Next Article in Journal
Regulation of Human Adenovirus Alternative RNA Splicing by the Adenoviral L4-33K and L4-22K Proteins
Next Article in Special Issue
Effects of Atmospheric Pressure Plasmas on Isolated and Cellular DNA—A Review
Previous Article in Journal
Profiling of Fatty Acids Composition in Suet Oil Based on GC–EI-qMS and Chemometrics Analysis
Previous Article in Special Issue
Autophagy in DNA Damage Response
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
IJMS
Volume 16
Issue 2
10.3390/ijms16022879
ijms-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Review

BRCA1 and p53 Tumor Suppressor Molecules in Alzheimer’s Disease

by
Atsuko Nakanishi
†,
Akari Minami
,
Yasuko Kitagishi
,
Yasunori Ogura
and
Satoru Matsuda
*,†
Department of Food Science and Nutrition, Nara Women's University, Kita-Uoya Nishimachi, Nara 630-8506, Japan
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
†
These authors are equally contributed to this work.
Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2015, 16(2), 2879-2892; https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms16022879
Submission received: 29 October 2014 / Revised: 20 November 2014 / Accepted: 20 January 2015 / Published: 28 January 2015
(This article belongs to the Special Issue DNA Damage and Repair in Degenerative Diseases 2014)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Tumor suppressor molecules play a pivotal role in regulating DNA repair, cell proliferation, and cell death, which are also important processes in the pathogenesis of Alzheimer’s disease. Alzheimer’s disease is the most common neurodegenerative disorder, however, the precise molecular events that control the death of neuronal cells are unclear. Recently, a fundamental role for tumor suppressor molecules in regulating neurons in Alzheimer’s disease was highlighted. Generally, onset of neurodegenerative diseases including Alzheimer’s disease may be delayed with use of dietary neuro-protective agents against oxidative stresses. Studies suggest that dietary antioxidants are also beneficial for brain health in reducing disease-risk and in slowing down disease-progression. We summarize research advances in dietary regulation for the treatment of Alzheimer’s disease with a focus on its modulatory roles in BRCA1 and p53 tumor suppressor expression, in support of further therapeutic research in this field.

1. Introduction

Alzheimer’s disease (AD) is a progressive degenerative disorder that commonly affects emotional stability and memory domains, and is the most predominant reason of dementia [1,2]. Pathologically, AD is characterized by the damage of neurons and its synapses [3,4]. Although research efforts have provided insights into the biology of AD, the underlying pathways mediating the progressive decline in cognitive function are still poorly understood. However, there are obviously a number of parallels between AD and cancer, including age and other risk factors [5,6]. Nucleic acid damage (DNA damage) susceptible to neurodegeneration and cell death is well-documented in AD and cancer [7,8]. Cells are prepared with the various DNA repair mechanisms to deal with the DNA damage and transduce the signal downward, which provokes a process to inhibit cell cycle progression, and to induce DNA repair [9,10]. The chief DNA damage recognition molecule is ataxia telangiectasia-mutated (ATM), which is a checkpoint kinase that phosphorylates a number of proteins including BRCA1 and p53 in response to the DNA damage, and thus induces a response [11,12]. The ATM protein appears to sense double strand breaks (DSB) during mitosis and/or several other DNA breaks consequent to the damage of free radicals [12]. Accordingly, mutations in the ATM have been associated with increased risk of developing a cancer. It is also well-known that mutations in the BRCA1 and p53 tumor suppressor genes comprise a variety of cancers. In general, tumor suppressor molecules play a pivotal role in regulating both cell proliferation and cell death in many cell types. Those may also play an important role in progression of the AD lesion coinciding with changes in the cellular composition. For example, alteration of the tumor suppressor gene p53 function, essential in DNA repair and cell apoptosis, often exacerbates cognate behaviors [13]. Other tumor suppressor proteins such as p21 and p27 activated by BRCA1 are also involved in DNA damage [11,14] as well as in AD [15,16]. Such tumor suppressors play a neuro-protective role in cell survival instead of apoptosis. The p53 protein is a key transcription factor that regulates some signaling pathways involved in the cellular response to genome stresses and DNA damage. Through the stress-induced activation, p53 initiates expression of target genes which protect the genetic reliability of cells. In this way, normal cells show an outstanding balance through the various mechanisms of DNA repair. Consequently, genomic instability is often related to the DNA repair deficiencies [17,18]. Standard DNA repair pathways existing in mammalian cells comprise homologous repair, single strand annealing, non-homologous end joining and so on; these are the different pathways that repair DNA double strand breaks (DSBs). An intricate set of signaling pathways identify the DSBs and mediate either survival via DNA repair or apoptotic cell death [19]. The DNA damaging agents generally used for cancer therapies are potent inducers of cell death triggered by the apoptosis of cancer cells [20,21]. Recent advances in biology have led to a better understanding of the molecular events important in the pathogenesis of AD, suggesting a critical relationship between DNA repair and AD pathogenesis. In the present review, we summarize the function of prominent DNA repair molecules and in particular tumor suppressor gene products, p53 and BRCA1, as a viewpoint of DNA damage and therapeutic modulation in AD. These studies indicate significant roles for tumor suppressor molecules in controlling AD progression, which would essentially facilitate more effective treatments for a better prognosis of AD.

