1. Introduction
Outside of the Earth’s protective magnetosphere, crews are exposed to galactic cosmic rays (GCR) and solar proton events (SPE) that occur when particles emitted by the sun, mostly protons, become accelerated in the interplanetary space due to a coronal mass ejection shock [ 1 ]. The exposure to GCR in the form of high-energy (HZE) ions, secondary protons, and neutrons has high linear energy transfer values that evoke complex DNA and other cellular damage [ 2 ]. In the purpose of controlling the health risks associated with the unique hazards of space flight, highly sophisticated systems have been developed [ 3 ]. A key question that impacts risk assessment is how cancers caused by HZE radiation compare to either radiogenic cancer induced by ground-based radiation [ 4 ]. As a unifying concept, NASA studies have sought to examine how space radiation exposure induces genetic and epigenetic modifications, noted as the hallmarks of cancer onset [ 5 ]. Due to the lack of human epidemiological data related to the types of radiation found in space, the current research utilises a translational approach which includes advanced human cell-based model systems exposed to space radiation simulants connected with human molecular pathways [ 6 ]. This approach allows relating the biological effects of space radiation to effects from similar exposure to ground-based gamma rays and X-rays to extrapolate the results to large human epidemiological cohorts [ 6 , 7 ]. Among the molecules involved at the cellular level, the CREB/ATF family plays a crucial role.
The CREB protein was initially described as a cAMP-responsive transcription factor involved in the regulation of the somatostatin gene [ 8 ]. Today, it is known to modulate gene transcription through binding to DNA sequences known as the cAMP response elements (CREs) [ 9 ]. In the human genome, there are approximately 750,000 of these CREs, although most of them are not available for protein binding as their cytosine methylation physically prevents these interactions [ 10 ]. The CREB/ATF transcription factors have key roles in cell survival, proliferation, and differentiation, as well as in apoptosis and adaptive responses [ 11 ]. Nuclear factor-κB (NF-κB) appears to be the most important CREB-related transcription factor [ 12 ]. Increased NF-κB activity can be considered as a hallmark of different diseases, such as human leukaemia, lymphoma, and other types of cancers [ 13 ]. NF-κB activity can be induced by ionising radiation, which appears to promote enhanced survival of human leukaemia K562 cells [ 14 ]. Indeed, a link has been shown between constitutive NF-κB activity, basal apoptosis, and radiosensitivity in breast carcinoma cell lines [ 15 ]. Furthermore, high NF-κB activity in human cancers can promote apoptosis suppression and radiotherapy resistance [ 16 ].
The present review is focused on the complex biochemical interactions of the CREB/ATF family members and the related transcription factors in the response to ionising radiation of human haematological malignancies and solid tumours.
2. Ionising Radiation: Radioresistance and Radiosensitivity
When atoms disintegrate, energy is released in the form of ionising radiation, which includes electromagnetic waves (e.g., gamma rays, X-rays) and particles (neutrons, alpha and beta particles). They can have a sufficient level of energy to result in ionisation of atoms and molecules [ 17 ]. When an organism is exposed to ionising radiation, the energy is absorbed by the atoms of the biomolecules in the cells, which become ionised or excited [ 18 ]. This can result in the formation of free radicals and reactive oxygen species (ROS) [ 19 ]. This build-up of ROS can then lead to several types of cellular damage in the form of genetic effects with direct alterations of DNA integrity, epigenetic effects with modifications of the DNA, or what are known as bystander effects [ 20 ], as further defined below.
To better understand the distinction between targeted and nontargeted effects of ionising radiation, it is necessary to consider the biological responses not just of the irradiated cells, which will mainly be killed, but particularly of the surviving cells in the close vicinity that have not undergone direct irradiation. Genomic instability is seen as the appearance of genetic abnormalities in the “offspring” of both the surviving irradiated cells and their close neighbours. They may exhibit adaptive responses, which are characterised by changes in their radiation susceptibility—in a protective manner—following the initial dose of radiation (i.e., the challenge dose). This may also apply to the cells previously exposed to one or more low doses of radiation [ 14 ] since it was seen that exposure to any radiation dose is pivotal in terms of risks [ 15 ]. Indeed, carcinogenesis is characterised by a multistage process where different target genes undergo modifications of their expression after radiation exposure in a dose-dependent manner. DNA repair genes, proto-oncogenes, and tumour suppressor genes shall be responsible for the deregulation of the cell cycle and the alteration of the apoptotic pathway [ 16 , 17 ]. In addition, the expression of small non-coding RNAs is affected by ionising radiation [ 18 ]. As indicated above, the main cellular effects of ionising radiation can be divided into three groups: genetic effects, epigenetic effects, and bystander effects ( Figure 1 ).
2.1. Genetic Effects
The direct genetic effects arising from radiation-induced DNA lesions are single-strand breaks or double-strand breaks, which lead, respectively, to the activation of the DNA repair process and apoptosis [ 21 , 22 ]. Furthermore, accumulation of ROS can also lead to indirect effects of ionising radiation that can cause structural and functional defects of the cellular nucleic acids, proteins, and lipids. This intracellular damage accumulation can lead to tumour development due to the increased DNA mutation rate [ 23 ]. In other cases, ROS-mediated oxidation can result in chromosomal rearrangements and errors in recombination processes [ 21 , 22 ] or damage to mitochondrial DNA. All these events have important roles in the development of secondary malignancies after radiotherapy [ 24 ].
2.2. Epigenetic Effects
Low ionising radiation doses can induce epigenetic effects at the cellular level through the involvement of ROS, and they can also promote carcinogenesis [ 25 ]. The main epigenetic modifications are DNA methylation of CpG islands of the gene promoter regions, with inhibition of gene expression [ 26 ] and histone acetylation with gene overexpression [ 27 , 28 ].
2.3. Bystander Effects
The signals that arise from radiation-induced bystander effects can be transmitted through tissues by means of direct intercellular contacts, similarly to local paracrine effects, or by means of the more remote actions of molecules, similarly to endocrine effects [ 29 ]. Ionising radiation can thus induce mutations not only within the nontargeted surrounding cells, but also in distant tissues [ 30 ]. This can be due to communication between cells through their gap junctions [ 30 ], various ligands and their receptors [ 31 ], and other released factors (e.g., ROS, interleukin (IL) 1, and transforming growth factor-β1) and their receptors [ 32 , 33 ]. Indeed, carcinogenesis induction has been proved for nearby unirradiated cells [ 34 ].
Overall, cell response to ionising radiation depends on the balance between cell cycle progression, DNA repair, and apoptosis [ 35 ]. P53 plays a key role here, as the cell cycle arrest induced in response to DNA damage can allow DNA repair or induce apoptosis [ 36 ]. This depends further on the dose of the ionising radiation, whereby low doses can allow DNA repair, which induces cell protection (i.e., radioresistance), while high doses trigger apoptosis, and hence cell death (radiosensitivity) [ 37 ].
Radiation-induced bystander effects appear to be correlated to tumour induction through enhanced radioresistance or increased cell proliferation [ 38 ]. Here, nitric oxide (NO) has a crucial role as it is produced and released by irradiated cells and it is able to act on nonirradiated bystander cells [ 39 ]. Moreover, the NO effects depend on the radiation dose as while NO can be cytotoxic and thus cause DNA damage leading to cell death, it can also be cytoprotective by protecting cells from apoptosis. The pro- or antitumoral properties of NO depend on local concentration, exposure time, redox state of the cell and its compartmentalization [ 38 , 40 ].
Thus, cells can respond to a low or priming dose of radiation by acquiring radioresistance as defined by the so-called radiation-induced adaptive response [ 41 ]. Based on this evidence, bystander effects can make cells radioresistant [ 42 ]. This appears to be caused by stimulation of the genes involved in DNA repair [ 43 ] and suppression of p53-dependent responses [ 44 ].
3. CREB Family Members and CREB-Binding Proteins
CREB is a basic region/ leucine zipper motif (bZIP) transcription factor as it contains a leucine zipper domain that facilitates dimerization and mediates its DNA binding [ 45 , 46 ]. The CREs to which these CREB dimers bind have the sequence TGACGTCA [ 47 ]. The phosphorylation of CREB at Ser133 promotes its binding to the coactivator CREB-binding protein (CBP), which facilitates transcription [ 48 ] as this binding promotes chromatin loosening through histone acetylation [ 49 ]. This pathway is involved in several biochemical metabolic cell processes, including glucose homeostasis, cell survival, proliferation, differentiation, apoptosis, memory, and learning [ 50 ]. The CREB/ATF transcription factors include three genes that are homologous: CREB itself, cAMP response element modulator ( CREM ), and ATF-1 [ 51 ]. Their gene products are thus three highly homologous proteins: CREB, CREM, and ATF-1. The CREB/ATF family to date includes CREB-1, CREB-2 (recently named ATF-4), CREB-3, CREB-5, CREM, ATF-1 (also known as TREB36), ATF-2 (also known as CRE-BP1), ATF-3, ATF-5 (also known as ATFX), ATF-6, ATF-7, and B-ATF [ 52 ]. As indicated above, they have bZIP domains, the sequences of which define their formation of homodimers or heterodimers. These heterodimers can include not just those with other CREB/ATF members, but also those with other bZIP-containing proteins, such as activator protein-1 (AP-1), C/EBP, and the Fos, Jun, and Maf proteins [ 53 ].
