Review

Critical function of Siah2 in tumorigenesis

  • The seven in absentia homolog (Siah) family proteins are components of E3 RING zinc finger ubiquitin ligase complexes that catalyze the ubiquitination of proteins. Siah proteins target their substrates for proteasomal degradation. Evidence is growing that Siah proteins are implicated in the progression of various cancer cells and play a critical role in angiogenesis and tumorigenesis, particularly through Ras, p53, estrogen, and hypoxia inducible factor (HIF)-mediated signaling pathways in response to DNA damage or hypoxia.

    Citation: Kazunobu Baba, Tadaaki Miyazaki. Critical function of Siah2 in tumorigenesis[J]. AIMS Molecular Science, 2017, 4(4): 415-423. doi: 10.3934/molsci.2017.4.415

    Related Papers:

    [1] Akhil Kumar Srivastav, Pankaj Kumar Tiwari, Prashant K Srivastava, Mini Ghosh, Yun Kang . A mathematical model for the impacts of face mask, hospitalization and quarantine on the dynamics of COVID-19 in India: deterministic vs. stochastic. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2021, 18(1): 182-213. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2021010
    [2] Rahat Zarin, Usa Wannasingha Humphries, Amir Khan, Aeshah A. Raezah . Computational modeling of fractional COVID-19 model by Haar wavelet collocation Methods with real data. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2023, 20(6): 11281-11312. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2023500
    [3] Fang Wang, Lianying Cao, Xiaoji Song . Mathematical modeling of mutated COVID-19 transmission with quarantine, isolation and vaccination. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2022, 19(8): 8035-8056. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2022376
    [4] Yangyang Yu, Yuan Liu, Shi Zhao, Daihai He . A simple model to estimate the transmissibility of the Beta, Delta, and Omicron variants of SARS-COV-2 in South Africa. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2022, 19(10): 10361-10373. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2022485
    [5] Matthew Hayden, Bryce Morrow, Wesley Yang, Jin Wang . Quantifying the role of airborne transmission in the spread of COVID-19. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2023, 20(1): 587-612. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2023027
    [6] Qinghua Liu, Siyu Yuan, Xinsheng Wang . A SEIARQ model combine with Logistic to predict COVID-19 within small-world networks. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2023, 20(2): 4006-4017. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2023187
    [7] A. M. Elaiw, Raghad S. Alsulami, A. D. Hobiny . Global dynamics of IAV/SARS-CoV-2 coinfection model with eclipse phase and antibody immunity. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2023, 20(2): 3873-3917. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2023182
    [8] Zita Abreu, Guillaume Cantin, Cristiana J. Silva . Analysis of a COVID-19 compartmental model: a mathematical and computational approach. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2021, 18(6): 7979-7998. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2021396
    [9] Sarafa A. Iyaniwura, Rabiu Musa, Jude D. Kong . A generalized distributed delay model of COVID-19: An endemic model with immunity waning. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2023, 20(3): 5379-5412. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2023249
    [10] Hamdy M. Youssef, Najat A. Alghamdi, Magdy A. Ezzat, Alaa A. El-Bary, Ahmed M. Shawky . A new dynamical modeling SEIR with global analysis applied to the real data of spreading COVID-19 in Saudi Arabia. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2020, 17(6): 7018-7044. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2020362
  • The seven in absentia homolog (Siah) family proteins are components of E3 RING zinc finger ubiquitin ligase complexes that catalyze the ubiquitination of proteins. Siah proteins target their substrates for proteasomal degradation. Evidence is growing that Siah proteins are implicated in the progression of various cancer cells and play a critical role in angiogenesis and tumorigenesis, particularly through Ras, p53, estrogen, and hypoxia inducible factor (HIF)-mediated signaling pathways in response to DNA damage or hypoxia.


    1. Introduction

    Nucleosomes contain histone octamers around which DNA is wrapped [1]. Neighboring nucleosomes are separated by unwrapped linker DNA. Generally, a nucleosome's position with respect to the gene promoter plays an important role in yeast gene expression [2,3,4,5]. Nucleosome arrangement is also specific to an organism [6].