2. Relationship between AD and BRCA1 in the DNA Repair Pathway

The tumor suppressor BRCA1 implicated in breast and ovarian cancers exerts various properties on the DNA repair system [20,22]. Actually, hereditary breast cancer with genomic aberration in BRCA1 is a type of cancer with defects in the DNA repair pathway [23]. In addition, mutations of a single allele of the BRCA1 gene are associated with increased genomic instability in breast epithelial cells [24,25], which further accelerate the mutation rate of other critical genes. Along with transcriptional activation and growth inhibition [26], BRCA1 is involved in transcription coupled in DNA repair of oxidative DNA damage [27], and regulatory roles for the G2/M cell cycle [28]. Furthermore, BRCA1 overexpression attenuates the production of ROS and up-regulating nitric oxide synthase [29]. ROS are formed resulting in oxidative DNA damage which is followed by increased DNA repair activity so that initial DNA damage is efficiently repaired. These well-known functions of BRCA may also be associated with AD (Figure 1). For example, oxidative DNA damage as well as RNA damage has been well documented in the aging brain, contributing to the development of AD [30]. Even the cases of slight cognitive impairment of the aging brain displays the same abnormalities, which provoke the search for DNA repair mechanisms in the case of neurodegeneration [31]. Evidence of the oxidative DNA damage profile in AD brings a speculation that BRCA1 may play an important role in AD pathogenesis [16]. BRCA1 is also known to have a role in maintaining telomere function and as such the presence of BRCA1 is indicative of DNA damage, both of which are pathogenic changes in neurodegeneration. Since the prevalence of BRCA1 increases as the disease progresses, transcription of BRCA1 may be activated early in the progression of neurodegeneration, suggesting that changes of DNA repair take place early in the progression of the disease [7,17].
Ijms 16 02879 g001 1024
Figure 1. Schematic illustration of tumor suppressor signaling including BRCA1, p53, Rb, p21WAF1/p27KIP1, and ATM in Alzheimer’s disease. Examples of molecules involved in Alzheimer’s disease known to act on cell growth arrest and DNA repair via the regulatory pathways are presented. Note that some critical pathways have been omitted for clarity.
Figure 1. Schematic illustration of tumor suppressor signaling including BRCA1, p53, Rb, p21WAF1/p27KIP1, and ATM in Alzheimer’s disease. Examples of molecules involved in Alzheimer’s disease known to act on cell growth arrest and DNA repair via the regulatory pathways are presented. Note that some critical pathways have been omitted for clarity.
Ijms 16 02879 g001
The BRCA1 gene is generally expressed in dividing neuronal cells during development [32], and encodes for a 1863 amino acids protein with an amino terminal zinc ring finger motif and two putative nuclear localization signals [33] (Figure 2). The amino-terminal domain retains E3 ubiquitin ligase activity [34], and the carboxyl-terminal domain is involved in association with specific phospho-proteins. The BRCA1 stimulates the CDK inhibitor p21 WAF1 and p53 tumor suppressor protein [35], which regulates several genes that control cell cycle checkpoints. The role of BRCA1 in the cell cycle control has been assumed by its ability to interact with various cyclins and cyclin-dependent kinases. In addition, BRCA1 has binding properties for BRCA2, Rb, Rad50 and Rad51 [36], in order to activate the cell cycle checkpoints. For example, BRCA1 is colocalized with Rad51, a DNA recombinase related to the bacterial RecA protein [37]. They may be involved in DNA double strand break repair. Rb is another tumor suppressor and a cell cycle checkpoint protein, which is also a potential diagnostic biomarker for AD [38]. The DNA repair Rad50 protein complexes are present in neurons of adult human cortex and cerebellum, but found significantly decreased in the neurons of AD brain cortex [39]. The presence of phosphorylated BRCA1 (Figure 2) has been characterized in a condition of DNA damage [40]. The BRCA1 protein becomes hyper-phosphorylated after exposure to DNA damaging agents and BRCA1 activity seems to be regulated by phosphorylation in response to DNA damage. Phosphorylated BRCA1 has also been implicated to play a role in maintaining genomic integrity in mitochondria [41]. Recent work has reported that BRCA1 functions in telomere maintenance, a distinctive feature of degenerating neurons in the AD brain [42].
Ijms 16 02879 g002 1024
Figure 2. Schematic structures of BRCA1 and p53 proteins. The predicted consensual domain structures for each protein are depicted. The functionally important sites are also shown. Note that the sizes of protein are modified for clarity. RING = (Really Interesting New Gene) finger domain; TA = transactivation domain; PxxP = proline rich region; NLS = Nuclear Localization Signal; DBD = DNA binding domain; BRCT = BRCA1 C-terminus domain; REG = regulatory domain; TET = tetramerization domain.
Figure 2. Schematic structures of BRCA1 and p53 proteins. The predicted consensual domain structures for each protein are depicted. The functionally important sites are also shown. Note that the sizes of protein are modified for clarity. RING = (Really Interesting New Gene) finger domain; TA = transactivation domain; PxxP = proline rich region; NLS = Nuclear Localization Signal; DBD = DNA binding domain; BRCT = BRCA1 C-terminus domain; REG = regulatory domain; TET = tetramerization domain.
Ijms 16 02879 g002