CREB, CREM, and ATF-1 have been characterised, and they are known to regulate gene transcription through their binding to CREs. In contrast, the properties of the structurally and functionally more distant ATF-2, ATF-3, and ATF-4 are not yet fully understood, although they are stress response proteins [ 54 , 55 ]. ATF-3 has been indicated as an adaptive response gene activated by several cell signals, which include those of the cytokines and genotoxic agents, and physiological stress [ 56 ]. ATF-3 has also been implicated in host defence systems against invading pathogens and cancer development [ 57 , 58 ]. ATF-3 expression is ubiquitous in all tissues, and it is localised in the nucleus; in the absence of cell stress, ATF-3 levels remain low [ 56 ]. However, ATF-3 is rapidly induced under cell stress, including during hypoxia, DNA damage, and heat or cold shock [ 56 ]. In contrast, in neuronal cells, ATF-4 has been shown to migrate from the cytoplasmic leaflet into the nucleus following activation of γ-aminobutyric acid receptors. ATF-4 has thus been suggested to be involved in neuronal plasticity, whereby it appears to couple receptor activity to gene expression [ 59 ].
Human CBP and its paralogue p300 are generally functionally interchangeable, although they each also have their own unique functions [ 60 ]. They have multiple domains for binding to over 40 transcription factors, and they are multifunctional adaptor proteins that have acetyl transferase activities for transcription factors and histones [ 61 ]. They are also important for cell cycle progression and cell differentiation where they can interact with components of the RNA polymerase II holoenzyme, with transcription factors, nuclear hormone receptors and their coactivators [ 62 ]. They have been shown to support normal cell differentiation and cell cycle arrest through interaction with GATA-1 (transcription activator/repressor); however, they can also promote cell cycle progression through interactions with c-Myb (transcription activator) and PU.1 (Ets family transcription factor). Several mutations have been described for the transcription factor-binding domains of these genes across different tumours [ 63 ].
Following identification of the molecular mechanisms through which CREB acts as an inducible regulator of such transcription factors, CREB has become the focus of many investigations, particularly with its involvement in various signalling pathways under both normal and pathological conditions. Furthermore, CREB interacts with other nuclear factors through its transactivation domain, which includes the Q2 domain, a constitutively active glutamine-rich domain, and the kinase-inducible domain that is regulated by cellular kinases. The interaction of the Q2 domain with TATA-binding protein-associated factors promotes constitutive activation, while the kinase-inducible domain promotes isomerisation through recruitment of coactivators CBP and p300 to gene promoters, with activation seen only following phosphorylation of Ser133 by specific cellular kinases [ 64 ].
4. NF-κB and p53: Two Crucial CREB-Related Transcription Factors
Most tumour cells show high levels of constitutive NF-κB activity, with increased cell survival promoted through antagonism of apoptotic pathways [ 65 ]. A key role of the NF-κB pathway is the promotion of the innate immune response through transcription of proinflammatory mediators, including chemokines, cytokines, antimicrobial peptides, and adhesion molecules [ 66 , 67 ]. The NF-κB family members include NF-κB1 (p50, p105), NF-κB2 (p52, p100), RelA (p65), c-Rel, and RelB [ 68 ]. Activation of NF-κB can occur through phosphorylation and proteolysis of the inhibitor of κB (IκB) or through an IκB-independent pathway [ 69 ] and as a stress-sensitive transcription factor. In fact, NF-κB is involved in regulation of the expression of stress-responsive genes [ 70 ]. In the nucleus, the interaction between the NF-κB family member RelA and CBP or p300 is required to promote NF-κB-dependent transcription of genes that induce proinflammatory responses. The RelA subunit activity involved in this interaction is potentiated by CBP and p300 [ 71 ]. P300 regulates cell sensitivity and has a proapoptotic function following cell damage [ 72 ]. The correlation between NF-κB and phosphorylated CREB is due to their interaction with CBP/p300 in the same region [ 73 ]. Consequently, this competition would lead to CREB-dependent inhibition of NF-κB activity [ 74 ]. In addition, CREB can induce an NF-κB-dependent antiapoptotic response in macrophages, which promotes macrophage survival and thus enhances the immune response [ 75 ].
Substantial evidence points to a critical role of the p300/CBP coactivators in p53 responses to DNA damage [ 76 ]. Interestingly, p53 was the prototype to demonstrate that p300, CBP, and the associated P/CAF acetylase can acetylate nonhistone transcription factors [ 77 ]. Both p300 and CBP can interact with p53, but only p300 appears to be involved in p53 stabilisation after DNA damage and p53-dependent apoptosis. The tumour suppressor protein p53 has key roles in prevention of the development of cancers, and it is inactivated in many human malignancies [ 78 ]. Indeed, p53 regulates expression of the genes involved in cell cycle control and apoptosis induction [ 79 ] and at the same time can induce transcription of DNA repair enzymes to promote cell survival [ 80 ]. It can be stimulated by cell stresses, such as oxidative stress, hypoxia, ionising radiation, and carcinogens [ 81 ], and its levels rise after DNA damage, whereas they are low in both normal and neoplastic cells under normal physiological conditions [ 82 ]. The uncovering that the TP53 gene physiologically expresses, in a tissue-dependent manner, several p53 splice variants (isoforms) provides an explanation for its pleiotropic biological activities [ 83 ]. In fact, among the different isoforms of p53, some have oncogenic potential, while others show oncosuppressor properties or, in some cases, can have both functions, depending on the cellular context [ 22 ]. The p53 family of proteins also includes p63 and p73 that can induce apoptosis by mediating cell cycle arrest at G2/M and G1/S [ 84 ]. Importantly, TP53 is deactivated in most of the human solid tumours due to missense mutations and deletions that impair its transcriptional function [ 85 ]. In cancer, the presence of p53 mutants leads to gain-of-function phenotypes due to increased cell growth and cell motility, coupled with carcinogenesis and chemoresistance [ 86 ]. The gain-of-function phenotype arises through chromatin changes following histone acetylation, which results in interactions between the STAT1/STAT2 complex and CBP/p300 on the NF-κB2 promoter [ 87 ].
5. CREB Family Members: An Active Role in Tumours
Several recent studies are proposing CREB/ATF and the related nuclear transcription factors as potential prognostic biomarkers [ 88 ]. It is well-known that CREB expression mediated by phosphorylation is essential for major cell survival functions [ 88 ]. Tumour cells have developed various mechanisms to achieve constitutive activation of CREB, including gene amplification, chromosome translocation, and inactivation of tumour suppressor genes, leading to uncontrolled proliferation of cells [ 89 ]. Therefore, it is hypothesised that CREB is directly involved in the pathogenesis of a variety of cancers ( Table 1 ), including hematological malignancies [ 90 ]. CREB is often overexpressed in hematopoietic tumours [ 88 , 89 , 91 ], and its implication in the radiation response of lymphoid neoplastic cell lines has been demonstrated [ 92 , 93 ]. Overexpression of CREB is known to be associated with increased cell proliferation and migration and reduced apoptosis, processes that are both directly and indirectly linked to malignant transformation of cells [ 94 ]. In human melanoma, CREB and ATF-1 have been reported to act as survival factors and favour tumour growth and metastasis [ 95 , 96 ]. During the progression of melanoma, CREB and ATF-1 show changes in their expression, along with the loss of the AP-2α transcription factor: indeed, CREB expression correlates directly with metastatic transformation [ 96 ], whereas ATF-1, which is absent in normal melanocytes, is then expressed in the metastatic melanoma cells [ 97 ]. In different cell types, CREB and ATF-1 have been shown to act as negative regulators of apoptosis as these proteins appear to rescue cells from apoptotic death through upregulation of Bcl-2 expression, with binding of CREB and ATF-2 to a CRE domain within the Bcl-2 promoter ( Figure 2 ).
CREB also has an important role in breast cancer through its interactions with tumour-promoting G-protein-coupled receptor 81 (GPR81), which is involved in the promotion of angiogenesis and breast cancer cell survival in the tumour microenvironment [ 98 ]. For instance, in the MCF7 breast cancer cell line, GPR81 activation has been shown to promote CREB phosphorylation, and thus the nuclear translocation of the active form of CREB. PI3K/Akt suppression was shown to block this GPR81-induced activation of CREB and subsequently inhibit expression of the proangiogenic mediator amphiregulin (AREG) and thus angiogenesis. Therefore, the pathway that involves PI3K/Akt and CREB can promote tumour-associated angiogenesis [ 98 ].
High constitutive expression of CREB has been observed in the immortalised Jurkat T lymphocyte cell line [ 99 ]; therefore, CREB might sustain the proliferation of lymphoid leukaemia cells. Indeed, the involvement of CREB in the pathogenesis of myeloid and lymphoid leukaemia has already been demonstrated [ 100 ]. Interestingly, a recent study revealed the association between CREB1 overexpression with metastasis, tumor stage, and poor outcomes in gastric cancer [ 101 ]. Moreover, CREB has an important role in the progression of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) by promoting angiogenesis and resistance to apoptosis [ 102 ]. It is possible that CREB confers drug resistance to HepG2 cells through activation of the human multidrug resistance 1 ( mdr1 ) gene and consequent increase in P-glycoprotein (P-gp) [ 103 ], along with activation of the bcl-2 antiapoptotic gene [ 104 ]. In neuroendocrine prostate cancer, the CREB/G-protein-coupled receptor kinase (GRK) 3 axis promotes neuroendocrine differentiation of the prostate cancer cells, whereas CREB activation is mediated by GRK3. Hence, it appears that GRK3 represents a drug target for the treatment of patients with aggressive prostate cancers [ 105 ]. Moreover, GRK3 has oncogenic roles in different human cancers including prostate cancer [ 106 ], acute myeloid leukaemia [ 107 ], and pancreatic cancer [ 108 ], and its activity can be regulated by CREB in lung cancer [ 109 ]. Thus, in these human cancers, overexpression, or increased activity of CREB promotes disease progression [ 100 ].
