Ribosomal protein genes are among the most highly expressed genes in most cell types. Their products are generally essential for ribosome synthesis, which is the cornerstone for cell growth and proliferation. Many cellular resources are dedicated to producing ribosomal proteins and thus this process needs to be regulated in ways that carefully balance the supply of nascent ribosomal proteins with the demand for new ribosomes. Ribosomal protein genes have classically been viewed as a uniform interconnected regulon regulated in eukaryotic cells by target of rapamycin and protein kinase A pathway in response to changes in growth conditions and/or cellular status. However, recent literature depicts a more complex picture in which the amount of ribosomal proteins produced varies between genes in response to two overlapping regulatory circuits. The first includes the classical general ribosome‐producing program and the second is a gene‐specific feature responsible for fine‐tuning the amount of ribosomal proteins produced from each individual ribosomal gene. Unlike the general pathway that is mainly controlled at the level of transcription and translation, this specific regulation of ribosomal protein genes is largely achieved through changes in pre‐mRNA splicing efficiency and mRNA stability. By combining general and specific regulation, the cell can coordinate ribosome production, while allowing functional specialization and diversity. Here we review the many ways ribosomal protein genes are regulated, with special focus on the emerging role of posttranscriptional regulatory events in fine‐tuning the expression of ribosomal protein genes and its role in controlling the potential variation in ribosome functions.This article is categorized under: Translation > Ribosome Biogenesis Translation > Ribosome Structure/Function Translation > Translation Regulation

Breast cancer is the most common cause of cancer death among women under age 50 years, so it is imperative to identify molecular markers to improve diagnosis and prognosis of this disease. Here, we present a new approach for the identification of breast cancer markers that does not measure gene expression but instead uses the ratio of alternatively spliced mRNAs as its indicator. Using a high-throughput reverse transcription-PCR–based system for splicing annotation, we monitored the alternative splicing profiles of 600 cancer-associated genes in a panel of 21 normal and 26 cancerous breast tissues. We validated 41 alternative splicing events that significantly differed in breast tumors relative to normal breast tissues. Most cancer-specific changes in splicing that disrupt known protein domains support an increase in cell proliferation or survival consistent with a functional role for alternative splicing in cancer. In a blind screen, a classifier based on the 12 best cancer-associated splicing events correctly identified cancer tissues with 96% accuracy. Moreover, a subset of these alternative splicing events could order tissues according to histopathologic grade, and 5 markers were validated in a further blind set of 19 grade 1 and 19 grade 3 tumor samples. These results provide a simple alternative for the classification of normal and cancerous breast tumor tissues and underscore the putative role of alternative splicing in the biology of cancer. [Cancer Res 2008;68(22):9525–31]

Alternative splicing provides a critical and flexible layer of regulation intervening in many biological processes to regulate the diversity of proteins and impact cell phenotype. To identify alternative splicing differences that distinguish epithelial from mesenchymal tissues, we have investigated hundreds of cassette exons using a high-throughput reverse transcription-PCR (RT-PCR) platform. Extensive changes in splicing were noted between epithelial and mesenchymal tissues in both human colon and ovarian tissues, with many changes from mostly one splice variant to predominantly the other. Remarkably, many of the splicing differences that distinguish normal mesenchymal from normal epithelial tissues matched those that differentiate normal ovarian tissues from ovarian cancer. Furthermore, because splicing profiling could classify cancer cell lines according to their epithelial/mesenchymal characteristics, we used these cancer cell lines to identify regulators for these specific splicing signatures. By knocking down 78 potential splicing factors in five cell lines, we provide an extensive view of the complex regulatory landscape associated with the epithelial and mesenchymal states, thus revealing that RBFOX2 is an important driver of mesenchymal tissue-specific splicing.