3. Activation and Inactivation of the p53 Tumor Suppressor Involved in DNA Repair and AD

Functional activities of p53 signaling may be involved in reverse associations between AD and cancer [43,44] (Figure 3). When p53 is activated in response to various types of cellular stresses including DNA damage, p53 induces cell cycle arrest among other functions, and failure of the DNA repair machinery leads to p53-mediated induction of apoptotic cell death. In order to maintain genomic stability, the decision is made whether to induce DNA repair or apoptosis of damaged cells. If the cell machinery were shifted to altered sensitivity for the response to stressors, the cells would be more prone to cell death, or to develop a cancer [44]. Because much of the response to genotoxic stress flows through the p53 pathway, p53 might be expected to play a key role in the cell consequences of genotoxic stress. In fact, the p53 protein is involved in many signaling pathways for the regulation of cell growth and apoptosis. It is suggested that cell cycle checkpoint abnormalities or loss of DNA damage protection in AD may occur via intensifying oxidative stresses [16,45]. Indeed, p53 and BRCA1 regulate a number of genes, and protect against genomic instability. In addition, a large number of molecules capable of activating p53 have been identified, and the effects are mediated by different downstream effectors and targets. Among them, a cyclin-dependent kinase (CDK) inhibitor and p21 WAF1 are key mediators of p53 action [46]. The p21 WAF1 inhibits cell cycle progression due to the interaction with cyclins and CDK complexes. Remarkably, it has been reported that mRNA levels of p21 WAF1 in AD is increased [47]. In addition, a pathogenic presenilin mutation in AD causes a specific increase in p53 and p21 protein level [48]. In order to promote cell death or cell survival, p53 and p21 may function depending on the type of stress stimuli, the cell type, and its protein activity [49,50]. By a stress such as hypoxia, p53 is also induced and activated in the nucleus [51,52]. Because p53 plays the most important role in the regulation of gene transcription, modification of p53 may be a key determinant of cell fate.
p53 is ubiquitously expressed in all cell types as an inactive transcription factor. However, p53 is frequently mutated in multiple cancer tissues indicating that p53 plays a critical role in preventing cancers. In general, mutant genes can be classified as a loss of function or a gain of function depending on the type of mutations. So, there are two types of p53 genes, the wild type p53 gene and the mutant p53 gene in diseases [53,54]. Oncogenic p53 mutations generally confer the mutant protein with a dominant-negative activity over the residual wild-type p53 gene product [53,54]. Many forms of mutant p53 acquire dominant-negative activities, and sometimes acquire oncogenic properties by themselves [53,54]. On the other hand, wild-type p53 activation with high protein expression may lead to regression of an early neoplastic lesion. These activities of p53 are also regulated by post-translational modification [55]. Phosphorylation (Figure 2) and acetylation, subcellular localization, and interaction with other cellular proteins are likely to influence the function of p53 [56]. Various cell proliferation- and apoptosis-signal transduction pathways may be constructed on complicated intra-cellular networks between oncogenes and tumor suppressor genes with their downstream factors. Thus, p53 regulates gene expression and plays an important role in modulation of signal transduction pathways. As mentioned above, p53 is involved in repair of damaged DNA and thus prevents accumulation of mutations, thereby suppressing tumor development. Accumulation of DNA stress and DNA damage beyond the capacity of p53 in neuronal cells may lead to neuronal apoptosis, and subsequently induce AD.
Ijms 16 02879 g003 1024
Figure 3. Tumor suppressor-dependent cellular fates in cancer and Alzheimer’s disease. Schematic illustrations of the tentative model for BRCA1 and p53 with these mutants are shown. In response to genotoxic signals, BRCA1 and p53 may be activated and induce cell cycle arrest. To maintain genomic stability, cell machinery would either induce DNA repair or activate apoptosis of damaged cells, which would then lead to a predisposition to Alzheimer’s disease in case of failure of the DNA repair. Some diets could stimulate neuronal tumor suppressor molecules expression and/or activities, which could also contribute to Alzheimer’s disease prevention.
Figure 3. Tumor suppressor-dependent cellular fates in cancer and Alzheimer’s disease. Schematic illustrations of the tentative model for BRCA1 and p53 with these mutants are shown. In response to genotoxic signals, BRCA1 and p53 may be activated and induce cell cycle arrest. To maintain genomic stability, cell machinery would either induce DNA repair or activate apoptosis of damaged cells, which would then lead to a predisposition to Alzheimer’s disease in case of failure of the DNA repair. Some diets could stimulate neuronal tumor suppressor molecules expression and/or activities, which could also contribute to Alzheimer’s disease prevention.
Ijms 16 02879 g003

4. Some Diets Involved in Tumor Suppressor Expression May Contribute to the Neuro-Protection in AD

Possible therapeutic tactics may be achieved by surveillance required for maintaining cellular homeostasis. Therefore, it might be important and cost-effective to define appropriate plans to get benefits from life-style and/or diets to control the expression of tumor suppressors. Lycopene is a fat soluble red pigment carotenoid that significantly reduces the risk for prostate cancer. It is naturally occurring in many fruits and vegetables such as tomatoes. Treatment with lycopene increases BRCA1 gene expression in breast cancer cell line MCF-7 and HBL-100 [57]. Furthermore, treatment with lycopene increases phospho-BRCA1 in MCF-7 cells [58]. Manganese-induced perturbation in the antioxidant system with increase of acetylcholinesterase as demonstrated by AD is prevented by lycopene treatment [59], suggesting potential protective effects of lycopene against AD. Treatment with soy phytoestrogens may invert DNA hyper-methylation and return the gene expression of BRCA1 [60]. Actually, phytoestrogen-rich diets are able to increase the mRNA of BRCA1 [61]. The mRNA expression of BRCA1 is also found up-regulated in the mammary glands of rats exposed to genistein during pre-puberty [62]. Indole-3-carbinol and genistein are naturally occurring chemicals derived from green vegetables and soy, respectively. It has been shown that both indole-3-carbinol and genistein induce the gene expression of BRCA1 in MCF-7 and T47D breast cancer cells [63]. In addition, phytoestrogens have been shown to reduce AD related pathology, potentially alleviating risk of AD progression [64], which effectively attenuates oxidative damage and improves parameters related to aging and AD [65]. Furthermore, phytoestrogens such as genistein and daidzein may decrease DNA methylation in the BRCA1 genome [66,67]. On the contrary, however, it is also noted that consumption of soy food products may contribute to the increasing risk of Alzheimer’s dementia [68].
Ginsenoside, one of components in American ginseng herb, activates p53 [69], which could improve spatial learning and memory, suggesting a useful agent for preventing and treating cognitive impairment in AD [70]. It has been suggested that pretreatment of ginsennoside has neuroprotective effects in a rat model of AD [71]. In addition, thymoquinone, the most abundant component in black seed, is associated with a rise of p53 mRNA and the downstream p53 target genes [72]. It is suggested that thymoquinone has potential neuroprotective effects in rat hippocampal and cortical neurons and thus may be a promising candidate for AD prevention [73,74]. Treatment with Magnolia officinalis (M. officinalis) extract up-regulates expression of p21 WAF1 and p27 KIP1 [75]. In addition, ethanol extracts of M. officinalis effectively prevents memory impairment in a transgenic mouse model of AD [76]. Moreover, neuroprotective effects of honokiol and magnolol, compounds from M. officinalis, on beta-amyloid-induced neuronal toxicity have been reported [77]. Baicalin, an herb-derived flavonoid compound, enhances the expression of p27 KIP1 [78]. The effect of baicalin attenuates pathological changes and memory deficits such as in AD, suggesting that baicalin may be a potential candidate for the treatment of AD [79].
Several other promising herbs or life-style conditions involved in p53 activity are as follows. Treatment with thorns from a medicinal herb, Gleditsia sinensis, have been shown to increase cell cycle arrest during the G2/M phase, and is associated with increased p53 protein level [80]. Treatment with extract of Gleditsia sinensis thorns is also associated with up-regulation of p21 WAF1 [81]. In addition, mRNA levels both of p53 and of p21 WAF1 are increased with usage of Kanglaite, an extract from Coix seed. Kanglaite appears to extend the protein half-life of p53 [82]. On the other hand, treatment with ethyl acetate extract of Saussurea involucrate induces p21 WAF1 and p27 KIP1 expression, independent of the p53 pathway [83]. Zinc is an essential element that is integral to some transcription factors with zinc finger structure, which regulate key cellular functions such as responses to oxidative stress and DNA damage repair. Zinc is also involved in the stabilization and activation of p53 which appears to be an important component of the apoptotic process [84]. Signaling pathways of p53 with zinc donor/acceptor pair may be critically involved in life and death decisions of cells [85]. Zinc thus provides an effective dietary preventive approach to cancers and AD, and zinc could also be effective in the treatment of some cancers and AD [84,85]. Furthermore, zinc is now accepted as a potent neuromodulator, affecting a variety of signaling pathways at the synapse that are critical to cognition [86]. Hypoxia-induced p53-mediated signaling may well be effective in the targeting of hypoxic cells [87]. The DNA damage response is induced in cells by hypoxia. In addition, brain hypoxia may be associated with increased concentration of neurotoxins and cellular stresses in AD brains. The activity of p53 may be altered by toxic amyloid-beta in AD, as well as by hypoxia to trigger neural apoptotic cell death. Overall, promising alternatives to the use of medications against AD seem to be some diets with the use of food supplements to modulate the expression and/or activity of tumor suppressor molecules. It will be a challenge to seek out how to use these medicinal materials and/or conditions for the beneficial modulation of critical processes required for maintaining cellular homeostasis that are associated with a pathologic situation characterized by AD (Figure 3).