6. CREB Family Members and Related Transcription Factors in Radiotherapy of Solid Tumours and Leukaemia
6.1. Cell Responses to Ionising Radiation
Ionising radiation is responsible for the loss of cell proliferation and for cell death by apoptosis or necrosis. Of note, there are two types of apoptosis: fast apoptosis, which occurs during the interphase, before cell division, and after the G2 block that is induced by radiation; and late apoptosis, which occurs after one or more cell divisions [ 110 ]. Some cells, such as lymphocytes, thymocytes, and intestinal crypt cells, are particularly radiosensitive, and when they are irradiated, they undergo fast apoptosis; when mouse leukaemia cells are irradiated, they experience G2 block, and mainly undergo apoptotic death [ 111 ].
As a response to genomic stress, activation of p53 can result in cell cycle arrest or cell death by apoptosis, and this can also contribute to DNA repair processes [ 112 ]. The mouse double minute (Mdm) 2 protein is a crucial regulator of p53. In mice, inactivation of the mdm2 gene shows early embryonal lethality [ 113 ]. Mdm2 has a dual relationship with p53. When Mdm2 binds to p53, this can inhibit the transcriptional function of p53, which also results in complete elimination of p53 by proteolytic degradation. At the same time, p53 can bind the mdm2 gene, which stimulates its transcription. Therefore, this defines a negative feedback loop that appears to serve to rapidly terminate the p53 response after effectively dealing with the p53-activating stress signal [ 114 ]. Various mechanisms have been proposed to explain the p53 fluctuations that are observed in cell populations [ 115 ]. However, considering the continuous effects on cells of acute ionising radiation, the complex cell responses that can be activated to fight against DNA damage still need to be addressed further at the level of the single cell. For oncogenes and toxins that have p53 regulatory functions, their degradation kinetics can be used to quantitatively predict outcomes of the cell responses to DNA damage induced by different doses of ionising radiation [ 116 ]. The retinoblastoma protein (Rb) and CBP/p300 have more complex influences on the p53/MDM2 interactions. Here, the binding of Rb to MDM2 prevents the MDM2 destabilisation of p53 while the Rb/MDM2 complex continues to bind to p53 and inhibits the transactivation mediated by p53 [ 117 ]. Thus, this indicates how the p53 inhibition and destabilisation functions of MDM2 can be individually deciphered. Regarding CBP/p300, these coactivators of p53 are also required for p53 degradation mediated by MDM2. When MDM2 lacks its p300-binding domain, it can no longer destabilise p53, although the MDM2 and p53 binding appears not to be affected [ 118 ].
There are further proteins that are involved in cell responses to ionising radiation, such as PKC family members [ 92 , 119 ]. PKCs are serine/threonine kinases and comprise (at least) 12 different isozymes. PKCδ releases a 40 kDa fragment by proteolysis when cells are exposed to ionising radiation and also to DNA-damaging drugs that leads to apoptosis [ 120 ]. Furthermore, in response to irradiation, activated PKCs regulate P-Bad, Bcl-2, and CREB to prevent apoptosis and induce pro-survival signalling [ 121 ]. PKCs also translocate into the nucleus to phosphorylate its targets [ 122 , 123 ] ( Figure 2 ).
6.2. CREB and Other Factors in Radioresistance and Radiosensitivity
Radiotherapy is designed to induce DNA double-strand breaks, which would then lead to elimination of cancer cells via apoptosis [ 124 ]. However, the efficacy of radiotherapy treatment against cancers also depends on the toxic side effects, which can impede dose escalation. Furthermore, as indicated above, cancer cells might instead develop radioresistance through mechanisms related to DNA repair responses. When cells are exposed to ionising radiation, there is activation of transcription factors like AP-1 and NF-κB [ 125 ]. The consequent induction of specific genes and synthesis of their protein products might then provide the cells with radiation resistance. When the constitutive levels of NF-κB are high, cells also show relatively high resistance to radiation therapy [ 126 ]. The Daudi and Ramos cell lines (human Burkitt lymphoma) show sensitivity to relatively low radiation doses (i.e., 1–5 Gy), with reduced cell viability due to necrosis and apoptosis, and the cell cycle blocked in the G 2 /M phase [ 93 ]. The less radiosensitive Ramos cells show expression of a mutated form of p53 and a constitutively activated NF-κB pathway. These cells are sensitive to an ionising radiation dose of 3 Gy, where they show an early increase in the expression of CREB and a dose-dependent upregulation of expression of NF-κB [ 93 ]. Interestingly, increased cellular levels of CREB have proapoptotic effects, while NF-κB upregulation can be linked to necrosis, at least in vitro and after 3 Gy ionising radiation [ 93 ].
Concerning the regulation of NF-κB, normally, its nuclear translocation and activation are prevented by the “super-repressor” IκB, but stimuli such as TNFα and ionising radiation can degrade, and thus remove, IκB, leaving NF-κB free to translocate into the nucleus and activate its target genes [ 127 ]. Therefore, as NF-κB is activated in several types of cancer, this might provide the cells with intrinsic radioresistance or promote radioresistance. Indeed, NF-κB activity induced by ionising radiation appears to enhance the survival of K562 human leukaemia cells [ 14 ]. Furthermore, in breast carcinoma cell lines, a link has been reported for constitutive NF-κB activity, basal apoptosis, and radiosensitivity [ 128 ]. This indicates that the higher levels of NF-κB seen for human tumours can both suppress apoptosis and promote radioresistance. Inhibition of the NF-κB expression generally increases the apoptotic response when cells are under radiation therapy [ 129 ], and as indicated above, NF-κB expression is upregulated in certain tumour cells in response to radiation, and to chemotherapeutic drugs [ 130 ]. Instead, K562 leukaemia cells have shown a different strategy for resistance to apoptosis induced by ionising radiation that is modulated through protein kinase C (PKC) δ and NF-κB [ 14 ].
CREB has an active role in prostate cancer, where radiation therapy is the first-line treatment [ 131 ]. In the human prostate, neuroendocrine cells represent one of three types of epithelial cells [ 132 ]. These neuroendocrine cells can promote growth of the surrounding tumour cells through their release of neuropeptides [ 133 ]. Along with CREB, a role for ATF2 has been indicated in prostate cancer. Indeed, it has been hypothesised that ATF2 acts as a shuttling protein as it moves between the cytoplasm and the nucleus [ 134 ]. Ionising radiation can induce reversible differentiation of neuroendocrine cells, which leads to the loss of their neuroendocrine properties. Here, CREB and ATF2 might have opposing effects as it appears that accumulation of ATF2 in the nucleus antagonises the signalling pathway involved in the phosphorylation of CREB that is induced by ionising radiation. After exposure to ionising radiation, the differentiated cells show increased proliferation, thus losing their neuroendocrine-like properties [ 135 ]. In this case, radiotherapy also gives tumour cells the possibility to survive the treatment and contribute to tumour recurrence.
Radioprotection of human leukaemia cell lines can also be linked to the stability of peroxiredoxins (Prx) [ 136 ]. They are a very large and conserved family of small peroxidases that conserve the thioredoxin-dependent catalytic activity that protects cells from oxidative damage produced by H 2 O 2 , organic hydroperoxides, and peroxynitrite [ 137 ]. The effects of ionising radiation in leukemia cells are of oncologic interest since high doses of whole-body gamma radiation can be employed before bone marrow transplantation. However, PrxII expression levels have been correlated with radioresistance or administration of certain anticancer drugs in radioresistant solid tumours, including breast cancer, glioblastoma, and head and neck cancer, as well as in tissue isolated from head and neck patients who do not respond to radiation therapy [ 138 ].
6.3. CREB and Related Transcription Factors as Possible Targets in the Treatment of Tumours
CREB appears to be a therapeutic target for cancer treatment due to its role in the development, maintenance, and progression of tumours [ 94 ]. This was also suggested by the downregulation of the inducible cyclic AMP early repressor (ICER) in bone marrow cells from patients with acute myeloid leukaemia, where altered CREB expression was observed. There are several different ways in which the CREB function might be inhibited in tumour cells [ 94 ]. First, a dominant-negative CREB mutant, known as KCREB, can be used to inhibit transcription of CREB, which arises through the formation of heterodimers of KCREB with wild-type CREB. In metastatic tumour cells in vitro and in vivo, KCREB has been shown to reduce the metastatic potential [ 95 ]. Secondly, CRE “decoy” oligonucleotides might inhibit CREB gene transcription and tumour growth [ 139 ]. Thirdly, silencing of CREB expression might reduce anchorage-independent growth of tumour cells, along with cell cycle arrest. This would lead to apoptosis accompanied by enhanced tumour immunogenicity [ 140 ]. Finally, many kinase inhibitors can be used to inhibit the CREB and CBP interactions with their CREs [ 141 ].
