This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Supplemental material Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Reprints and Permissions Copyright Information Books from ASM Press MicrobeWorld Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Krieg, A. J. Articles by Giaccia, A. J. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Krieg, A. J. Articles by Giaccia, A. J.

 Previous Article  |  Next Article 

Molecular and Cellular Biology, October 2006, p. 7030-7045, Vol. 26, No. 19
0270-7306/06/$08.00+0     doi:10.1128/MCB.00322-06
Copyright © 2006, American Society for Microbiology. All Rights Reserved.

Functional Analysis of p53 Binding under Differential Stresses

Division of Radiation and Cancer Biology, Department of Radiation Oncology, and Center for Clinical Sciences Research, Department of Radiation Oncology, Stanford University, Stanford, California 94303-5152

Received 21 February 2006/ Returned for modification 11 April 2006/ Accepted 5 July 2006

Hypoxia and DNA damage stabilize the p53 protein, but the subsequent effect that each stress has on transcriptional regulation of known p53 target genes is variable. We have used chromatin immunoprecipitation followed by CpG island (CGI) microarray hybridization to identify promoters bound by p53 under both DNA-damaging and non-DNA-damaging conditions in HCT116 cells. Using gene-specific PCR analysis, we have verified an association with CGIs of the highest enrichment (>2.5-fold) (REV3L, XPMC2H, HNRPUL1, TOR1AIP1, glutathione peroxidase 1, and SCFD2), with CGIs of intermediate enrichment (>2.2-fold) (COX7A2L, SYVN1, and JAG2), and with CGIs of low enrichment (>2.0-fold) (MYC and PCNA). We found little difference in promoter binding when p53 is stabilized by these two distinctly different stresses. However, expression of these genes varies a great deal: while a few genes exhibit classical induction with adriamycin, the majority of the genes are unchanged or are mildly repressed by either hypoxia or adriamycin. Further analysis using p53 mutated in the core DNA binding domain revealed that the interaction of p53 with CGIs may be occurring through both sequence-dependent and -independent mechanisms. Taken together, these experiments describe the identification of novel p53 target genes and the subsequent discovery of distinctly different expression phenomena for p53 target genes under different stress scenarios.

Supplemental material for this article may be found at http://mcb.asm.org/.

This article has been cited by other articles:

• Smeenk, L., van Heeringen, S. J., Koeppel, M., van Driel, M. A., Bartels, S. J. J., Akkers, R. C., Denissov, S., Stunnenberg, H. G., Lohrum, M. (2008). Characterization of genome-wide p53-binding sites upon stress response. Nucleic Acids Res 36: 3639-3654 [Abstract] [Full Text]