5. Perspective

To maintain normal cellular function, neurons can struggle to avoid oxidative damage throughout aging processes. If the cells cannot keep the balance, the excess toxic stresses may cause neuronal cell death. Because AD is a disease that could last more than ten years, neurons may attempt to survive by attempting to control the damaged or deregulated cells rather than succumbing to apoptosis immediately. These speculations raise the possibility that BRCA1 and p53 accumulate in neurons early stages of AD. In addition, the association of BRCA1 and p53 with neurodegenerative pathology in AD may implicate a neuro-protective function in healthy neurons in AD. Genomic instability as a feature in the pathogenesis of neurodegeneration in AD may as well be a feature of the DNA repair activity in survival neurons. Alteration of BRCA1 and p53 simultaneously and complexly indicate oncogenic and/or neurodegenerative stimuli which are found in cancer, AD, and other neuropathology. There are several examples showing cognitive improvements in dementia patients undergoing chemotherapy against cancer. Notably, tumor suppressors are crucial molecules at this point. Neuroprotective factors have been suggested as a possible target for drug design efforts with the goal of delaying neurodegeneration from neuronal apoptosis. This may represent the rational basis for the development of dietary treatment of AD. Further mechanistic studies are required to understand the precise molecular mechanisms, and to determine whether an appropriate dietary intake is related to the improved brain function and the preservation of brain health. Long-term clinical studies are also necessary to clarify effects of treatment in the management of AD.

6. Conclusions

The functions of BRCA1 and p53 are involved in the pathogenesis of AD as well as carcinogenesis. Some diets may contribute to neuro-protection, disease prevention, and possible better prognosis in AD via regulation of the expression of tumor suppressors.

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by JSPS KAKENHI Grant Number 25560050, 26-12035, 24240098.

Abbreviation

AD
Alzheimer’s disease
ATM
ataxia telangiectasia-mutated
BRCA1
breast cancer gene 1
CDK
cyclin-dependent kinase
CDK2
cyclin-dependent kinase 2
DSBs
DNA double strand breaks
ROS
reactive oxygen species