Pharmacological inhibition of IKK-NF-κB might also represent an interesting approach to potentiate the apoptotic effects of irradiation. Indeed, a suppressor of the IKK complex was reported to make lung cancer cell lines more apoptosis-susceptible following their irradiation [ 142 ]. Furthermore, curcumin, which interferes with activation of the inhibitor of NF-κB kinase (IKK), showed greater radiation-induced apoptosis against PC-3 prostate cancer cells [ 143 ]. Instead of targeting NF-κB itself, the effector genes of NF-κB might represent better drug targets for the enhancement of radiosensitivity on the basis that in tumour cells that are radioresistant, activation of these genes might be predominant. In an investigation of genes that are upregulated in human keratinocytes following long-term irradiation, Chen et al. (2002) [ 112 ] reported that six genes showed upregulation as putative targets for NF-κB. By using a mutant IκB, three of these genes, cyclin B1, cyclin D1, and human inhibitor of apoptosis protein (HIAP) 1, were downregulated, while the other three upregulated genes, Bcl-2-associated athanogene (BAG) 1, thyroid transcription factor (TTF), and fibronectin, were not downregulated. The genes that were downregulated following NF-κB inhibition are associated with significantly decreased cell survival, and thus they might have crucial roles in radioresistance.
For hepatocyte malignancy in HCC, radiotherapy is the most common treatment choice [ 144 ]. Unfortunately, as both cancer and healthy cells are killed, this treatment comes with multiple side effects for the cells. However, as Fuchs-Tarlovsky (2013) [ 145 ] reported, administration of antioxidant nutrients prior to or combined with radiation therapy protected nontumour cells against the free radicals generated to kill the tumour cells during the irradiation.
P53 can also be considered as a target in anticancer therapies that use different small molecules that have been shown to restore the function of wild type p53. One of these is the cis-imidazoline analogue nutlin-3 which prevents p53 degradation and was shown to induce apoptosis in p53-deficient colorectal carcinoma cells and in an HCC cell line through p73 activation [ 146 , 147 ]. Previous preclinical studies showed the therapeutic use of nutlin-3 for haematological malignancies, including acute myeloid leukaemia [ 148 ], acute lymphoblastic leukaemia [ 149 ], and B cell chronic lymphocytic leukaemia [ 150 ]. In a human head and neck cancer cell line, the small molecule known as RITA (reactivation of p53 and induction of tumour cell apoptosis) that blocks the interaction between p53 and MDM2 was shown to restore the function of p53 and induce tumour cell apoptosis [ 151 ]. Indeed, there are several other small molecules that are used in therapies for tumours where p53 mutations have led to loss of the p53 DNA-binding function. For example, PRIMA (p53 reactivation and induction of massive apoptosis) 1 reactivates p53 and induces apoptosis [ 152 ]. Then, a small molecule with a similar structure to PRIMA-1 known as PRIMA MET (APR-246) can also induce tumour cell apoptosis either alone or in combination with other chemotherapeutics. Furthermore, in multiple myeloma, MIRA (mutant p53 reactivation and induction of rapid apoptosis) 1 can restore the p53 function and p53-induced cancer cell apoptosis with a higher potency than PRIMA-1 [ 153 ]. Then, there is the small molecule RETRA (reactivation of transcriptional reporter activity) which not only restores the p53 function, but also increases the level of Tap73, a structural homologue of p53. However, the essential problem with these small molecules is the need for selective actions (in terms of restoration of the p53 function) that are directed only to the cancer cell.
7. Conclusions
Radiotherapy is the standard treatment of choice for patients with solid tumours and haematological malignancies although it induces the death not only of malignant cells, but also of healthy cells. However, cells can escape apoptotic death through activation of various survival factors. One of these factors is CREB, which is upregulated in various tumours treated with radiotherapy. This CREB upregulation leads to increased cell proliferation, reduced apoptosis, and enhanced cell migration and contributes to metastatic transformation of cells, as well as to angiogenesis. Along with CREB, ATF and NF-κB are also upregulated in different types of malignancies. Considering this, ionising radiation can also become a potential carcinogen, and thus it is important to consider the doses used. In addition, although the key role of CREB is evident in this context, it should not be considered the only therapeutic target. Indeed, further studies are needed to clarify other molecular players involved in mediating tumour radioresistance to identify novel, more efficient combined treatments designed on an individual patient and tumour basis.
Acknowledgments
The authors are grateful to Pierpaolo Nicolì for his contribution to artwork.
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Author Contributions
Writing—original draft preparation, G.S. and F.P.; writing—review and editing, G.S., F.G., L.C. and R.D.P.; supervision, R.D.P. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding
This research was funded with MIUR (Italian Ministry of University and Research) research funds granted in 2017 to Roberta Di Pietro and Lucia Centurione.
Institutional Review Board Statement
Not applicable.
Informed Consent Statement
Not applicable.
Conflicts of Interest
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
References
1. El-Jaby S. Lewis B.J. Tomi L. A commentary on the impact of modelling results to inform mission planning and shield design Life Sci. Sp. Res. 2020 25 148 150 10.1016/j.lssr.2019.11.002 32414489
2. Li M. Gonon G. Buonanno M. Autsavapromporn N. De Toledo S.M. Pain D. Azzam E.I. Health Risks of Space Exploration: Targeted and Nontargeted Oxidative Injury by High-Charge and High-Energy Particles Antioxid. Redox Signal. 2014 20 1501 10.1089/ars.2013.5649 24111926 PMC3936510
3. Romero E. Francisco D. The NASA human system risk mitigation process for space exploration Acta Astronaut. 2020 175 606 615 10.1016/j.actaastro.2020.04.046
4. Sridharan D.M. Asaithamby A. Bailey S.M. Costes S.V. Doetsch P.W. Dynan W.S. Kronenberg A. Rithidech K.N. Saha J. Snijders A.M. Understanding cancer development processes after HZE-particle exposure: Roles of ROS, DNA damage repair and inflammation Radiat. Res. 2015 183 1 26 10.1667/RR13804.1 25564719
5. Prasad B. Grimm D. Strauch S.M. Erzinger G.S. Corydon T.J. Lebert M. Magnusson N.E. Infanger M. Richter P. Krüger M. Influence of Microgravity on Apoptosis in Cells, Tissues, and Other Systems In Vivo and In Vitro Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2020 21 9373 10.3390/ijms21249373 PMC7764784 33317046
6. Simonsen L.C. Slaba T.C. Guida P. Rusek A. NASA’s first ground-based Galactic Cosmic Ray Simulator: Enabling a new era in space radiobiology research PLoS Biol. 2020 18 e3000669 10.1371/journal.pbio.3000669 32428004 PMC7236977
7. Barcellos-Hoff M.H. Blakely E.A. Burma S. Fornace A.J. Gerson S. Hlatky L. Kirsch D.G. Luderer U. Shay J. Wang Y. Concepts and challenges in cancer risk prediction for the space radiation environment Life Sci. Sp. Res. 2015 6 92 103 10.1016/j.lssr.2015.07.006 26256633
8. Montminy M. Transcriptionl regulation by ciclic amp Annu. Rev. Biochem. 2003 66 807 822 10.1146/annurev.biochem.66.1.807 9242925
9. Papavassiliou A.G. The CREB/ATF family of transcription factors: Modulation by reversible phosphorylation Anticancer Res. 1994 14 1801 1805 7847813
10. Niu M. Tabari E. Ni P. Su Z. Towards a map of cis-regulatory sequences in the human genome Nucleic Acids Res. 2018 46 5395 5409 10.1093/nar/gky338 29733395 PMC6009671
11. D’Auria F. Centurione L. Centurione M.A. Angelini A. Di Pietro R. Regulation of Cancer Cell Responsiveness to Ionizing Radiation Treatment by Cyclic AMP Response Element Binding Nuclear Transcription Factor Front. Oncol. 2017 7 76 10.3389/fonc.2017.00076 28529924 PMC5418225