    Trichostatin A (TSA) is a histone deacetylase inhibitor that promotes histone acetylation, which induces hyperacetylation of histones [7]. TSA influences nucleosome structure via histone acetylation. In addition, TSA influences nucleosome positions in the filamentous ascomycete Aspergillus fumigatus [8]. The acetylation and deacetylation of histones play an important role in the regulation of transcription [9]. Our previous study showed that TSA influences gene expression and nucleosome position in the archiascomycete Saitoella complicata [10]. Our study identified a total of 154 genes upregulated in a concentration-dependent manner in response to TSA treatment, whereas 131 genes were identified to be increasingly downregulated with increasing TSA concentration [10]. Most of nucleosome positions did not change after TSA treatment [10]. The anamorphic and saprobic budding yeast S. complicata, which is classified under Taphrinomycotina, represents the earliest ascomycetous lineage [11,12]. The fission yeast Schizosaccharomyces is also classified under Taphrinomycotina [12].

    In the previous study, we compared the nucleosome positions in 0 and 3 μg/mL TSA [10]. Thus, it was uncertain whether nucleosome position changed in a TSA concentration-dependent manner or not. If nucleosome position did not change in a TSA concentration-dependent manner, at which concentration did the position change? In this study, we investigated whether genes that are known to be regulated in response to TSA treatment also exhibit changes in nucleosome formation at the gene promoters in a TSA concentration-dependent manner.

    In addition, the ascomycetous yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae spheroplast was reported to enlarge using zymolyase [13,14]. Enlarged spheroplast cells contain multiple nuclei [13]. It was uncertain how the multiple nuclei were maintained. Do nucleosome positions differ in between single nucleus and multiple nuclei? In bacterial enlarged spheroplasts, DNA was replicated and stress response genes were upregulated [15]. We found that S. complicata cells enlarge when grown in minimal SD broth (Takara, Japan) after zymolyase treatment. Thus, we measured the extent of nucleosome formation at the gene promoters in enlarged S. complicatacells and compared them with nucleosome formation levels in TSA-treated cells.


    2. Materials and Method


    2.1. Saitoella complicata culture

    Saitoella complicata NBRC 10748 (= JCM 7358, = IAM 12963; type strain) was cultivated in YM broth (yeast extract, 3 g/L; malt extract, 3 g/L; peptone, 5 g/L; dextrose, 10 g/L) at 25 ℃ for 24 h as a control sample. Afterwards, TSA (1, 2, and 3 μg/mL) was added to the S. complicata culture; cells were subsequently incubated at 25 ℃ for 24 h. For the enlarged spheroplast generation, S. complicata was grown in minimal SD broth (Takara, Japan) at 25 ℃ for 30 h. Harvested cells were centrifuged for 5 min at 3000 rpm and suspended in buffer containing 0.8 M sorbitol and 25 mM phosphate at 25 ℃ for 20 min. Zymolyase 20T (Seikagaku corporation, Japan) was added to the cell suspension; the cells were incubated at 37 ℃ for 60 min. S. complicata cells were harvested, centrifuged for 5 min at 3000 rpm, and cultured in minimal SD broth (adjusted to pH 7.5) at 25 ℃ for 4-7 days.


    2.2. Nucleosomal DNA fragment isolation

    Equal volumes of S. complicata culture and 2% formaldehyde were mixed and incubated for 10 min. Next, 5 mL of 1.25 M glycine was added to the resulting solution. S. complicata cells were collected, washed with 50 mM Tris-EDTA buffer (pH 8), and then suspended in zymolyase buffer (1 M sorbitol, 10 mM DTT, and 50 mM Tris-HCl, pH 8.0). Zymolyase (Seikagaku corporation, Japan) (50 U) was added to the cell suspension, and the resulting solution was incubated at 37 ℃ for 1 h. Cells were collected by centrifugation and suspended in 2.5 mL of zymolyase buffer, after which 1 U of MNase (Takara, Japan) was added. The resulting digestion solution was incubated at 37 ℃ for 30 min, and the reaction was stopped by adding sodium dodecyl sulfate to a final concentration of 1% and EDTA to a final concentration of 10 mM. Proteinase K solution (5 μL) was added to the solution, and the mixture was incubated at 56 ℃ for 1 h. DNA was phenol/chloroform-extracted, ethanol-precipitated, and treated with RNase (Nippon Gene, Japan). Nucleosomal DNA fragments were isolated via electrophoresis on 2% agarose gel. The mononucleosomal DNA band was excised and purified using the QIAquick Gel Extraction Kit (Qiagen, Germany).


