Janouskova, HanaTekle, Geniver ElBellini, ElisaUdeshi, Namrata D.Rinaldi, AnnaUlbricht, AnnaBernasocchi, TizianoCivenni, GianlucaLosa, MarcoSvinkina, TanyaBielski, Craig M.Kryukov, Gregory V.Cascione, LucianoNapoli, SaraEnchev, Radoslav I.Mutch, David G.Carney, Michael E.Berchuck, AndrewWinterhoff, Boris J.N.Broaddus, Russell R.Schraml, PeterMoch, HolgerBertoni, FrancescoCatapano, Carlo V.Peter, MatthiasCarr, Steven A.Garraway, LeviWild, Peter J.Theurillat, Jean-Philippe P.2018-03-202017Janouskova, H., G. E. Tekle, E. Bellini, N. D. Udeshi, A. Rinaldi, A. Ulbricht, T. Bernasocchi, et al. 2017. “Opposing effects of cancer type-specific SPOP mutations on BET protein degradation and sensitivity to BET inhibitors.” Nature medicine 23 (9): 1046-1054. doi:10.1038/nm.4372. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nm.4372.http://nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:35014839It is generally assumed that recurrent mutations within a given cancer driver gene elicit similar drug responses. Cancer genome studies have identified recurrent but divergent missense mutations in the substrate recognition domain of the ubiquitin ligase adaptor SPOP in endometrial and prostate cancer. Their therapeutic implications remain incompletely understood. Here, we analyzed changes in the ubiquitin landscape induced by endometrial cancer-associated SPOP mutations and identified BRD2, BRD3 and BRD4 proteins (BETs) as SPOP-CUL3 substrates that are preferentially degraded by endometrial SPOP mutants. The resulting reduction of BET protein levels sensitized cancer cells to BET inhibitors. Conversely, prostate cancer-specific SPOP mutants impaired degradation of BETs, promoting resistance against their pharmacologic inhibition. These results uncover an oncogenomics paradox, whereby mutations within the same domain evoke opposing drug susceptibilities. Specifically, we provide a molecular rationale for the use of BET inhibitors to treat endometrial but not prostate cancer patients with SPOP mutations.en-USJournal Article2018-03-2010.1038/nm.4372