12. Lavrovsky Y. Schwartzman M.L. Levere R.D. Kappas A. Abraham N.G. Identification of binding sites for transcription factors NF-kappa B and AP-2 in the promoter region of the human heme oxygenase 1 gene Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 1994 91 5987 5991 10.1073/pnas.91.13.5987 8016102 PMC44122
13. Kogure Y. Kataoka K. Genetic alterations in adult T-cell leukemia/lymphoma Cancer Sci. 2017 108 1719 1725 10.1111/cas.13303 28627735 PMC5581529
14. Cataldi A. Rapino M. Centurione L. Sabatini N. Grifone G. Garaci F. Rana R. NF-kB activation plays an antiapoptotic role in human leukemic K562 cells exposed to ionizing radiation J. Cell. Biochem. 2003 89 956 963 10.1002/jcb.10560 12874830
15. Yu H. Aravindan N. Xu J. Natarajan M. Inter- and intra-cellular mechanism of NF-kB-dependent survival advantage and clonal expansion of radio-resistant cancer cells Cell. Signal. 2017 31 105 111 10.1016/j.cellsig.2017.01.011 28069440
16. Mortezaee K. Najafi M. Farhood B. Ahmadi A. Shabeeb D. Musa A.E. NF-κB targeting for overcoming tumor resistance and normal tissues toxicity J. Cell. Physiol. 2019 234 17187 17204 10.1002/jcp.28504 30912132
17. Obrador E. Salvador R. Villaescusa J.I. Soriano J.M. Estrela J.M. Montoro A. Radioprotection and Radiomitigation: From the Bench to Clinical Practice Biomedicines 2020 8 461 10.3390/biomedicines8110461 PMC7692399 33142986
18. Tang F.R. Loke W.K. Khoo B.C. Low-dose or low-dose-rate ionizing radiation–induced bioeffects in animal models J. Radiat. Res. 2017 58 165 182 10.1093/jrr/rrw120 28077626 PMC5439383
19. Spitz D.R. Azzam E.I. Jian Li J. Gius D. Metabolic oxidation/reduction reactions and cellular responses to ionizing radiation: A unifying concept in stress response biology Cancer Metastasis Rev. 2004 23 311 322 10.1023/B:CANC.0000031769.14728.bc 15197331
20. Chaudhry M.A. Bystander effect: Biological endpoints and microarray analysis Mutat. Res. Mol. Mech. Mutagen. 2006 597 98 112 10.1016/j.mrfmmm.2005.04.023 16414093
21. Fleming A.M. Ding Y. Burrows C.J. Oxidative DNA damage is epigenetic by regulating gene transcription via base excision repair Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2017 114 2604 2609 10.1073/pnas.1619809114 28143930 PMC5347626
22. Tudek B. Winczura A. Janik J. Siomek A. Foksinski M. Oliński R. Involvement of oxidatively damaged DNA and repair in cancer development and aging Am. J. Transl. Res. 2010 2 254 284 20589166 PMC2892402
23. Valko M. Rhodes C.J. Moncol J. Izakovic M. Mazur M. Free radicals, metals and antioxidants in oxidative stress-induced cancer Chem. Biol. Interact. 2006 160 1 40 10.1016/j.cbi.2005.12.009 16430879
24. Tubiana M. Can we reduce the incidence of second primary malignancies occurring after radiotherapy? A critical review Radiother. Oncol. 2009 91 4 15 10.1016/j.radonc.2008.12.016 19201045
25. Bhat A.V. Hora S. Pal A. Jha S. Taneja R. Stressing the (Epi)Genome: Dealing with Reactive Oxygen Species in Cancer Antioxid. Redox Signal. 2018 29 1273 1292 10.1089/ars.2017.7158 28816066
26. Bhutani N. Burns D.M. Blau H.M. DNA Demethylation Dynamics Cell 2011 146 866 872 10.1016/j.cell.2011.08.042 21925312 PMC3236603
27. Church M.C. Fleming A.B. A role for histone acetylation in regulating transcription elongation Transcription 2018 9 225 232 10.1080/21541264.2017.1394423 29219750 PMC6104697
28. Zhang D. Tang Z. Huang H. Zhou G. Cui C. Weng Y. Liu W. Kim S. Lee S. Perez-Neut M. Metabolic regulation of gene expression by histone lactylation Nature 2019 574 575 580 10.1038/s41586-019-1678-1 31645732 PMC6818755
29. Mladenov E. Li F. Zhang L. Klammer H. Iliakis G. Intercellular communication of DNA damage and oxidative status underpin bystander effects Int. J. Radiat. Biol. 2018 94 719 726 10.1080/09553002.2018.1434323 29377786
30. Ilnytskyy Y. Kovalchuk O. Non-targeted radiation effects—An epigenetic connection Mutat. Res. Mol. Mech. Mutagen. 2011 714 113 125 10.1016/j.mrfmmm.2011.06.014 21784089
31. Albanese J. Dainiak N. Ionizing radiation alters Fas antigen ligand at the cell surface and on exfoliated plasma membrane-derived vesicles: Implications for apoptosis and intercellular signaling Radiat. Res. 2000 153 49 61 10.1667/0033-7587(2000)153[0049:IRAFAL]2.0.CO;2 10630977
32. Azzam E.I. de Toledo S.M. Gooding T. Little J.B. Intercellular communication is involved in the bystander regulation of gene expression in human cells exposed to very low fluences of alpha particles Radiat. Res. 1998 150 497 504 10.2307/3579865 9806590
33. Barcellos-Hoff M.H. Brooks A.L. Extracellular signaling through the microenvironment: A hypothesis relating carcinogenesis, bystander effects, and genomic instability Radiat. Res. 2001 156 618 627 10.1667/0033-7587(2001)156[0618:ESTTMA]2.0.CO;2 11604083
34. Nakamura N. A hypothesis: Radiation carcinogenesis may result from tissue injuries and subsequent recovery processes which can act as tumor promoters and lead to an earlier onset of cancer Br. J. Radiol. 2020 93 1 7 10.1259/bjr.20190843 PMC8519633 31860335
35. Ishikawa K. Ishii H. Saito T. DNA Damage-Dependent Cell Cycle Checkpoints and Genomic Stability DNA Cell Biol. 2006 25 406 411 10.1089/dna.2006.25.406 16848682
36. Nakano H. Yonekawa H. Shinohara K. Threshold Level of p53 Required for the Induction of Apoptosis in X-Irradiated MOLT-4 Cells Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. 2007 68 883 891 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2007.03.007 17544001
37. Heylmann D. Ponath V. Kindler T. Kaina B. Comparison of DNA repair and radiosensitivity of different blood cell populations Sci. Rep. 2021 11 2478 10.1038/s41598-021-81058-1 33510180 PMC7843614
38. Portella L. Scala S. Ionizing radiation effects on the tumor microenvironment Semin. Oncol. 2019 46 254 260 10.1053/j.seminoncol.2019.07.003 31383368
39. Matsumoto H. Hayashi S. Hatashita M. Ohnishi K. Shioura H. Ohtsubo T. Kitai R. Ohnishi T. Kano E. Induction of radioresistance by a nitric oxide-mediated bystander effect Radiat. Res. 2001 153 387 396 10.1667/0033-7587(2001)155[0387:IORBAN]2.0.CO;2 11182788
40. González R. Molina-Ruiz F.J. Bárcena J.A. Padilla C.A. Muntané J. Regulation of Cell Survival, Apoptosis, and Epithelial-to-Mesenchymal Transition by Nitric Oxide-Dependent Post-Translational Modifications Antioxid. Redox Signal. 2018 29 1312 1332 10.1089/ars.2017.7072 28795583
41. Coleman C.N. Eke I. Makinde A.Y. Chopra S. Demaria S. Formenti S.C. Martello S. Bylicky M. Mitchell J.B. Aryankalayil M.J. Radiation-induced Adaptive Response: New Potential for Cancer Treatment Clin. Cancer Res. 2020 26 5781 5790 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-20-0572 32554542 PMC7669567
42. Chevalier F. Hamdi D.H. Saintigny Y. Lefaix J.-L. Proteomic overview and perspectives of the radiation-induced bystander effects Mutat. Res. Mutat. Res. 2015 763 280 293 10.1016/j.mrrev.2014.11.008 25795126
43. Suzuki K. Yamashita S. Radiation-Induced Bystander Response: Mechanism and Clinical Implications Adv. Wound Care 2014 3 16 24 10.1089/wound.2013.0468 24761341 PMC3899946
44. Tazawa H. Kagawa S. Fujiwara T. p53 Replacement Therapy for Cancer Recent Results Cancer Res. 2016 209 1 15 10.1007/978-3-319-42934-2_1 28101684
45. Acharya A. Rishi V. Moll J. Vinson C. Experimental identification of homodimerizing B-ZIP families in Homo sapiens J. Struct. Biol. 2006 155 130 139 10.1016/j.jsb.2006.02.018 16725346
46. Zhang L. Yu H. Wang P. Ding Q. Wang Z. Screening of transcription factors with transcriptional initiation activity Gene 2013 531 64 70 10.1016/j.gene.2013.07.054 23933270
47. Sapio L. Salzillo A. Ragone A. Illiano M. Spina A. Naviglio S. Targeting CREB in Cancer Therapy: A Key Candidate or One of Many? An Update Cancers 2020 12 3166 10.3390/cancers12113166 33126560 PMC7693618
48. Mayr B. Montminy M. Transcriptional regulation by the phosphorylation-dependent factor CREB Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 2001 2 599 609 10.1038/35085068 11483993