    2.3. Quantitative PCR

    In this study, we selected six nucleosome positions in the gene promoters (300 nucleotides upstream of the translational start site) of the following four locus tags: G7K_2351-t1, G7K_2810-t1, G7K_3456-t1, and G7K_5676-t1. G7K_2351-t1 and G7K_2810-t1 encode homologs to 19S proteasome regulatory subunit Rpn3 and 20S proteasome-component α6 subunit Pre5, respectively, and are known to be increasingly downregulated upon treatment with increasing concentrations of TSA [10]. G7K_3456-t1 encodes a homolog to anaphase promoting complex subunit Apc11, whereas the G7K_5676-t1 gene is not homologous to any Schizosaccharomyces pombe protein. G7K_3456-t1 and G7K_5676-t1 are genes that are both upregulated in response to TSA treatment in a concentration-dependent manner [10]. Table 1 and Supplementary Figure 1 list the primers used in this study. We selected the position 5676_0 as an internal control, which showed the same nucleosome formation level between the cells treated with 0 μg/mL and 3 μg/mL TSA (Supplementary Figure 1) [10]. PCR was performed using the following cycling conditions: 1 cycle of 95 ℃ for 600 s and 45 cycles of denaturation (95 ℃ for 10 s), annealing (55 ℃ for 10 s), and extension (72 ℃ for 15 s). After the extension, a melting curve cycle was performed from 60 ℃ to 95 ℃ at 0.1 ℃/s to confirm the absence of non-specific bands. The quantification cycle (Cq) values were obtained using LightCycler Nano Software (Roche, Basel). We calculated the nucleosome formation level using the following formula: 2(Cq value at the position 5676_0 − Cq value at each position).

    Table 1. Primers used in this study.
    Target position Forward (5' to 3') Reverse (5' to 3') Product size (bp)
    2351 ggcaggcagtccaatagagt gagatcaagaggggttcacg 103
    2810_1 gcagtttaacgacgagaaggtt cgcctcggtaataggtattcat 110
    2810_2 ggacaagctcctggtcttcc cccttcaaagcacctcaatc 110
    3456 gagaagctaaccgagcaacttt tggccaattgaacaaacgat 109
    5676_1 tcagcgattccccaagttat gatgagggcgtcgagttc 110
    5676_2 gttcacgaggacagatcagg ggagttcgaaccatctttataacttg 109
    5676_0 (control) gagcgggatgtctttgtgat ctaggcagtcactgggatcg 99
     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV
    Figure 1. Phase contrast micrographs of Saitoella complicata. (A) Normal budding cells in minimal SD broth before zymolyase treatment. (B) Enlarged spheroplasts after 112 h of culture in minimal SD broth after zymolyase treatment. Phase contrast microscopy images were obtained using Olympus CKX41; bar = 50 μm.

    We performed analysis of variance (ANOVA) and a pairwise t test with Holm's adjustment using R statistical software (http://www.r-project.org/).


    3. Results and Discussion

    The typical diameter of a Saitoella complicata cell is approximately 5 μm, whereas that of an enlarged spheroplast cultured in minimal SD broth after zymolyase treatment was measured to be approximately 15 μm (Figure 1).

    ANOVA results showed that nucleosome formation levels were not significantly (p > 0.05) different at position 2351 but significantly different (p < 0.05) at the five other positions, namely, 2810_1, 2810_2, 3456, 5676_1, and 5676_2 (Figure 2).

    Figure 2. Comparison of nucleosome formation levels. The degree of nucleosome formation at position 5676_0 (control) is 1. We calculated the degree of nucleosome formation using the following formula: 2(Cq value at the position 5676_0-Cq value at each position). Star indicates p < 0.05 in a pairwise t test with Holm's adjustment.

    Among the five positions, analysis using pairwise ttest with Holm's adjustment showed no significant differences in terms of the degree of nucleosome formation at position 5676_1 (p > 0.05) between normal budding cells (0 μg/mL TSA) and enlarged cells (culture in minimal SD broth). However, significant differences (p < 0.05) in nucleosome formation levels were observed in the four other positions (2810_1, 2810_2, 3456, and 5676_2) (Figure 2). In addition, no significant differences in nucleosome formation were observed between enlarged cells and TSA-treated cells (2 and 3 μg/mL) at positions 2810_1, 2810_2, and 5676_2 (Figure 2). The above results strongly suggest that TSA-treatment and culture in minimal SD broth after zymolyase treatment exert similar effects on nucleosome formation at positions 2810_1, 2810_2, and 5676_2. Further research is necessary to confirm whether enlarged cells exhibit different histone acetylation patterns. Changes in nucleosome formation at the gene promoters can represent a stress response mechanism in cells subjected to spheroplast (zymolyase treatment) and TSA treatment. On the other hand, the degree of nucleosome formation at position 5676_1 was observed to be significantly different between enlarged cells and TSA-treated cells (Figure 2). However, nucleosome formation at this position was not significantly different between normal budding cells and enlarged cells. Thus, the observed nucleosome formation at position 5676_1 is specific to TSA-treated cells.

