Stacey D W
Roche Institute of Molecular Biology, Roche Research Center, Nutley, N.J. 07110.
Adv Exp Med Biol. 1988;234:141-67. doi: 10.1007/978-1-4757-1980-2_11.
The studies described above have led to some conclusions as well as some speculations regarding the participation of oncogenes in proliferation. It is important to make a clear distinction between the data described along with the resulting conclusions, and the highly speculative models which have been proposed here to describe these results. On the basis of the results described, several conclusions appear to be indicated. First, it is clear that in normal cells of many types ras proteins are required for proliferation. Second, these proteins are needed for the maintenance of the transformed phenotype induced by some, but not all, oncogenes. Third, the activity of ras proteins is not apparently involved in controlling the activity of phospholipase C or any other identifiable phospholipase. Finally, tumor formation appears to involve the development of a proliferative phenotype which functions independently of ras activity. To explain these data, a model of proliferative control is presented. This model is highly speculative at this time and is based upon the assumption that the "ras pathway" involves the sequential action of cellular genes related to the retroviral oncogenes. The function of this pathway is to pass the proliferative signal generated by an occupied growth factor receptor into the cell. It is clearly needed late in the G-1 phase of the cell cycle, but the "ras pathway" might also be involved in the early events associated with mitogenic stimulation. Due to its central role in the control of proliferation and the fact that tumor cells circumvent its action, ras proteins are postulated to a site of negative proliferative control. After the action of ras and related cellular oncogenes, the proliferative control signal no longer involves the action of a simple linear sequence of protein activities, but might involve multiple, interdependent pathways. This model is primarily of value as a working hypothesis and does not account for many observations central to proliferative control such as the involvement of cell-cell contact, differentiation, and the action of factors which inhibit rather than promote proliferation, such as interferons. The model does summarize the data described and even in the simplest form represents a novel approach to explain proliferative control in terms of the activities of known genes.
上述研究得出了一些关于癌基因在增殖过程中作用的结论及推测。明确区分所得出的结论所依据的数据与在此提出的用于描述这些结果的高度推测性模型非常重要。基于所描述的结果,似乎可以得出几个结论。首先,很明显在许多类型的正常细胞中,ras蛋白是增殖所必需的。其次,这些蛋白对于维持某些(但并非所有)癌基因诱导的转化表型是必需的。第三,ras蛋白的活性显然不参与控制磷脂酶C或任何其他可识别的磷脂酶的活性。最后,肿瘤形成似乎涉及一种独立于ras活性发挥作用的增殖表型的发展。为了解释这些数据,提出了一种增殖控制模型。此时该模型具有高度的推测性,并且基于这样的假设,即“ras途径”涉及与逆转录病毒癌基因相关的细胞基因的顺序作用。该途径的功能是将由占据的生长因子受体产生的增殖信号传递到细胞内。它在细胞周期的G-1期后期显然是必需的,但“ras途径”也可能参与与有丝分裂刺激相关的早期事件。由于其在增殖控制中的核心作用以及肿瘤细胞规避其作用这一事实,推测ras蛋白处于负性增殖控制位点。在ras及相关细胞癌基因发挥作用后,增殖控制信号不再涉及简单线性序列的蛋白质活性作用,而是可能涉及多个相互依赖的途径。该模型主要作为一个工作假设具有价值,并且没有解释许多对于增殖控制至关重要的观察结果,例如细胞间接触、分化以及抑制而非促进增殖的因子(如干扰素)的作用。该模型确实总结了所描述的数据,并且即使以最简单的形式也代表了一种根据已知基因的活性来解释增殖控制的新方法。