49. Naqvi S. Martin K.J. Arthur J.S.C. CREB phosphorylation at Ser133 regulates transcription via distinct mechanisms downstream of cAMP and MAPK signalling Biochem. J. 2014 458 469 479 10.1042/BJ20131115 24438093
50. Pregi N. Belluscio L.M. Berardino B.G. Castillo D.S. Cánepa E.T. Oxidative stress-induced CREB upregulation promotes DNA damage repair prior to neuronal cell death protection Mol. Cell. Biochem. 2017 425 9 24 10.1007/s11010-016-2858-z 27816995
51. Kehat I. Hasin T. Aronheim A. The Role of Basic Leucine Zipper Protein-Mediated Transcription in Physiological and Pathological Myocardial Hypertrophy Ann. N. Y. Acad. Sci. 2006 1080 97 109 10.1196/annals.1380.009 17132778
52. Medzhitov R. Horng T. Transcriptional control of the inflammatory response Nat. Rev. Immunol. 2009 9 692 703 10.1038/nri2634 19859064
53. Cai D.H. Wang D. Keefer J. Yeamans C. Hensley K. Friedman A.D. C/EBPα:AP-1 leucine zipper heterodimers bind novel DNA elements, activate the PU.1 promoter and direct monocyte lineage commitment more potently than C/EBPα homodimers or AP-1 Oncogene 2008 27 2772 2779 10.1038/sj.onc.1210940 18026136 PMC2696120
54. Hai T. Curran T. Cross-family dimerization of transcription factors Fos/Jun and ATF/CREB alters DNA binding specificity Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 1991 88 3720 3724 10.1073/pnas.88.9.3720 1827203 PMC51524
55. Wek R.C. Anthony T.G. EXtENDINg β cell survival by UPRegulating ATF4 translation Cell Metab. 2006 4 333 334 10.1016/j.cmet.2006.10.006 17084705
56. Hai T. Hartman M.G. The molecular biology and nomenclature of the activating transcription factor/cAMP responsive element binding family of transcription factors: Activating transcription factor proteins and homeostasis Gene 2001 273 1 11 10.1016/S0378-1119(01)00551-0 11483355
57. Gao S. Gao L. Wang S. Shi X. Yue C. Wei S. Zuo L. Zhang L. Qin X. ATF3 Suppresses Growth and Metastasis of Clear Cell Renal Cell Carcinoma by Deactivating EGFR/AKT/GSK3β/β-Catenin Signaling Pathway Front. Cell Dev. Biol. 2021 9 618987 10.3389/fcell.2021.618987 33816467 PMC8017234
58. Hasim M.S. Nessim C. Villeneuve P.J. Vanderhyden B.C. Dimitroulakos J. Activating Transcription Factor 3 as a Novel Regulator of Chemotherapy Response in Breast Cancer Transl. Oncol. 2018 11 988 998 10.1016/j.tranon.2018.06.001 29940414 PMC6039300
59. Smith S.G. Haynes K.A. Hegde A.N. Degradation of Transcriptional Repressor ATF4 during Long-Term Synaptic Plasticity Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2020 21 8543 10.3390/ijms21228543 33198401 PMC7697267
60. Holmqvist P.-H. Mannervik M. Genomic occupancy of the transcriptional co-activators p300 and CBP Transcription 2013 4 18 23 10.4161/trns.22601 23131664 PMC3644037
61. Attar N. Kurdistani S.K. Exploitation of EP300 and CREBBP Lysine Acetyltransferases by Cancer Cold Spring Harb. Perspect. Med. 2017 7 a026534 10.1101/cshperspect.a026534 27881443 PMC5334244
62. Mink S. Haenig B. Klempnauer K.H. Interaction and functional collaboration of p300 and C/EBPbeta Mol. Cell. Biol. 1997 17 6609 6617 10.1128/MCB.17.11.6609 9343424 PMC232514
63. Burda P. Laslo P. Stopka T. The role of PU.1 and GATA-1 transcription factors during normal and leukemogenic hematopoiesis Leukemia 2010 24 1249 1257 10.1038/leu.2010.104 20520638
64. Johannessen M. Delghandi M.P. Seternes O.M. Johansen B. Moens U. Synergistic activation of CREB-mediated transcription by forskolin and phorbol ester requires PKC and depends on the glutamine-rich Q2 transactivation domain Cell. Signal. 2004 16 1187 1199 10.1016/j.cellsig.2004.03.009 15240013
65. Hoesel B. Schmid J.A. The complexity of NF-κB signaling in inflammation and cancer Mol. Cancer 2013 12 86 10.1186/1476-4598-12-86 23915189 PMC3750319
66. Qin F. Fan Q. Yu P.K.N. Almahi W.A. Kong P. Yang M. Cao W. Nie L. Chen G. Han W. Properties and gene expression profiling of acquired radioresistance in mouse breast cancer cells Ann. Transl. Med. 2021 9 628 10.21037/atm-20-4667 33987326 PMC8106033
67. Sokolova O. Naumann M. NF-κB Signaling in Gastric Cancer Toxins 2017 9 119 10.3390/toxins9040119 PMC5408193 28350359
68. Vallabhapurapu S. Karin M. Regulation and Function of NF-κB Transcription Factors in the Immune System Ann. Rev. Immunol. 2009 27 693 733 10.1146/annurev.immunol.021908.132641 19302050
69. Shoji S. Hanada K. Takahashi M. Watanabe K. Yonemochi M. Tomabechi Y. Shirouzu M. The NF-κB regulator IκBβ exhibits different molecular interactivity and phosphorylation status from IκBα in an IKK2-catalysed reaction FEBS Lett. 2020 594 1532 1549 10.1002/1873-3468.13752 32017069
70. Schmitz M.L. Bacher S. Kracht M. IκB-independent control of NF-κB activity by modulatory phosphorylations Trends Biochem. Sci. 2001 26 186 190 10.1016/S0968-0004(00)01753-9 11246025
71. Mukherjee S.P. Behar M. Birnbaum H.A. Hoffmann A. Wright P.E. Ghosh G. Analysis of the RelA:CBP/p300 Interaction Reveals Its Involvement in NF-κB-Driven Transcription PLoS Biol. 2013 11 e1001647 10.1371/journal.pbio.1001647 24019758 PMC3760798
72. Ono H. Basson M.D. Ito H. P300 inhibition enhances gemcitabine-induced apoptosis of pancreatic cancer Oncotarget 2016 7 51301 51310 10.18632/oncotarget.10117 27322077 PMC5239476
73. Dyson H.J. Wright P.E. Role of Intrinsic Protein Disorder in the Function and Interactions of the Transcriptional Coactivators CREB-binding Protein (CBP) and p300 J. Biol. Chem. 2016 291 6714 6722 10.1074/jbc.R115.692020 26851278 PMC4807259
74. Huante-Mendoza A. Silva-García O. Oviedo-Boyso J. Hancock R.E.W. Baizabal-Aguirre V.M. Peptide IDR-1002 Inhibits NF-κB Nuclear Translocation by Inhibition of IκBα Degradation and Activates p38/ERK1/2–MSK1-Dependent CREB Phosphorylation in Macrophages Stimulated with Lipopolysaccharide Front. Immunol. 2016 7 533 10.3389/fimmu.2016.00533 27933067 PMC5122595
75. Wen A.Y. Sakamoto K.M. Miller L.S. The Role of the Transcription Factor CREB in Immune Function J. Immunol. 2010 185 6413 6419 10.4049/jimmunol.1001829 21084670 PMC5519339
76. Grossman S.R. p300/CBP/p53 interaction and regulation of the p53 response Eur. J. Biochem. 2001 268 2773 2778 10.1046/j.1432-1327.2001.02226.x 11358491
77. Liu H. Deng X. Shyu Y.J. Li J.J. Taparowsky E.J. Hu C.-D. Mutual regulation of c-Jun and ATF2 by transcriptional activation and subcellular localization EMBO J. 2006 25 1058 1069 10.1038/sj.emboj.7601020 16511568 PMC1409714
78. Basu S. Murphy M.E. Genetic Modifiers of the p53 Pathway Cold Spring Harb. Perspect. Med. 2016 6 a026302 10.1101/cshperspect.a026302 27037420 PMC4817744
79. Vaseva A.V. Moll U.M. The mitochondrial p53 pathway Biochim. Biophys. Acta-Bioenerg. 2009 1787 414 420 10.1016/j.bbabio.2008.10.005 PMC2819081 19007744
80. Reinhardt H.C. Schumacher B. The p53 network: Cellular and systemic DNA damage responses in aging and cancer Trends Genet. 2012 28 128 136 10.1016/j.tig.2011.12.002 22265392 PMC4120491
81. Pflaum J. Schlosser S. Müller M. p53 Family and Cellular Stress Responses in Cancer Front. Oncol. 2014 4 285 10.3389/fonc.2014.00285 25374842 PMC4204435
82. Lavin M.F. Gueven N. The complexity of p53 stabilization and activation Cell Death Differ. 2006 13 941 950 10.1038/sj.cdd.4401925 16601750
83. Joruiz S.M. Bourdon J.-C. p53 Isoforms: Key Regulators of the Cell Fate Decision Cold Spring Harb. Perspect. Med. 2016 6 a026039 10.1101/cshperspect.a026039 26801896 PMC4968168
84. Levine A.J. Oren M. The first 30 years of p53: Growing ever more complex Nat. Rev. Cancer 2009 9 749 758 10.1038/nrc2723 19776744 PMC2771725
85. Chasov V. Mirgayazova R. Zmievskaya E. Khadiullina R. Valiullina A. Stephenson Clarke J. Rizvanov A. Baud M.G.J. Bulatov E. Key Players in the Mutant p53 Team: Small Molecules, Gene Editing, Immunotherapy Front. Oncol. 2020 10 1460 10.3389/fonc.2020.01460 32974171 PMC7461930
86. Mantovani F. Collavin L. Del Sal G. Mutant p53 as a guardian of the cancer cell Cell Death Differ. 2019 26 199 212 10.1038/s41418-018-0246-9 30538286 PMC6329812
