“P53 has long been recognized as a key player in directing chemotherapy-damaged cancer cells to self annihilate, but less attention has been paid to p53’s role in repairing damaged cells,”said John McDonald, chair of Georgia Tech’s School of Biology and chief research scientist at the Ovarian Cancer Institute.
When a cell is malfunctioning or injured, the gene p53 is called into action and tries to repair the cell. If the cell can't be repaired, p53 starts a process known as apoptosis that kills the cell. It's p53's role as one of the genes involved in initiating cell death that has led cancer researchers to long believe that the gene is essential to successful chemotherapy. The idea is that p53 assists in killing the cancerous cells that the chemo treatment injures.
But in this latest trial, Georgia Tech researchers found that p53 may be a “double-edged sword.?Chemotherapy patients whose tumors had a mutated p53 gene that didn't work had a much better survival rate than those who had normal p53.
In the study, researchers took malignant and benign ovarian tumors straight from the operating room and compared their gene expression profiles. Some of the cancer patients had been treated with chemotherapy prior to surgery, and some had not. At this point researchers didn't consider whether the patients actually had malignant tumors or had been treated with chemotherapy. However, they found that the gene expression profiles of the tumors clustered the chemotherapy-treated patients into two groups: those whose profiles were similar to cancer patients who had not been treated with chemo and those whose profiles were similar to patients with benign tumors.
As they continued their analysis, they found that the main difference between the groups' genetic profiles was the gene p53. While both groups had roughly the same amount of the protein encoded by p53, the cancer group had mutations in their p53 that caused the gene’s corresponding protein not to function.The benign group's p53 was normal.
Five years later, only 30 percent of the chemotherapy cancer patients clustering in the benign group were alive, while 70 percent of those clustering in the cancer group were still alive. The stage of cancer at the time of surgery had no correlation to who survived and who didn't. What did seem to have an effect was whether p53 was working or not in the chemotherapy-treated tumors.
A standard belief in cancer research is that a working p53 is essential in helping chemo patients because it turns on the killing mechanism for the cells that were damaged by chemo. But McDonald points out that p53 can also help repair damaged cells. If p53 is repairing cancer cells, that may lead to cancer recurrence.
"We think p53 may actually help some cancer cells make a comeback,?he said. "Based on our results, we propose that p53 may help repair some of the cancer cells damaged by chemotherapy leading to tumor recurrence and explaining the higher mortality rate of patients whose tumors had a functioning p53. If we are correct, inhibiting p53 in tumors being treated with chemotherapy may substantially improve patients' long-term survival."
McDonald and colleagues are continuing to test their theory by conducting stud
ies in cell cultures and mice. If it bears out, then disabling the gene in tumors, through medications or new genetic techniques during chemotherapy may help patients survive.
Source:Georgia Institute of Technology
Related biology news :
1. A frogs life is food for thought
2. Different microarray systems more alike than previously thought
3. Oceans more vulnerable to agricultural runoff than previously thought, study finds
4. Atmosphere may cleanse itself better than previously thought
5. ‘Blue Brain?project explores thought at molecular level
6. Lifes origins were easier than was thought
7. Katrina floodwaters not as toxic to humans as previously thought, study says
8. Alleged 40,000-year-old human footprints in Mexico much, much older than thought
9. Evidence for omega 3 fats less conclusive than we thought, say experts
10. Deep-rooted plants have much greater impact on climate than experts thought
11. Avian flu transmission to humans may be higher than thought