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Shastry, B.S. Molecular genetics of familial Alzheimer disease. Am. J. Med. Sci. 1998, 315, 266–272. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Mazza, M.; Marano, G.; Traversi, G.; Bria, P.; Mazza, S. Primary cerebral blood flow deficiency and Alzheimer’s disease: Shadows and lights. J. Alzheimers Dis. 2011, 23, 375–389. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  3. Bloom, G.S. Amyloid-β and Tau: The trigger and bullet in Alzheimer disease pathogenesis. JAMA Neurol. 2014, 71, 505–508. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. Reddy, P.H. Amyloid beta-induced glycogen synthase kinase 3β phosphorylated VDAC1 in Alzheimer’s disease: Implications for synaptic dysfunction and neuronal damage. Biochim. Biophys. Acta 2013, 1832, 1913–1921. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Herholz, K.; Ebmeier, K. Clinical amyloid imaging in Alzheimer’s disease. Lancet Neurol. 2011, 10, 667–670. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  6. Driver, J.A.; Lu, K.P. Pin1: A new genetic link between Alzheimer’s disease, cancer and aging. Curr. Aging Sci. 2010, 3, 158–165. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  7. Madabhushi, R.; Pan, L.; Tsai, L.H. DNA damage and its links to neurodegeneration. Neuron 2014, 83, 266–282. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  8. Lambeth, J.D. Nox enzymes, ROS, and chronic disease: an example of antagonistic pleiotropy. Free Radic. Biol. Med. 2007, 43, 332–347. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  9. Heijink, A.M.; Krajewska, M.; van Vugt, M.A. The DNA damage response during mitosis. Mutat. Res. 2013, 750, 45–55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  10. Kaufmann, W.K. Initiating the uninitiated: Replication of damaged DNA and carcinogenesis. Cell Cycle 2007, 6, 1460–1467. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  11. Neganova, I.; Vilella, F.; Atkinson, S.P.; Lloret, M.; Passos, J.F.; von Zglinicki, T.; O’Connor, J.E.; Burks, D.; Jones, R.; Armstrong, L.; et al. An important role for CDK2 in G1 to S checkpoint activation and DNA damage response in human embryonic stem cells. Stem Cells 2011, 29, 651–659. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  12. Lavin, M.F.; Concannon, P.; Gatti, R.A. Eighth International Workshop on Ataxia-Telangiectasia (ATW8). Cancer Res. 1999, 59, 3845–3849. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  13. Zinn, P.O.; Sathyan, P.; Mahajan, B.; Bruyere, J.; Hegi, M.; Majumder, S.; Colen, R.R. A novel volume-age-KPS (VAK) glioblastoma classification identifies a prognostic cognate microRNA-gene signature. PLoS One 2012, 7, e41522. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Menendez, J.A.; Mehmi, I.; Atlas, E.; Colomer, R.; Lupu, R. Novel signaling molecules implicated in tumor-associated fatty acid synthase-dependent breast cancer cell proliferation and survival: Role of exogenous dietary fatty acids, p53-p21WAF1/CIP1, ERK1/2 MAPK, p27KIP1, BRCA1, and NF-κB. Int. J. Oncol. 2004, 24, 591–608. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  15. Pavard, S.; Metcalf, C.J. Negative selection on BRCA1 susceptibility alleles sheds light on the population genetics of late-onset diseases and aging theory. PLoS One 2007, 2, e1206. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  16. Katsel, P.; Tan, W.; Fam, P.; Purohit, D.P.; Haroutunian, V. Correction: Cell cycle checkpoint abnormalities during dementia: A plausible association with the loss of protection against oxidative stress in Alzheimer’s disease. PLoS One 2013, 8, e68361. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  17. Jeppesen, D.K.; Bohr, V.A.; Stevnsner, T. DNA repair deficiency in neurodegeneration. Prog. Neurobiol. 2011, 94, 166–200. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  18. Kirkland, J.B. Niacin requirements for genomic stability. Mutat. Res. 2012, 733, 14–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  19. House, N.C.; Koch, M.R.; Freudenreich, C.H. Chromatin modifications and DNA repair: Beyond double-strand breaks. Front. Genet. 2014, 5, 296. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  20. Roos, W.P.; Kaina, B. DNA damage-induced cell death: from specific DNA lesions to the DNA damage response and apoptosis. Cancer Lett. 2013, 332, 237–248. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  21. Hemström, T.H.; Joseph, B.; Schulte, G.; Lewensohn, R.; Zhivotovsky, B. PKC 412 sensitizes U1810 non-small cell lung cancer cells to DNA damage. Exp. Cell Res. 2005, 305, 200–213. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  22. Zhao, T.; Jia, H.; Li, L.; Zhang, G.; Zhao, M.; Cheng, Q.; Zheng, J.; Li, D. Inhibition of CK2 enhances UV-triggered apoptotic cell death in lung cancer cell lines. Oncol. Rep. 2013, 30, 377–384. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  23. Cantor, S.B.; Guillemette, S. Hereditary breast cancer and the BRCA1-associated FANCJ/BACH1/BRIP1. Future Oncol. 2011, 7, 253–261. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Konishi, H.; Mohseni, M.; Tamaki, A.; Garay, J.P.; Croessmann, S.; Karnan, S.; Ota, A.; Wong, H.Y.; Konishi, Y.; Karakas, B; et al. Mutation of a single allele of the cancer susceptibility gene BRCA1 leads to genomic instability in human breast epithelial cells. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2011, 108, 17773–17778. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Salmena, L.; Narod, S. BRCA1 haploinsufficiency: Consequences for breast cancer. Womens Health 2012, 8, 127–129. [Google Scholar]