87. Mogensen T.H. IRF and STAT Transcription Factors—From Basic Biology to Roles in Infection, Protective Immunity, and Primary Immunodeficiencies Front. Immunol. 2019 9 3047 10.3389/fimmu.2018.03047 30671054 PMC6331453
88. Steven A. Friedrich M. Jank P. Heimer N. Budczies J. Denkert C. Seliger B. What turns CREB on? And off? And why does it matter? Cell. Mol. Life Sci. 2020 77 4049 4067 10.1007/s00018-020-03525-8 32347317 PMC7532970
89. Siu Y.-T. Jin D.-Y. CREB—A real culprit in oncogenesis FEBS J. 2007 274 3224 3232 10.1111/j.1742-4658.2007.05884.x 17565603
90. D’Auria F. Di Pietro R. Role of CREB Protein Family Members in Human Haematological Malignancies Cancer Treatment—Conventional and Innovative Approaches InTechOpen London, UK 2013 978-953-51-1098-9 10.5772/55368
91. Cho E.-C. Mitton B. Sakamoto K. CREB and Leukemogenesis Crit. Rev. Oncog. 2011 16 37 46 10.1615/CritRevOncog.v16.i1-2.50 22150306 PMC3243968
92. Cataldi A. Di Giacomo V. Rapino M. Genovesi D. Rana R.A. Cyclic Nucleotide Response Element Binding Protein (CREB) Activation Promotes Survival Signal in Human K562 Erythroleukemia Cells Exposed to Ionising Radiation/Etoposide Combined Treatment J. Radiat. Res. 2006 47 113 120 10.1269/jrr.47.113 16819137
93. Di Nisio C. Sancilio S. Di Giacomo V. Rapino M. Sancillo L. Genovesi D. Di Siena A. Rana R.A. Cataldi A. Di Pietro R. Involvement of cyclic-nucleotide response element-binding family members in the radiation response of Ramos B lymphoma cells Int. J. Oncol. 2016 48 28 36 10.3892/ijo.2015.3238 26573110 PMC4734613
94. Steven A. Seliger B. Control of CREB expression in tumors: From molecular mechanisms and signal transduction pathways to therapeutic target Oncotarget 2016 7 35454 35465 10.18632/oncotarget.7721 26934558 PMC5085243
95. Jean D. Menashe B.-E. Bar-Eli M. Regulation of tumor growth and metastasis of human melanoma by the CREB transcription factor family Mol. Cell. Biochem. 2000 212 19 28 10.1023/A:1007128101751 11108132
96. Sarkar D. Leung E.Y. Baguley B.C. Finlay G.J. Askarian-Amiri M.E. Epigenetic regulation in human melanoma: Past and future Epigenetics 2015 10 103 121 10.1080/15592294.2014.1003746 25587943 PMC4622872
97. Braeuer R.R. Zigler M. Villares G.J. Dobroff A.S. Bar-Eli M. Transcriptional control of melanoma metastasis: The importance of the tumor microenvironment Semin. Cancer Biol. 2011 21 83 88 10.1016/j.semcancer.2010.12.007 21147226 PMC3049824
98. Lee Y.J. Shin K.J. Park S.-A. Park K.S. Park S. Heo K. Seo Y.-K. Noh D.-Y. Ryu S.H. Suh P.-G. G-protein-coupled receptor 81 promotes a malignant phenotype in breast cancer through angiogenic factor secretion Oncotarget 2016 7 70898 70911 10.18632/oncotarget.12286 27765922 PMC5342597
99. Caravatta L. Sancilio S. di Giacomo V. Rana R. Cataldi A. Di Pietro R. PI3-K/Akt-dependent activation of cAMP-response element-binding (CREB) protein in Jurkat T leukemia cells treated with TRAIL J. Cell. Physiol. 2008 214 192 200 10.1002/jcp.21186 17579344
100. Shankar D.B. Cheng J.C. Kinjo K. Federman N. Moore T.B. Gill A. Rao N.P. Landaw E.M. Sakamoto K.M. The role of CREB as a proto-oncogene in hematopoiesis and in acute myeloid leukemia Cancer Cell 2005 7 351 362 10.1016/j.ccr.2005.02.018 15837624
101. Wang Y.W. Chen X. Gao J.W. Zhang H. Ma R.R. Gao Z.H. Gao P. High expression of cAMP responsive element binding protein 1 (CREB1) is associated with metastasis, tumor stage and poor outcome in gastric cancer Oncotarget 2015 6 10646 10657 10.18632/oncotarget.3392 25825983 PMC4496382
102. Abramovitch R. Tavor E. Jacob-Hirsch J. Zeira E. Amariglio N. Pappo O. Rechavi G. Galun E. Honigman A. A Pivotal Role of Cyclic AMP-Responsive Element Binding Protein in Tumor Progression Cancer Res. 2004 64 1338 1346 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-03-2089 14973073
103. Ye C.-G. Yeung J.H.-K. Huang G.-L. Cui P. Wang J. Zou Y. Zhang X.-N. He Z.-W. Cho C.-H. Increased glutathione and mitogen-activated protein kinase phosphorylation are involved in the induction of doxorubicin resistance in hepatocellular carcinoma cells Hepatol. Res. 2013 43 289 299 10.1111/j.1872-034X.2012.01067.x 22882382
104. Belkhiri A. Dar A.A. Zaika A. Kelley M. El-Rifai W. t-Darpp Promotes Cancer Cell Survival by Up-regulation of Bcl2 through Akt-Dependent Mechanism Cancer Res. 2008 68 395 403 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-07-1580 18199533
105. Sang M. Hulsurkar M. Zhang X. Song H. Zheng D. Zhang Y. Li M. Xu J. Zhang S. Ittmann M. GRK3 is a direct target of CREB activation and regulates neuroendocrine differentiation of prostate cancer cells Oncotarget 2016 7 45171 45185 10.18632/oncotarget.9359 27191986 PMC5216714
106. Darrington R.S. Campa V.M. Walker M.M. Bengoa-Vergniory N. Gorrono-Etxebarria I. Uysal-Onganer P. Kawano Y. Waxman J. Kypta R.M. Distinct expression and activity of GSK-3α and GSK-3β in prostate cancer Int. J. Cancer 2012 131 E872 E883 10.1002/ijc.27620 22539113
107. Banerji V. Frumm S.M. Ross K.N. Li L.S. Schinzel A.C. Hahn C.K. Kakoza R.M. Chow K.T. Ross L. Alexe G. The intersection of genetic and chemical genomic screens identifies GSK-3α as a target in human acute myeloid leukemia J. Clin. Investig. 2012 122 935 947 10.1172/JCI46465 22326953 PMC3287215
108. Bang D. Wilson W. Ryan M. Yeh J.J. Baldwin A.S. GSK-3α Promotes Oncogenic KRAS Function in Pancreatic Cancer via TAK1–TAB Stabilization and Regulation of Noncanonical NF-κB Cancer Discov. 2013 3 690 703 10.1158/2159-8290.CD-12-0541 23547054 PMC3679268
109. Park S.-A. Lee J.W. Herbst R.S. Koo J.S. GSK-3α Is a Novel Target of CREB and CREB-GSK-3α Signaling Participates in Cell Viability in Lung Cancer PLoS ONE 2016 11 e0153075 10.1371/journal.pone.0153075 27049759 PMC4822949
110. Cataldi A. Di Giacomo V. Rapino M. Zara S. Rana R.A. Ionizing Radiation Induces Apoptotic Signal Through Protein Kinase Cδ (delta) and Survival Signal Through Akt and Cyclic-Nucleotide Response Element-Binding Protein (CREB) in Jurkat T Cells Biol. Bull. 2009 217 202 212 10.1086/BBLv217n2p202 19875824
111. Katanyutanon S. Wu R. Wang P. The effect of whole-body radiation on blood levels of gastrointestinal peptides in the rat Int. J. Clin. Exp. Med. 2008 1 332 337 19079678 PMC2596326
112. Chen X. Shen B. Xia L. Khaletzkiy A. Wong J.Y.C. Li J.J. Chu D. Activation of nuclear factor κB in radioresistance of TP53-inactive human keratinocytes Cancer Res. 2002 62 1213 1221 11861406
113. Chua J.S. Liew H.P. Guo L. Lane D.P. Tumor-specific signaling to p53 is mimicked by Mdm2 inactivation in zebrafish: Insights from mdm2 and mdm4 mutant zebrafish Oncogene 2015 34 5933 5941 10.1038/onc.2015.57 25746004 PMC4661431
114. Stewart-Ornstein J. Iwamoto Y. Miller M.A. Prytyskach M.A. Ferretti S. Holzer P. Kallen J. Furet P. Jambhekar A. Forrester W.C. p53 dynamics vary between tissues and are linked with radiation sensitivity Nat. Commun. 2021 12 898 10.1038/s41467-021-21145-z 33563973 PMC7873198
115. Qi J.-P. Shao S.-H. Li D.-D. Zhou G.-P. A dynamic model for the p53 stress response networks under ion radiation Amino Acids 2007 33 75 83 10.1007/s00726-006-0454-3 17072789 PMC7088058
116. Qi J. Shao S. Shen Y. Cellular responding DNA damage: An improved modeling of P53 gene regulatory networks under ion radiation (IR) Appl. Math. Comput. 2008 205 73 83 10.1016/j.amc.2008.05.131
117. Macaluso M. Montanari M. Cinti C. Giordano A. Modulation of Cell Cycle Components by Epigenetic and Genetic Events Semin. Oncol. 2005 32 452 457 10.1053/j.seminoncol.2005.07.009 16210085
118. Teufel D.P. Bycroft M. Fersht A.R. Regulation by phosphorylation of the relative affinities of the N-terminal transactivation domains of p53 for p300 domains and Mdm2 Oncogene 2009 28 2112 2118 10.1038/onc.2009.71 19363523 PMC2685776
119. Sokolov M. Neumann R. Changes in gene expression as one of the key mechanisms involved in radiation-induced bystander effect (Review) Biomed. Rep. 2018 9 99 111 10.3892/br.2018.1110 30013775 PMC6036822
120. DeVries-Seimon T.A. Ohm A.M. Humphries M.J. Reyland M.E. Induction of Apoptosis Is Driven by Nuclear Retention of Protein Kinase Cδ J. Biol. Chem. 2007 282 22307 22314 10.1074/jbc.M703661200 17562707
121. Bluwstein A. Kumar N. Léger K. Traenkle J. van Oostrum J. Rehrauer H. Baudis M. Hottiger M.O. PKC signaling prevents irradiation-induced apoptosis of primary human fibroblasts Cell Death Dis. 2013 4 e498 10.1038/cddis.2013.15 23412390 PMC3734826
122. Martelli A.M. Evangelisti C. Nyakern M. Manzoli F.A. Nuclear protein kinase C Biochim. Biophys. Acta 2006 1761 542 551 10.1016/j.bbalip.2006.02.009 16574477
123. Xue Y. Ren J. Gao X. Jin C. Wen L. Yao X. GPS 2.0, a tool to predict kinase-specific phosphorylation sites in hierarchy Mol. Cell. Proteomics 2008 7 1598 1606 10.1074/mcp.M700574-MCP200 18463090 PMC2528073
124. Nickoloff J.A. Sharma N. Taylor L. Clustered DNA Double-Strand Breaks: Biological Effects and Relevance to Cancer Radiotherapy Genes 2020 11 99 10.3390/genes11010099 31952359 PMC7017136
125. Alam M. Kashyap T. Pramanik K.K. Singh A.K. Nagini S. Mishra R. The elevated activation of NFκB and AP-1 is correlated with differential regulation of Bcl-2 and associated with oral squamous cell carcinoma progression and resistance Clin. Oral Investig. 2017 21 2721 2731 10.1007/s00784-017-2074-6 28233171
126. Voboril R. Rychterova V. Voborilova J. Kubecova M. Fanta J. Dvorak J. NF-κB/p65 expression before and after treatment in rectal cancer patients undergoing neoadjuvant (chemo)radiotherapy and surgery: Prognostic marker for disease progression and survival Neoplasma 2016 63 462 470 10.4149/317_151013N525 26952512
127. Basu S. Rosenzweig K.R. Youmell M. Price B.D. The DNA-Dependent Protein Kinase Participates in the Activation of NFκB Following DNA Damage Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 1998 247 79 83 10.1006/bbrc.1998.8741 9636658
128. Madhusoodhanan R. Natarajan M.N. Veeraraghavan J. Herman T.S. Aravindan N. NFκB activity and transcriptional responses in human breast adenocarcinoma cells after single and fractionated irradiation Cancer Biol. Ther. 2009 8 765 773 10.4161/cbt.8.9.8105 19276662
129. Ramos P.M.M. Pezuk J.A. Castro-Gamero A.M. Oliveira H.F. Scrideli C.A. Umezawa K. Tone L.G. Antineoplastic Effects of NF-κB Inhibition by DHMEQ (Dehydroxymethylepoxyquinomicin) Alone and in Co-treatment with Radio-and Chemotherapy in Medulloblastoma Cell Lines Anticancer. Agents Med. Chem. 2018 18 541 549 10.2174/1871520617666171113151335 29141555
130. Samuel T. Fadlalla K. Gales D.N. Putcha B.D. Manne U. Variable NF-κB pathway responses in colon cancer cells treated with chemotherapeutic drugs BMC Cancer 2014 14 599 10.1186/1471-2407-14-599 25134433 PMC4152571
131. Chen M. Singh A.K. Repasky E.A. Highlighting the Potential for Chronic Stress to Minimize Therapeutic Responses to Radiotherapy through Increased Immunosuppression and Radiation Resistance Cancers 2020 12 3853 10.3390/cancers12123853 PMC7767049 33419318
132. Nelson E.C. Cambio A.J. Yang J.C. Ok J.-H. Lara P.N. Evans C.P. Clinical implications of neuroendocrine differentiation in prostate cancer Prostate Cancer Prostatic 2007 10 6 14 10.1038/sj.pcan.4500922 17075603
133. Huang Y.-H. Zhang Y.-Q. Huang J.-T. Neuroendocrine cells of prostate cancer: Biologic functions and molecular mechanisms Asian J. Androl. 2019 21 291 10.4103/aja.aja_128_18 30924452 PMC6498729
134. Liu M. Guyot-Sionnest P. Mechanism of silver(I)-assisted growth of gold nanorods and bipyramids J. Phys. Chem. B 2005 109 22192 22200 10.1021/jp054808n 16853888
135. Deng X. Liu H. Huang J. Cheng L. Keller E.T. Parsons S.J. Hu C.-D. Ionizing Radiation Induces Prostate Cancer Neuroendocrine Differentiation through Interplay of CREB and ATF2: Implications for Disease Progression Cancer Res. 2008 68 9663 9670 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-08-2229 19047143 PMC3100895
136. Di Pietro R. Fang H. Fields K. Miller S. Flora M. Petricoin E.C. Dveksler G. Rana R.A. Grimley P.M. Peroxiredoxin Genes are Not Induced in Myeloid Leukemia Cells Exposed to Ionizing Radiation Int. J. Immunopathol. Pharmacol. 2006 19 517 524 10.1177/039463200601900307 17026836
137. Rhee S.G. Overview on Peroxiredoxin Mol. Cells 2016 39 1 5 10.14348/molcells.2016.2368 26831451 PMC4749868
138. Wang T. Diaz A.J.G. Yen Y. The role of peroxiredoxin II in chemoresistance of breast cancer cells Breast Cancer Targ. Ther. 2014 6 73 80 10.2147/BCTT.S61281 24976757 PMC4041024
139. Alper O. Bergmann-Leitner E.S. Abrams S. Cho-Chung Y.S. Apoptosis, growth arrest and suppression of invasiveness by CRE-decoy oligonucleotide in ovarian cancer cells: Protein kinase A downregulation and cytoplasmic export of CRE-binding proteins Mol. Cell. Biochem. 2001 218 55 63 10.1023/A:1007205205131 11330838
140. Steven A. Leisz S. Massa C. Iezzi M. Lattanzio R. Lamolinara A. Bukur J. Müller A. Hiebl B. Holzhausen H.-J. HER-2/neu Mediates Oncogenic Transformation via Altered CREB Expression and Function Mol. Cancer Res. 2013 11 1462 1477 10.1158/1541-7786.MCR-13-0125 24025972
141. Xie F. Li B.X. Kassenbrock A. Xue C. Wang X. Qian D.Z. Sears R.C. Xiao X. Identification of a Potent Inhibitor of CREB-Mediated Gene Transcription with Efficacious in Vivo Anticancer Activity J. Med. Chem. 2015 58 5075 5087 10.1021/acs.jmedchem.5b00468 26023867 PMC4493896
142. Tsolou A. Liousia M. Kalamida D. Pouliliou S. Giatromanolaki A. Koukourakis M. Inhibition of IKK-NFκB pathway sensitizes lung cancer cell lines to radiation Cancer Biol. Med. 2017 14 293 301 10.20892/j.issn.2095-3941.2017.0049 28884046 PMC5570606
143. Molavi Pordanjani S. Jalal Hosseinimehr S. The Role of NF-κB Inhibitors in Cell Response to Radiation Curr. Med. Chem. 2016 23 3951 3963 10.2174/0929867323666160824162718 27554808
144. Hara K. Takeda A. Tsurugai Y. Saigusa Y. Sanuki N. Eriguchi T. Maeda S. Tanaka K. Numata K. Radiotherapy for Hepatocellular Carcinoma Results in Comparable Survival to Radiofrequency Ablation: A Propensity Score Analysis Hepatology 2019 69 2533 2545 10.1002/hep.30591 30805950
145. Fuchs-Tarlovsky V. Role of antioxidants in cancer therapy Nutrition 2013 29 15 21 10.1016/j.nut.2012.02.014 22784609
146. Impicciatore G. Sancilio S. Miscia S. Di Pietro R. Nutlins and Ionizing Radiation in Cancer Therapy Curr. Pharm. Des. 2010 16 1427 1442 10.2174/138161210791033932 20166982
147. Nayak S.K. Khatik G.L. Narang R. Monga V. Chopra H.K. p53-Mdm2 Interaction Inhibitors as Novel Nongenotoxic Anticancer Agents Curr. Cancer Drug Targ. 2017 18 749 772 10.2174/1568009617666170623111953 28669344
148. Zauli G. Celeghini C. Melloni E. Voltan R. Ongari M. Tiribelli M. di Iasio M.G. Lanza F. Secchiero P. The sorafenib plus nutlin-3 combination promotes synergistic cytotoxicity in acute myeloid leukemic cells irrespectively of FLT3 and p53 status Haematologica 2012 97 1722 1730 10.3324/haematol.2012.062083 22689683 PMC3487447
149. Gu L. Zhu N. Findley H.W. Zhou M. MDM2 antagonist nutlin-3 is a potent inducer of apoptosis in pediatric acute lymphoblastic leukemia cells with wild-type p53 and overexpression of MDM2 Leukemia 2008 22 730 739 10.1038/leu.2008.11 18273046 PMC3477706
150. Zauli G. Voltan R. Bosco R. Melloni E. Marmiroli S. Rigolin G.M. Cuneo A. Secchiero P. Dasatinib Plus Nutlin-3 Shows Synergistic Antileukemic Activity in Both p53 wild-type and p53 mutated B Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemias by Inhibiting the Akt Pathway Clin. Cancer Res. 2011 17 762 770 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-10-2572 21106726
151. Roh J.L. Ko J.H. Moon S.J. Ryu C.H. Choi J.Y. Koch W.M. The p53-reactivating small-molecule RITA enhances cisplatin-induced cytotoxicity and apoptosis in head and neck cancer Cancer Lett. 2012 325 35 41 10.1016/j.canlet.2012.05.020 22634494
152. Wiman K.G. Pharmacological reactivation of mutant p53: From protein structure to the cancer patient Oncogene 2010 29 4245 4252 10.1038/onc.2010.188 20498645
153. Hientz K. Mohr A. Bhakta-Guha D. Efferth T. The role of p53 in cancer drug resistance and targeted chemotherapy Oncotarget 2017 8 8921 8946 10.18632/oncotarget.13475 27888811 PMC5352454