‘SIRT8’ expressed in thyroid cancer is actually SIRT7 (original) (raw)

Br J Cancer. 2002 Dec 2; 87(12): 1479.

R Frye

Pittsburgh VA Med Center, Pathology (132L-U), University Drive C, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, PA 15240, USA

*Pittsburgh VA Med Center, Pathology (132L-U), University Drive C, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, PA 15240, USA. E-mail: ude.ttip@10eyrf

This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material.If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.

Abstract

de Nigris et al (2002) claim to have isolated a cDNA prepared from thyroid papillary carcinoma that represents a novel gene of the silent information regulator (SIR) protein family, which the authors designated SIRT8. In fact, examination of their data reveals that the cDNA is derived from the previously characterised SIRT7 sequence (Frye, 2000). Moreover, the first 300 bases at the 5′ end of the supposedly novel cDNA depicted in Figure 1B of their article is none other than a sequence of the cloning vector, pBlue scriptIISK. The bases from 323 onward appear to be the SIRT7 sequence with some scattered sequencing errors. The small block of predicted amino-acids around codon 221 that diverge from SIRT7 can be accounted for by two 1-base frame shifts that are probably sequence artifacts. The ‘SIRT8’ sequence WYTGAGISTAASIPDYRGP is actually identical to the SIRT7 deposited in GenBank (NM_016538) which the authors incorrectly reproduced in Figure 1C of their article.

One must further doubt the validity of the authors' statement on ‘the homology of SIR-T8 with the telomerase proteins' because, while both types of protein have been implicated in ageing, they do not share structural homology or similar molecular functions. It is regrettable that neither the authors nor the editorial review process identified these errors.

References

de NigrisFCeruttiJMorelliCCalifanoDChiariottiLVigliettoGSantelliGFuscoA2002Isolation of a SIR-like gene, SIR-T8, that is overexpressed in thyroid carcinoma cell lines and tissues Br J Cancer 86917923 [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
FryeRA2000Phylogenetic classification of prokaryotic and eukaryotic Sir2-like proteins Biochem Biophys Res Commun 273793798 [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from British Journal of Cancer are provided here courtesy of Cancer Research UK