Back

SMAD4 loss drives chromosomal instability during tumourigenesis via translational reprogramming

Milne, J. V.; Wu, K.; Kusnadi, E. P.; Brosda, S.; Fujihara, K. M.; Mustafa, E. H.; Witts, S.; Papastratos, K.; Pechlivanis, M.; Trigos, A. S.; Jana, M. K.; Barbour, A. P.; McMillan, P. J.; Jackson, T. D.; Thio, N.; Feng, Y.; Montgomery, K. G.; Alexander, J.; Wade, M.; Simpson, K. J.; Duong, C. P.; Liu, D. S.; Phillips, W. A.; Furic, L.; Clemons, N. J.

2026-03-25 cancer biology
10.64898/2026.03.23.712291 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Chromosomal instability (CIN), arising from errors in chromosome segregation during cell division, is a hallmark of cancer. Whilst CIN can result from several mitotic defects, the mechanisms that initiate CIN to drive tumourigenesis remain incompletely understood. Here, we show that loss of SMAD4 reprograms translation to induce CIN, resulting in tumour formation. Multi-omics analysis of tumourigenesis models driven by loss of SMAD4 complemented by functional studies demonstrate that loss of SMAD4 in pre-neoplastic cells leads to dysfunctional mitosis and an altered global translation landscape. We show that CDK11B is translationally downregulated in SMAD4-\- cells, and re-expression of the mitosis-specific isoform of this protein (CDK11B-p58) rescues the mitotic defects. Analysis of patient tumours reveals a strong correlation between markers of CIN and SMAD4 status, indicating the clinical relevance of this phenotype. Collectively, we reveal a previously unrecognised role for SMAD4 as a gatekeeper for CIN-mediated tumourigenesis via regulation of translation.

Matching journals

The top 8 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
eLife
● 5828 papers in training set
Top 9%
11.5%
Similar papers in this journal
2
Nature Communications
○ 5641 papers in training set
Top 22%
7.6%
Similar papers in this journal
3
NAR Cancer
◐ 37 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
6.5%
Similar papers in this journal
4
Science Advances
● 1243 papers in training set
Top 3%
6.5%
Similar papers in this journal
5
Oncogene
○ 85 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
5.3%
Similar papers in this journal
6
Cancer Research
● 130 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
4.7%
7
Molecular Cancer Research
● 49 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
4.7%
8
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
● 2444 papers in training set
Top 15%
3.3%
50% of probability mass above
9
British Journal of Cancer
○ 49 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
3.1%
10
Nucleic Acids Research
◐ 1281 papers in training set
Top 6%
3.1%
11
Journal of Clinical Investigation
● 179 papers in training set
Top 2%
3.0%
12
Cancer Discovery
● 66 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
2.5%
13
PLOS Genetics
● 862 papers in training set
Top 5%
2.4%
14
Science Signaling
● 65 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
2.3%
15
JCI Insight
● 277 papers in training set
Top 4%
2.0%
16
Cell Reports
○ 1498 papers in training set
Top 18%
1.8%
17
Life Science Alliance
● 285 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.4%
18
Journal of Biological Chemistry
○ 690 papers in training set
Top 7%
1.3%
19
Clinical Cancer Research
● 64 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.1%
20
The EMBO Journal
○ 309 papers in training set
Top 5%
1.1%
21
Genes & Development
● 90 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.1%
22
EMBO Reports
○ 263 papers in training set
Top 5%
1.1%
23
Cell Death & Disease
147 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.1%
24
Cellular and Molecular Gastroenterology and Hepatology
○ 46 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
1.0%
25
Molecular Oncology
○ 55 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.0%
26
Nature
○ 645 papers in training set
Top 10%
0.9%
27
PLOS ONE
● 5266 papers in training set
Top 57%
0.9%
28
Cancers
○ 213 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.8%
29
Cell Death & Differentiation
○ 48 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.8%
30
EMBO Molecular Medicine
○ 95 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.8%

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.