  26. Chai, Y.; Salmena, G.; Cui, J.; Liao, B.; Liu, S.; Aysola, K.; Yezdani, M.; Reddy, E.S.; Rao, V.N. c-Fos oncogene regulator Elk-1 interacts with BRCA1 splice variants BRCA1a/1b and enhances BRCA1a/1b-mediated growth suppression in breast cancer cells. Oncogene 2001, 20, 1357–1367. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  27. Le Page, F.; Randrianarison, V.; Marot, D.; Cabannes, J.; Perricaudet, M.; Feunteun, J.; Sarasin, A. BRCA1 and BRCA2 are necessary for the transcription-coupled repair of the oxidative 8-oxoguanine lesion in human cells. Cancer Res. 2000, 60, 5548–5552. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  28. Helmer, R.A.; Martínez-Zaguilán, R.; Dertien, J.S.; Fulford, C.; Foreman, O.; Peiris, V.; Chilton, B.S. Helicase-like transcription factor (Hltf) regulates G2/M transition, Wt1/Gata4/Hif-1a cardiac transcription networks, and collagen biogenesis. PLoS One 2013, 8, e80461. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  29. Singh, K.K.; Shukla, P.C.; Quan, A.; Al-Omran, M.; Lovren, F.; Pan, Y.; Brezden-Masley, C.; Ingram, A.J.; Stanford, W.L.; Teoh, H.; et al. BRCA1 is a novel target to improve endothelial dysfunction and retard atherosclerosis. J. Thorac. Cardiovasc. Surg. 2013, 146, 949–960.e4. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  30. Bradley-Whitman, M.A.; Timmons, M.D.; Beckett, T.L.; Murphy, M.P.; Lynn, B.C.; Lovell, M.A. Nucleic acid oxidation: An early feature of Alzheimer’s disease. J. Neurochem. 2014, 128, 294–304. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  31. Falik-Zaccai, T.C.; Keren, Z.; Slor, H. The versatile DNA nucleotide excision repair (NER) and its medical significance. Pediatr. Endocrinol. Rev. 2009, 7, 37–42. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  32. Keimpema, E.; Tortoriello, G.; Alpár, A.; Capsoni, S.; Arisi, I.; Calvigioni, D.; Hu, S.S.; Cattaneo, A.; Doherty, P.; Mackie, K.; et al. Nerve growth factor scales endocannabinoid signaling by regulating monoacylglycerol lipase turnover in developing cholinergic neurons. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2013, 110, 1935–1940. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  33. Monteiro, A.N.; August, A.; Hanafusa, H. Evidence for a transcriptional activation function of BRCA1 C-terminal region. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 1996, 93, 13595–13599. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  34. Ayi, T.C.; Tsan, J.T.; Hwang, L.Y.; Bowcock, A.M.; Baer, R. Conservation of function and primary structure in the BRCA1-associated RING domain (BARD1) protein. Oncogene 1998, 17, 2143–2148. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  35. Reedy, M.B.; Hang, T.; Gallion, H.; Arnold, S.; Smith, S.A. Antisense inhibition of BRCA1 expression and molecular analysis of hereditary tumors indicate that functional inactivation of the p53 DNA damage response pathway is required for BRCA-associated tumorigenesis. Gynecol. Oncol. 2001, 81, 441–446. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  36. Jhanwar-Uniyal, M. BRCA1 in cancer, cell cycle and genomic stability. Front. Biosci. 2003, 8, s1107–s1117. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  37. Cousineau, I.; Abaji, C.; Belmaaza, A. BRCA1 regulates RAD51 function in response to DNA damage and suppresses spontaneous sister chromatid replication slippage: Implications for sister chromatid cohesion, genome stability, and carcinogenesis. Cancer Res. 2005, 65, 11384–11391. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  38. Song, M.; Kwon, Y.A.; Lee, Y.; Kim, H.; Yun, J.H.; Kim, S.; Kim, D.K. G1/S cell cycle checkpoint defect in lymphocytes from patients with Alzheimer’s disease. Psychiatry Investig. 2012, 9, 413–417. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  39. Jacobsen, E.; Beach, T.; Shen, Y.; Li, R.; Chang, Y. Deficiency of the Mre11 DNA repair complex in Alzheimer’s disease brains. Brain Res. Mol. Brain Res. 2004, 128, 1–7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  40. Kim, S.S.; Cao, L.; Li, C.; Xu, X.; Huber, L.J.; Chodosh, L.A.; Deng, C.X. Uterus hyperplasia and increased carcinogen-induced tumorigenesis in mice carrying a targeted mutation of the Chk2 phosphorylation site in Brca1. Mol. Cell Biol. 2004, 24, 9498–9507. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  41. Coene, E.D.; Hollinshead, M.S.; Waeytens, A.A.; Schelfhout, V.R.; Eechaute, W.P.; Shaw, M.K.; van Oostveldt, P.M.; Vaux, D.J. Phosphorylated BRCA1 is predominantly located in the nucleus and mitochondria. Mol. Biol. Cell 2005, 16, 997–1010. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  42. Rolyan, H.; Scheffold, A.; Heinrich, A.; Begus-Nahrmann, Y.; Langkopf, B.H.; Hölter, S.M.; Vogt-Weisenhorn, D.M.; Liss, B.; Wurst, W.; Lie, D.C.; et al. Telomere shortening reduces Alzheimer’s disease amyloid pathology in mice. Brain 2011, 134, 2044–2056. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  43. Lanni, C.; Racchi, M.; Memo, M.; Govoni, S.; Uberti, D. p53 at the crossroads between cancer and neurodegeneration. Free Radic. Biol. Med. 2012, 52, 1727–1733. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  44. Behrens, M.I.; Lendon, C.; Roe, C.M. A common biological mechanism in cancer and Alzheimer’s disease? Curr. Alzheimer Res. 2009, 6, 196–204. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  45. Ding, S.L.; Sheu, L.F.; Yu, J.C.; Yang, T.L.; Chen, B.F.; Leu, F.J.; Shen, C.Y. Abnormality of the DNA double-strand-break checkpoint/repair genes, ATM, BRCA1 and TP53, in breast cancer is related to tumour grade. Br. J. Cancer 2004, 90, 1995–2001. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  46. Gartel, A.L. P21(WAF1/CIP1) may be a tumor suppressor after all. Cancer Biol. Ther. 2007, 6, 1171–1172. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  47. Esteras, N.; Alquézar, C.; Bermejo-Pareja, F.; Bialopiotrowicz, E.; Wojda, U.; Martín-Requero, A. Downregulation of extracellular signal-regulated kinase 1/2 activity by calmodulin KII modulates p21Cip1 levels and survival of immortalized lymphocytes from Alzheimer’s disease patients. Neurobiol. Aging 2013, 34, 1090–1100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  48. Bialopiotrowicz, E.; Szybinska, A.; Kuzniewska, B.; Buizza, L.; Uberti, D.; Kuznicki, J.; Wojda, U. Highly pathogenic Alzheimer’s disease presenilin 1 P117R mutation causes a specific increase in p53 and p21 protein levels and cell cycle dysregulation in human lymphocytes. J. Alzheimers Dis. 2012, 32, 397–415. