutation to the TP53 gene , 1997, Oncogene.

[76]  V. Rotter,et al.  Cooperation between p53-dependent and p53-independent apoptotic pathways in myeloid cells. , 1996, Cancer research.

[77]  Guillermina Lozano,et al.  Rescue of early embryonic lethality in mdm2-deficient mice by deletion of p53 , 1995, Nature.

[78]  R. Hruban,et al.  p53 mutations in pancreatic carcinoma and evidence of common involvement of homocopolymer tracts in DNA microdeletions. , 1994, Cancer research.

[79]  A. Levine,et al.  Gain of function mutations in p53 , 1993, Nature Genetics.

[80]  P. Gruss,et al.  Participation of p53 cellular tumour antigen in transformation of normal embryonic cells , 1984, Nature.

[81]  V. Rotter,et al.  Reconstitution of p53 expression in a nonproducer Ab-MuLV-transformed cell line by transfection of a functional p53 gene , 1984, Cell.

[82]  V. Rotter.  p53, a transformation-related cellular-encoded protein, can be used as a biochemical marker for the detection of primary mouse tumor cells. , 1983, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.