    Changes in the degree of nucleosome formation appeared to occur in a TSA concentration-dependent manner at positions 3456 (decreasing) and 5676_1 (increasing) (Figure 2). However, no significant differences in nucleosome formation levels were observed between cells treated with 1 and 2 μg/mL TSA and between cells treated with 2 and 3 μg/mL TSA (Figure 2).

    Nucleosome formation at position 5676_1 increased after TSA-treatment (Figure 2). On the other hand, nucleosome formation levels decreased after TSA-treatment at the neighboring position 5676_2 (Figure 2), which strongly suggests that a histone octamer can move from position 5676_2 to 5676_1. Based on the calculated nucleosome formation levels and p values, cells treated with 1 μg/mL TSA evidently showed nucleosome movement (Figure 2). Interestingly, changes in nucleosome position did not occur in enlarged cells, since nucleosome formation was observed only at position 5676_2 (Figure 2).

    In positions 2810_1 and 2810_2 (neighboring regions), nucleosome formation levels decreased as a result of TSA-treatment (Figure 2). This suggests that two histone octamers may be absent at these two positions. The observed nucleosome depletion at position 2810_2 is inconsistent with the results of the previous study (Supplementary Figure 1) and suggests that the nucleosome occupancy at this position is unstable.

    Except for position 2351, nucleosome formation levels in all other positions were significantly different between cells treated with 0 and 1 μg/mL TSA. However, no significant differences were observed between cells treated with 2 and 3 μg/mL TSA. The above results indicate that changes in the nucleosome formation occurred mainly in cells treated with 1 μg/mL TSA but not in cells treated with 2 and 3 μg/mL TSA.


    4. Conclusion

    We demonstrated that although TSA-treatment and zymolyase-treatment are completely different stimulus, TSA-treated cells and enlarged spheroplasts ofSaitoella complicata showed similar changes in nucleosome formation in five out of six gene promoter positions examined in the present study. These results strongly suggest that changes in nucleosome formation could serve as a stress response mechanism of S. complicata cells. Different stressors (TSA and zymolyase treatments) induce similar changes in the patterns of nucleosome formation in gene promoters in S. complicata.


    Acknowledgments

    This work was supported by JSPS KAKENHI grant no. 25440188 and a grant from The Cannon Foundation.


    Conflict of Interest

    The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest regarding the publication of this paper.


