p53 Is Required for Cisplatin-induced Processing of the Mitochondrial Fusion Protein L-Opa1 That Is Mediated by the Mitochondrial Metallopeptidase Oma1 in Gynecologic Cancers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Mitochondria are highly dynamic organelles, and mitochondrial fission is a crucial step of apoptosis. Although Oma1 is believed to be responsible for long form Opa1 (L-Opa1) processing during mitochondrial fragmentation, whether and how Oma1 is involved in L-Opa1 processing and participates in the regulation of chemoresistance is unknown. Chemosensitive and chemoresistant ovarian (OVCA) and cervical (CECA) cancer cells were treated with cisplatin (CDDP). Mitochondrial dynamics and protein contents were assessed by immunofluorescence and Western blot, respectively. The requirements of Oma1 and p53 for CDDP-induced L-Opa1 processing, mitochondrial fragmentation, and apoptosis were examined by siRNA or cDNA. CDDP induces L-Opa1 processing and mitochondrial fragmentation in chemosensitive but not in chemoresistant cells. CDDP induced Oma1 40-kDa form increases in OV2008 cells, not in C13* cells. Oma1 knockdown inhibited L-Opa1 processing, mitochondrial fragmentation, and apoptosis. Silencing p53 expression attenuated the effects of CDDP in Oma1 (40 kDa) increase, L-Opa1 processing, mitochondrial fragmentation, and apoptosis in chemosensitive OVCA cells, whereas reconstitution of p53 in p53 mutant or null chemoresistant OVCA cells induced Oma1 (40 kDa) increase, L-Opa1 processing, mitochondrial fragmentation, and apoptosis irrespective of the presence of CDDP. Prohibitin 1 (Phb1) dissociates from Opa1-Phb1 complex and binds phosphorylated p53 (serine 15) in response to CDDP in chemosensitive but not chemoresistant CECA cells. These findings demonstrate that (a) p53 and Oma1 mediate L-Opa1 processing, (b) mitochondrial fragmentation is involved in CDDP-induced apoptosis in OVCA and CECA cells, and (c) dysregulated mitochondrial dynamics may in part be involved in the pathophysiology of CDDP resistance. Mitochondria are highly dynamic organelles, and mitochondrial fission is a crucial step of apoptosis. Although Oma1 is believed to be responsible for long form Opa1 (L-Opa1) processing during mitochondrial fragmentation, whether and how Oma1 is involved in L-Opa1 processing and participates in the regulation of chemoresistance is unknown. Chemosensitive and chemoresistant ovarian (OVCA) and cervical (CECA) cancer cells were treated with cisplatin (CDDP). Mitochondrial dynamics and protein contents were assessed by immunofluorescence and Western blot, respectively. The requirements of Oma1 and p53 for CDDP-induced L-Opa1 processing, mitochondrial fragmentation, and apoptosis were examined by siRNA or cDNA. CDDP induces L-Opa1 processing and mitochondrial fragmentation in chemosensitive but not in chemoresistant cells. CDDP induced Oma1 40-kDa form increases in OV2008 cells, not in C13* cells. Oma1 knockdown inhibited L-Opa1 processing, mitochondrial fragmentation, and apoptosis. Silencing p53 expression attenuated the effects of CDDP in Oma1 (40 kDa) increase, L-Opa1 processing, mitochondrial fragmentation, and apoptosis in chemosensitive OVCA cells, whereas reconstitution of p53 in p53 mutant or null chemoresistant OVCA cells induced Oma1 (40 kDa) increase, L-Opa1 processing, mitochondrial fragmentation, and apoptosis irrespective of the presence of CDDP. Prohibitin 1 (Phb1) dissociates from Opa1-Phb1 complex and binds phosphorylated p53 (serine 15) in response to CDDP in chemosensitive but not chemoresistant CECA cells. These findings demonstrate that (a) p53 and Oma1 mediate L-Opa1 processing, (b) mitochondrial fragmentation is involved in CDDP-induced apoptosis in OVCA and CECA cells, and (c) dysregulated mitochondrial dynamics may in part be involved in the pathophysiology of CDDP resistance.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".