De novo, systemic, deleterious amino acid substitutions are common in large cytoskeleton‑related protein coding regions
- Authors:
- Rebecca J. Stoll
- Grace R. Thompson
- Mohammad D. Samy
- George Blanck
View Affiliations
Affiliations: Department of Molecular Medicine, Morsani College of Medicine, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL 33612, USA
- Published online on: December 8, 2016 https://doi.org/10.3892/br.2016.826
-
Pages:
211-216
Metrics: Total
Views: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )
Metrics: Total PDF Downloads: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )
This article is mentioned in:
Abstract
Human mutagenesis is largely random, thus large coding regions, simply on the basis of probability, represent relatively large mutagenesis targets. Thus, we considered the possibility that large cytoskeletal-protein related coding regions (CPCRs), including extra-cellular matrix (ECM) coding regions, would have systemic nucleotide variants that are not present in common SNP databases. Presumably, such variants arose recently in development or in recent, preceding generations. Using matched breast cancer and blood‑derived normal datasets from the cancer genome atlas, CPCR single nucleotide variants (SNVs) not present in the All SNPs(142) or 1000 Genomes databases were identified. Using the Protein Variation Effect Analyzer internet‑based tool, it was discovered that apparent, systemic mutations (not shared among others in the analysis group) in the CPCRs, represented numerous deleterious amino acid substitutions. However, no such deleterious variants were identified among the (cancer blood‑matched) variants shared by other members of the analysis group. These data indicate that private SNVs, which potentially have a medical consequence, occur de novo with significant frequency in the larger, human coding regions that collectively impact the cytoskeleton and ECM.
View References
|
1
|
Parry ML, Ramsamooj M and Blanck G: Big
genes are big mutagen targets: A connection to cancerous, spherical
cells? Cancer Lett. 356(2)B479–482. 2015. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
|
|
2
|
Narsing S, Jelsovsky Z, Mbah A and Blanck
G: Genes that contribute to cancer fusion genes are large and
evolutionarily conserved. Cancer Genet Cytogenet. 191:78–84. 2009.
View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
|
|
3
|
Pava LM, Morton DT, Chen R and Blanck G:
Unifying the genomics-based classes of cancer fusion gene partners:
Large cancer fusion genes are evolutionarily conserved. Cancer
Genomics Proteomics. 9:389–395. 2012.PubMed/NCBI
|
|
4
|
Fawcett TJ, Parry ML and Blanck G: A Novel
Approach to Evaluating Cancer Driver Gene Mutation Densities:
Cytoskeleton-related Gene Candidates. Cancer Genomics Proteomics.
12:283–290. 2015.PubMed/NCBI
|
|
5
|
Parry ML and Blanck G: Flat cells come
full sphere: Are mutant cytoskeletal-related proteins
oncoprotein-monsters or useful immunogens? Hum Vaccin Immunother.
12:120–123. 2016. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
|
|
6
|
Ballestar E, Yusufzai TM and Wolffe AP:
Effects of Rett syndrome mutations of the methyl-CpG binding domain
of the transcriptional repressor MeCP2 on selectivity for
association with methylated DNA. Biochemistry. 39:7100–7106. 2000.
View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
|
|
7
|
Kontrogianni-Konstantopoulos A, Ackermann
MA, Bowman AL, Yap SV and Bloch RJ: Muscle giants: Molecular
scaffolds in sarcomerogenesis. Physiol Rev. 89:1217–1267. 2009.
View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
|
|
8
|
Ford SA and Blanck G: Signal persistence
and amplification in cancer development and possible, related
opportunities for novel therapies. Biochim Biophys Acta.
1855:18–23. 2014.PubMed/NCBI
|