    [1] Carthew RW, Rubin GM (1990) Seven in absentia, a gene required for specification of R7 cell fate in the Drosophila eye. Cell 63: 561-577. doi: 10.1016/0092-8674(90)90452-K
    [2] Della NG, Senior PV, Bowtell DL (1993) Isolation and characterization of murine homologues of the Drosophila seven in absentia gene (Sina). Development 117: 1333-1343.
    [3] Holloway AJ, Della NG, Fletcher CF, et al. (1997) Chromosomal mapping of five highly conserved murine homologues of the Drosophila RING finger gene seven-in-absentia. Genomics 41: 160-168. doi: 10.1006/geno.1997.4642
    [4] House CM, Hancock NC, Moller A, et al. (2006) Elucidation of the substrate binding site of Siah ubiquitin ligase. Structure 14: 695-701. doi: 10.1016/j.str.2005.12.013
    [5] House CM, Frew IJ, Huang HL, et al. (2003) A binding motif for Siah ubiquitin ligase. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 100: 3101-3106. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0534783100
    [6] Khurana A, Nakayama K, Williams S, et al. (2006) Regulation of the ring finger E3 ligase Siah2 by p38 MAPK. J Biol Chem 281: 35316-35326. doi: 10.1074/jbc.M606568200
    [7] Scortegagna M, Subtil T, Qi J, et al. (2011) USP13 enzyme regulates Siah2 ligase stability and activity via noncatalytic ubiquitin-binding domains. J Biol Chem 286: 27333-27341. doi: 10.1074/jbc.M111.218214
    [8] Matsuzawa SI, Reed JC (2001) Siah-1, SIP, and Ebi Collaborate in a Novel Pathway for b-Catenin Degradation Linked to p53 Responses. Mol Cell 7: 915-926. doi: 10.1016/S1097-2765(01)00242-8
    [9] Winter M, Sombroek D, Dauth I, et al. (2008) Control of HIPK2 stability by ubiquitin ligase Siah-1 and checkpoint kinases ATM and ATR. Nat Cell Biol 10: 812-824. doi: 10.1038/ncb1743
    [10] Zundel W, Schindler C, Haas-Kogan D, et al. (2000) Loss of PTEN facilitates HIF-1-mediated gene expression. Genes Dev 14: 391-396.
    [11] Carthew RW, Neufeld TP, Rubin GM (1994) Identification of genes that interact with the sina gene in Drosophila eye development. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 91: 11689-11693. doi: 10.1073/pnas.91.24.11689
    [12] Tang AH, Neufeld TP, Kwan E, et al. (1997) PHYL acts to down-regulate TTK88, a transcriptional repressor of neuronal cell fates, by a SINA-dependent mechanism. Cell 90: 459-467. doi: 10.1016/S0092-8674(00)80506-1
    [13] Bogdan S, Senkel S, Esser F, et al. (2001) Misexpression of Xsiah-2 induces a small eye phenotype in Xenopus. Mech Dev 103: 61-69.
    [14] Zhang J, Guenther MG, Carthew RW, et al. (1998) Proteasomal regulation of nuclear receptor corepressor-mediated repression. Genes Dev 12: 1775-1780. doi: 10.1101/gad.12.12.1775
    [15] D'Orazi G, Cecchinelli B, Bruno T, et al. (2002) Homeodomain-interacting protein kinase-2 phosphorylates p53 at Ser 46 and mediates apoptosis. Nat Cell Biol 4: 11-19. doi: 10.1038/ncb714
    [16] Johnsen SA, Subramaniam M, Monroe DG, et al. (2002) Modulation of transforming growth factor beta (TGFbeta)/Smad transcriptional responses through targeted degradation of TGFbeta-inducible early gene-1 by human seven in absentia homologue. J Biol Chem 277: 30754-30759. doi: 10.1074/jbc.M204812200
    [17] Hu G, Fearon ER (1999) Siah-1 N-terminal RING domain is required for proteolysis function, and C-terminal sequences regulate oligomerization and binding to target proteins. Mol Cell Biol 1: 19724-19732.
    [18] Maxwell PH, Ratciffe PJ (2002) Oxygen sensors and angiogenesis. Semin Cell Dev Biol 13: 29-37. doi: 10.1006/scdb.2001.0287
    [19] McNeill LA, Hewitson KS, Gleadle JM (2002) The use of dioxygen by HIF prolyl hydroxylase (PHD1). Bioorg Med Chem Lett 12: 1547-1550. doi: 10.1016/S0960-894X(02)00219-6
    [20] Qi J, Nakayama K, Gaitonde S, et al. (2008) Siah2-dependent concerted activity of HIF and FoxA2 regulates formation of neuroendocrine phenotype and neuroendocrine prostate tumors. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 105: 16713-16718. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0804063105
    [21] Baba K, Morimoto H, Imaoka S (2013) Seven in absentia homolog 2 (Siah2) protein is a regulator of NF-E2-related factor 2 (Nrf2). J Biol Chem 288: 18393-18405. doi: 10.1074/jbc.M112.438762
    [22] Sajja RK, Green KN, Cucullo L (2015) Altered Nrf2 signaling mediates hypoglycemia-induced blood-brain barrier endothelial dysfunction in vitro. PLos One 10: e0122358. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0122358