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  49. Muñoz-Fontela, C.; Macip, S.; Martínez-Sobrido, L.; Brown, L.; Ashour, J.; García-Sastre, A.; Lee, S.W.; Aaronson, S.A. Transcriptional role of p53 in interferon-mediated antiviral immunity. J. Exp. Med. 2008, 205, 1929–1938. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  50. Gehrau, R.C.; D’Astolfo, D.S.; Andreoli, V.; Bocco, J.L.; Koritschoner, N.P. Differential expression of the klf6 tumor suppressor gene upon cell damaging treatments in cancer cells. Mutat. Res. 2011, 707, 15–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  51. Ward, A.; Hudson, J.W. p53-Dependent and cell specific epigenetic regulation of the polo-like kinases under oxidative stress. PLoS One 2014, 9, e87918. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  52. Chavez-Perez, V.A.; Strasberg-Rieber, M.; Rieber, M. Hypoxia and hypoxia mimetic cooperate to counteract tumor cell resistance to glucose starvation preferentially in tumor cells with mutant p53. Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 2014, 443, 120–125. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  53. Wiech, M.; Olszewski, M.B.; Tracz-Gaszewska, Z.; Wawrzynow, B.; Zylicz, M.; Zylicz, A. Molecular mechanism of mutant p53 stabilization: the role of HSP70 and MDM2. PLoS One 2012, 7, e51426. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  54. Petitjean, A.; Achatz, M.I.; Borresen-Dale, A.L.; Hainaut, P.; Olivier, M. TP53 mutations in human cancers: Functional selection and impact on cancer prognosis and outcomes. Oncogene 2007, 26, 2157–2165. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  55. Pant, V.; Lozano, G. Limiting the power of p53 through the ubiquitin proteasome pathway. Genes Dev. 2014, 28, 1739–1751. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  56. Hollstein, M.; Hainaut, P. Massively regulated genes: The example of TP53. J. Pathol. 2010, 220, 164–173. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  57. Chalabi, N.; le Corre, L.; Maurizis, J.C.; Bignon, Y.J.; Bernard-Gallon, D.J. The effects of lycopene on the proliferation of human breast cells and BRCA1 and BRCA2 gene expression. Eur. J. Cancer 2004, 40, 1768–1775. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  58. Chalabi, N.; Maurizis, J.C.; le Corre, L.; Delort, L.; Bignon, Y.J.; Bernard-Gallon, D.J. Quantification by affinity perfusion chromatography of phosphorylated BRCAl and BRCA2 proteins from tumor cells after lycopene treatment. J. Chromatogr. B 2005, 821, 188–193. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Lebda, M.A.; El-Neweshy, M.S.; El-Sayed, Y.S. Neurohepatic toxicity of subacute manganese chloride exposure and potential chemoprotective effects of lycopene. Neurotoxicology 2012, 33, 98–104. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  60. Bosviel, R.; Dumollard, E.; Déchelotte, P.; Bignon, Y.J.; Bernard-Gallon, D. Can soy phytoestrogens decrease DNA methylation in BRCA1 and BRCA2 oncosuppressor genes in breast cancer? OMICS 2012, 16, 235–244. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  61. Vissac-Sabatier, C.; Coxam, V.; Déchelotte, P.; Picherit, C.; Horcajada, M.N.; Davicco, M.J.; Lebecque, P.; Bignon, Y.J.; Bernard-Gallon, D. Phytoestrogen-rich diets modulate expression of Brca1 and Brca2 tumor suppressor genes in mammary glands of female Wistar rats. Cancer Res. 2003, 63, 6607–6612. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  62. Cabanes, A.; Wang, M.; Olivo, S.; DeAssis, S.; Gustafsson, J.A.; Khan, G.; Hilakivi-Clarke, L. Prepubertal estradiol and genistein exposures up-regulate BRCA1 mRNA and reduce mammary tumorigenesis. Carcinogenesis 2004, 25, 741–748. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  63. Fan, S.; Meng, Q.; Auborn, K.; Carter, T.; Rosen, E.M. BRCA1 and BRCA2 as molecular targets for phytochemicals indole-3-carbinol and genistein in breast and prostate cancer cells. Br. J. Cancer 2006, 94, 407–426. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  64. Soni, M.; Rahardjo, T.B.; Soekardi, R.; Sulistyowati, Y.; Lestariningsih; Yesufu-Udechuku, A.; Irsan, A.; Hogervorst, E. Phytoestrogens and cognitive function: A review. Maturitas 2014, 77, 209–220. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  65. Hsieh, T.C.; Wu, J.M. Targeting CWR22Rv1 prostate cancer cell proliferation and gene expression by combinations of the phytochemicals EGCG, genistein and quercetin. Anticancer Res. 2009, 29, 4025–4032. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  66. Adjakly, M.; Bosviel, R.; Rabiau, N.; Boiteux, J.P.; Bignon, Y.J.; Guy, L.; Bernard-Gallon, D. DNA methylation and soy phytoestrogens: Quantitative study in DU-145 and PC-3 human prostate cancer cell lines. Epigenomics 2011, 3, 795–803. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  67. Dagdemir, A.; Durif, J.; Ngollo, M.; Bignon, Y.J.; Bernard-Gallon, D. Histone lysine trimethylation or acetylation can be modulated by phytoestrogen, estrogen or anti-HDAC in breast cancer cell lines. Epigenomics 2013, 5, 51–63. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  68. Roccisano, D.; Henneberg, M.; Saniotis, A. A possible cause of Alzheimer’s dementia—Industrial soy foods. Med. Hypotheses 2014, 82, 250–254. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  69. Guo, X.X.; Li, Y.; Sun, C.; Jiang, D.; Lin, Y.J.; Jin, F.X.; Lee, S.K.; Jin, Y.H. p53-dependent Fas expression is critical for Ginsenoside Rh2 triggered caspase-8 activation in HeLa cells. Protein Cell 2014, 5, 224–234. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  70. Zhang, X.; Wang, J.; Xing, Y.; Gong, L.; Li, H.; Wu, Z.; Li, Y.; Wang, J.; Wang, Y.; Dong, L.; Li, S. Effects of ginsenoside Rg1 or 17β-estradiol on a cognitively impaired, ovariectomized rat model of Alzheimer’s disease. Neuroscience 2012, 220, 191–200. