Conclusions and Future Directions

  • P. J. Farnham
Part of the Current Topics in Microbiology and Immunology book series (CT MICROBIOLOGY, volume 208)


The decision to proliferate or to enter a non replicating state is one that a cell must continually reassess. This decision is based in part upon the environmental cues encountered, such as the levels of growth factors, the presence of chemotherapeutic drugs, and infection by viruses. Investigations into the molecular mechanisms by which cells control their proliferative response have focused on positive effectors such as cyclins and viral oncoproteins, negative effectors such as tumor suppressor proteins, and signal transduction pathways leading to the transcriptional activation of various genes in particular stages of the cell cycle. Each of these approaches has implicated E2F in the control of cell growth. Although progress towards understanding the E2F gene family has been rapid, and great advances have been made in the last several years, questions concerning the different family members and their role in cell growth control still remain. Several specific questions that remain to be addressed are discussed below.


Thymidine Kinase Cell Growth Control Viral Oncoproteins Thymidine Kinase Promoter Cellular Promoter 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Ayer DE, Eisenman RN (1993) A switch from Myc: Max to Mad: Max heterocomplexes accompanies monocyte/macrophage differentiation. Genes Dev 7: 2110–2119PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Beijersbergen RL, Hijmans Em, Zhu L, Bernards R (1994) Interaction of c-Myc with the pRb-related protein p107 results in inhibition of c-Myc-mediated transactivation. EMBO J 13: 4080–4086PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Blackwood EM, Kretzner L, Eisenman RN (1992) Myc and Max function as a nucleoprotein complex. Curr Opin Genet Dev 2: 227–235PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Dobrowolski SF, Stacey DW, Harter MW, Stine JT, Hiebert SW (1994) An E2F dominant negative mutant blocks E1A induced cell cycle progression. Oncogene 9: 2605–2612PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Dou Q-P, Molnar G, Pardee AB (1994) Cyclin D1/CDK2 kinase is present in a G1 phase-specific protein complex YI1 that binds to the mouse thymidine kinase gene promoter. Biochem Biophys Res Commun 205: 1859–1868PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Gilmour DS, Lis JT (1985) In vivo interactions of RNA polymerase II with genes of Drosophila melanogaster. Mol Cell Biol 5: 2009–2018PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Gilmour DS, Lis JT (1986) RNA polymerase II interacts with the promoter region of the noninduced hsp70 gene in Drosophila melanogaster cells. Mol Cell Biol 6: 3984–3989PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Hsiao K-M, McMahon SL, Farnham PJ (1994) Multiple DNA elements are required for the growth regulation of the mouse E2F1 promoter. Genes Dev 8: 1526–1537PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Johnson DG, Ohtani K, Nevins JR (1994) Autoregulatory control of E2F1 expression in response to positive and negative regulators of cell cycle progression. Genes Dev 8: 1514–1525PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Li L, Naeve GS, Lee AS (1993) Temporal regulation of cyclin A-p107 and p33cdk2 complexes binding to human thymidine kinase promoter element important for G,-S Phase transcriptional regulation. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 90: 3554–3558PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Lieber A, Strauss M (1995) Selection of efficient cleavage sites in target RNAs by using a ribozyme expression library. Mol Cell Biol 15: 540–551PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Miltenberger RJ, Sukow K, Farnham PJ (1995) An E box-mediated increase in cad transcription at the G1/S-phase boundary is suppressed by inhibitory c-Myc mutants. Mol Cell Biol 15: 2527–2535PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Neuman E, Flemington EK, Sellers WR, Kaelin WG Jr (1994) Transcription of the E2F-1 gene is rendered cell cycle dependent by E2F DNA-binding sites within its promoter. Mol Cell Biol 14: 6607–6615Google Scholar
  14. Porcu P, Grana X, Li S, Swantek J, De Luca A, Giordano A, Baserga R (1994) An E2F binding sequence negatively regulates the response of the insulin-like growth factor 1 (IGF-1) promoter to simian virus 40 T antigen and to serum. Oncogene 9: 2125–2134PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Sala A, Nicolaides Nc, Engelhard A, Bellon T, Lawe DC, Arnold A, Grana X, Giordano A, Calabretta B (1994) Correlation between E2F-1 requirement in S phase and E2F-1 transactivation of cell cycle related genes in human cells. Cancer Res 54: 1402–1406PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Singh P, Wong SH, Hong W (1994) Overexpression of E2F-1 in rat embryo fibroblasts leads to neoplastic transformation. EMBO J 13: 3329–3338PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Smith EJ, Nevins JR (1995) The Rb-related p107 protein can suppress E2F function independently of binding to cyclin A/cdk2. Mol Cell Biol 15: 338–344PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Vairo G, Livingston DM, Ginsberg D (1995) Functional interaction between E2F4 and p130: evidence for distinct mechanisms underlying growth suppression by different Rb family members. Genes Dev 9: 869–881PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Walter J, Dever CA, Biggin MD (1994) Two homeo domain proteins bind with similar specificity to a wide range of DNA sites in Drosophila embryos. Genes Dev 8: 1678–4692PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Zervos AS, Gyuris J, Brent R (1993) Mxi1, a protein that specifically interacts with Max to bind MycMax recognition sites. Cell 72: 223–232PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Zhu L, van den Heuvel S, Helin K, Fattaey A, Ewen M, Livingston D, Dyson N, Harlow E (1993) Inhibition of cell proliferation by p107, a relative of the retinoblastoma protein. Genes Dev 7: 1111–1125PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1996

Authors and Affiliations

  • P. J. Farnham
    • 1
  1. 1.McArdle Laboratory for Cancer ResearchUniversity of Wisconsin Medical SchoolMadisonUSA

Personalised recommendations