    [23] Itoh K, Wakabayashi N, Katoh Y, et al. (1999) Keap1 represses nuclear activation of antioxidant responsive elements by Nrf2 through binding to the amino-terminal Neh2 domain. Genes Dev 13: 76-86. doi: 10.1101/gad.13.1.76
    [24] Kim H, Scimia MC, Wilkinson D (2011) Fine-tuning of Drp1/Fis1 availability by AKAP121/Siah2 regulates mitochondrial adaptation to hypoxia. Mol Cell 44: 532-544 doi: 10.1016/j.molcel.2011.08.045
    [25] Li Q, Wang P, Ye K, et al. (2015) Central role of SIAH inhibition in DCC-dependent cardioprotection provoked by netrin-1/NO. Proc Natl Acad USA 112: 899-904. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1420695112
    [26] Schmidt RL, Park CH, Ahmed AU, et al. (2007) Inhibition of RAS-mediated transformation and tumorigenesis by targeting the downstream E3 ubiquitin ligase seven in absentia homologue. Cancer Res 67: 11798-11810. doi: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-06-4471
    [27] Kim CJ, Cho YG, Park CH, et al. (2004) Inactivating mutations of the Siah-1 gene in gastric cancer. Oncogene 23: 8591-8596. doi: 10.1038/sj.onc.1208113
    [28] Ahmed AU, Sxhmidt RL, Park CH, et al. (2008) Effect of disrupting seven-in-absentia homolog 2 function on lung cancer cell growth. J Natl Cancer Inst 100: 1606-29. doi: 10.1093/jnci/djn365
    [29] Wong CS, Sceneay J, House CM, et al. (2012) Vascular normalization by loss of Siah2 results an increased chemotherapeutic efficacy. Cancer Res 72: 1694-1704. doi: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-11-3310
    [30] Shah M, Stebbins JL, Dewing A, et al. (2009) Inhibition of Siah2 ubiquitin ligase by vitamin K3 (menadione) attenuates hypoxia and MAPK signaling and blocks melanoma tumorigenesis. Pigment Cell Melanoma Res 22: 799-808. doi: 10.1111/j.1755-148X.2009.00628.x
    [31] Qi J, Nakayama K, Cardiff RD, et al. (2010) Siah2-dependent concerted activity of HIF and FoxA2 regulates formation of neuroendocrine phenotype and neuroendocrine prostate tumors. Cancer Cell 18: 23-38. doi: 10.1016/j.ccr.2010.05.024
    [32] Yoshibayashi H, Okabe H, Satoh S, et al. (2007) SIAH1 causes growth arrst and apoptosis in hepatoma cells through beta-catenin degradation-dependent and –independent mechanisms. Oncol Rep 17: 549-556.
    [33] Roperch J, Lethrone F, Prieur S, et al. (1999) SIAH-1 promotes apoptosis and tumor suppression through a network involving the regulation of protein folding, unfolding, and trafficking: identification of common effectors with p53 and p21(Waf1). Proc Natl Acad USA 96: 8070-8073. doi: 10.1073/pnas.96.14.8070
    [34] Malz M, Aulmann A, Samarin J, et al. (2012) Nuclear accumulation of seven in absentia homologue-2 supports motility and proliferation of liver cancer cells. Int J Cancer 131: 2016-2026. doi: 10.1002/ijc.27473
    [35] Wong CS, Moller A (2013) Siah: a promising anticancer target. Cancer Res 73: 2400-2406. doi: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-12-4348
    [36] DeBruyne JP, Baggs JE, Sato TK (2015) Ubiquitin ligase Siah2 regulates RevErba degradation and the mammalian circadian clock. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 112: 12420-12425. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1501204112
    [37] Adam MG, Matt S, Christian S (2015) SIAH ubiquitin ligases regulate breast cancer cell migration and invasion independent of the oxygen status. Cell Cycle 14: 3734-3747. doi: 10.1080/15384101.2015.1104441
    [38] Frasor J, Danes JM, Funk CC, et al. (2005) Estrogen down-regulation of the corepressor N-CoR: mechanism and implications for estrogen derepression of N-CoR-regulated genes. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 102: 13153-13157. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0502782102
  • This article has been cited by:

    1. Karan Thakkar, Julia Regazzini Spinardi, Jingyan Yang, Moe H. Kyaw, Egemen Ozbilgili, Carlos Fernando Mendoza, Helen May Lin Oh, Impact of vaccination and non-pharmacological interventions on COVID-19: a review of simulation modeling studies in Asia, 2023, 11, 2296-2565, 10.3389/fpubh.2023.1252719
  • Reader Comments
  • © 2017 the Author(s), licensee AIMS Press. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0)
通讯作者: 陈斌, bchen63@163.com
  • 1. 

    沈阳化工大学材料科学与工程学院 沈阳 110142

  1. 本站搜索
  2. 百度学术搜索
  3. 万方数据库搜索
  4. CNKI搜索

Metrics

Article views(5939) PDF downloads(939) Cited by(1)

Article outline

Figures and Tables

Figures(3)

Other Articles By Authors

/

DownLoad:  Full-Size Img  PowerPoint
Return
Return

Catalog