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  71. Liu, J.; Yan, X.; Li, L.; Zhu, Y.; Qin, K.; Zhou, L.; Sun, D.; Zhang, X.; Ye, R.; Zhao, G. Ginsennoside rd attenuates cognitive dysfunction in a rat model of Alzheimer’s disease. Neurochem. Res. 2012, 37, 2738–2747. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  72. Gali-Muhtasib, H.; Diab-Assaf, M.; Boltze, C.; Al-Hmaira, J.; Hartig, R.; Roessner, A.; Schneider-Stock, R. Thymoquinone extracted from black seed triggers apoptotic cell death in human colorectal cancer cells via a p53-dependent mechanism. Int. J. Oncol. 2004, 25, 857–866. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  73. Alhebshi, A.H.; Gotoh, M.; Suzuki, I. Thymoquinone protects cultured rat primary neurons against amyloid β-induced neurotoxicity. Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 2013, 433, 362–367. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  74. Khan, A.; Vaibhav, K.; Javed, H.; Khan, M.M.; Tabassum, R.; Ahmed, M.E.; Srivastava, P.; Khuwaja, G.; Islam, F.; Siddiqui, M.S.; et al. Attenuation of Aβ-induced neurotoxicity by thymoquinone via inhibition of mitochondrial dysfunction and oxidative stress. Mol. Cell. Biochem. 2012, 369, 55–65. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  75. Lee, S.J.; Kim, H.M.; Cho, Y.H.; Park, K.; Kim, E.J.; Jung, K.H.; Kim, C.H.; Kim, W.J.; Moon, S.K. Aqueous extract of Magnolia officinalis mediates proliferative capacity, p21WAF1 expression and TNF-α-induced NF-κB activity in human urinary bladder cancer 5637 cells; involvement of p38 MAP kinase. Oncol. Rep. 2007, 18, 729–736. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  76. Lee, Y.J.; Choi, D.Y.; Han, S.B.; Kim, Y.H.; Kim, K.H.; Hwang, B.Y.; Kang, J.K.; Lee, B.J.; Oh, K.W.; Hong, J.T. Inhibitory effect of ethanol extract of Magnolia officinalis on memory impairment and amyloidogenesis in a transgenic mouse model of Alzheimer’s disease via regulating β-secretase activity. Phytother. Res. 2012, 26, 1884–1892. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  77. Hoi, C.P.; Ho, Y.P.; Baum, L.; Chow, A.H. Neuroprotective effect of honokiol and magnolol, compounds from Magnolia officinalis, on beta-amyloid-induced toxicity in PC12 cells. Phytother. Res. 2010, 24, 1538–1542. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  78. Dong, L.H.; Wen, J.K.; Miao, S.B.; Jia, Z.; Hu, H.J.; Sun, R.H.; Wu, Y.; Han, M. Baicalin inhibits PDGF-BB-stimulated vascular smooth muscle cell proliferation through suppressing PDGFRβ-ERK signaling and increase in p27 accumulation and prevents injury-induced neointimal hyperplasia. Cell Res. 2010, 20, 1252–1262. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  79. Chen, C.; Li, X.; Gao, P.; Tu, Y.; Zhao, M.; Li, J.; Zhang, S.; Liang, H. Baicalin attenuates Alzheimer-like pathological changes and memory deficits induced by amyloid β1–42 protein. Metab. Brain Dis. 2014. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Lee, S.J.; Park, K.; Ha, S.D.; Kim, W.J.; Moon, S.K. Gleditsia sinensis thorn extract inhibits human colon cancer cells: The role of ERK1/2, G2/M-phase cell cycle arrest and p53 expression. Phytother. Res. 2010, 24, 1870–1876. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  81. Lee, S.J.; Ryu, D.H.; Jang, L.C.; Cho, S.C.; Kim, W.J.; Moon, S.K. Suppressive effects of an ethanol extract of Gleditsia sinensis thorns on human SNU-5 gastric cancer cells. Oncol. Rep. 2013, 29, 1609–1616. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  82. Lu, Y.; Li, C.S.; Dong, Q. Chinese herb related molecules of cancer-cell-apoptosis: A minireview of progress between Kanglaite injection and related genes. J. Exp. Clin. Cancer Res. 2008, 27, 31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  83. Lin, Y.C.; Hung, C.M.; Tsai, J.C.; Lee, J.C.; Chen, Y.L.; Wei, C.W.; Kao, J.Y.; Way, T.D. Hispidulin potently inhibits human glioblastoma multiforme cells through activation of AMP-activated protein kinase (AMPK). J. Agric. Food Chem. 2010, 58, 9511–9517. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  84. Bai, L.; Merchant, J.L. ZBP-89 promotes growth arrest through stabilization of p53. Mol. Cell Biol. 2001, 21, 4670–4683. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  85. Hao, Q.; Maret, W. Imbalance between pro-oxidant and pro-antioxidant functions of zinc in disease. J. Alzheimers Dis. 2005, 8, 161–170. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  86. Hancock, S.M.; Finkelstein, D.I.; Adlard, P.A. Glia and zinc in ageing and Alzheimer’s disease: A mechanism for cognitive decline? Front. Aging Neurosci. 2014, 6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  87. Olcina, M.; Lecane, P.S.; Hammond, E.M. Targeting hypoxic cells through the DNA damage response. Clin. Cancer Res. 2010, 16, 5624–5629. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Nakanishi, A.; Minami, A.; Kitagishi, Y.; Ogura, Y.; Matsuda, S. BRCA1 and p53 Tumor Suppressor Molecules in Alzheimer’s Disease. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2015, 16, 2879-2892. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms16022879

AMA Style

Nakanishi A, Minami A, Kitagishi Y, Ogura Y, Matsuda S. BRCA1 and p53 Tumor Suppressor Molecules in Alzheimer’s Disease. International Journal of Molecular Sciences. 2015; 16(2):2879-2892. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms16022879

Chicago/Turabian Style

Nakanishi, Atsuko, Akari Minami, Yasuko Kitagishi, Yasunori Ogura, and Satoru Matsuda. 2015. "BRCA1 and p53 Tumor Suppressor Molecules in Alzheimer’s Disease" International Journal of Molecular Sciences 16, no. 2: 2879-2892. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms16022879

APA Style

Nakanishi, A., Minami, A., Kitagishi, Y., Ogura, Y., & Matsuda, S. (2015). BRCA1 and p53 Tumor Suppressor Molecules in Alzheimer’s Disease. International Journal of Molecular Sciences, 16(2), 2879-2892. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms16022879

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop