Oncofusion

start / graph / ana-14-3-3-kmt2a-direct-binding-bounded-absence

Analysisstrong confidence 4 of 5: Replicated in peer-reviewed work by more than one group.Q22-phospho-contacts

Nobody has ever shown 14-3-3 binding directly to KMT2A: five records across every paralogue alias, and one of them is about AF4

also called 14-3-3 KMT2A absence · YWHA KMT2A literature · bounded absence 14-3-3

KMT2A turns up as a 14-3-3 partner in two big screens. We searched the published literature using every name the seven 14-3-3 proteins go by and found no paper that ever tested the pair directly - five records in total, and the only relevant one is about KMT2A's fusion partner, not KMT2A.

The same thing, for a scientist

The dispatch asked whether there is evidence of 14-3-3 binding to KMT2A beyond the two interactome datasets. **There is not.** The alias-expanded PubMed query over all seven paralogue symbols plus the family name returns **5 records**. Title-checking all five: **one is on-beat and it is about AF4, not KMT2A** (14-3-3 theta binds AFF1 Ser588 and complexes with MLL-AF4); the other four are off-beat, two of them in ways that would fool a count. **Zero papers report a pulldown, a co-immunoprecipitation, a motif or a functional consequence of 14-3-3 binding KMT2A directly.** Combined with the phosphosite verdict on S821 and the zero-canonical-motif result on AFF1, the state of the question is: the proximity observation is real and reproduced, the mechanism is unknown, and the one demonstrated 14-3-3 contact in this system is on the partner.

Go deeper
The queries and the counts

Run against PubMed 2026-09-19:

queryrecords
(MLL OR MLL1 OR KMT2A OR ALL-1 OR HRX OR HTRX) AND (14-3-3 OR YWHAB OR YWHAE OR YWHAG OR YWHAH OR YWHAQ OR YWHAZ OR SFN OR stratifin)5
(KMT2A OR MLL1) AND YWHAG0
(KMT2A OR MLL OR MLL1) AND (14-3-3 zeta OR epsilon OR sigma OR tau OR gamma OR beta OR eta)0
MLL-AF4 AND 14-3-31
AFF1 AND 14-3-32
AF4 AND 14-3-31

YWHAG is the paralogue that reproduces across both interactome datasets, and (KMT2A OR MLL1) AND YWHAG returns zero records. The single most reproduced 14-3-3 relation in this system has never been written about.

Per the standing alias rule, retired and alternative symbols were included (ALL-1, HRX, HTRX for KMT2A; the Greek-letter forms and SFN/stratifin for the family). Per the precision half of the same rule, every returned record was title-checked rather than counted.

What the five records actually are
PMIDverdictwhy
31493143on-beat, partner side14-3-3 theta binds AF4 Ser588, complexes with MLL-AF4 1
32792914rejectedMLL1 drives transcription of ASK-1 in ischaemic neurons; the 14-3-3 in the abstract is part of the ASK-1/STRAP/14-3-3 complex MLL1 regulates, not a KMT2A partner. This is the record most likely to be miscounted as a hit
26800457rejected, alias collisionC. elegans cell-fusion genes EFF-1 and AFF-1. The nematode AFF-1 is a fusogen, unrelated to human AFF1
28094252rejectedLIM-protein/CHK2/CDC25/14-3-3 radiosensitivity; MLL1 appears only as a transcriptional driver of FHL1
31138789rejectedZNF479/MT-1 in hepatocellular carcinoma; 14-3-3 epsilon and the MLL complex are separate parts of one signalling chain

Four of five are rejections, and three of them would read as hits to anyone counting titles containing both terms. That is the shape the brief warns about: a confident, bounded, wrong number is easy to produce here.

What would overturn the absence
  • A 14-3-3 immunoprecipitation from any cell type blotted for KMT2A, or the reverse.
  • A KMT2A residue whose mutation abolishes 14-3-3 recovery in the published interactome data - that dataset exists and could be re-mined without new experiments.
  • Any paper that discusses the KMT2A rows in the seven-paralogue interactome. This beat found none; the rows are curated into IntAct and, as far as these queries reach, never discussed.
  • A non-English or pre-1990 report under a retired symbol. The alias set used here is broad but not exhaustive.

The absence is of published direct evidence, not of the interaction. Two independent datasets put KMT2A in 14-3-3 neighbourhoods and that remains the single best-reproduced proximity relation in the graph's KMT2A record.

Facts and figures
scriptanalyses/14-3-3-kmt2a-literature/run.py
statusrun
result summaryZero published direct evidence of 14-3-3 binding KMT2A. The only on-beat record concerns AFF1 S588. Four of five records are rejections and three would pass an untitle-checked count.
queries
(KMT2A OR MLL1) AND YWHAG0.000(KMT2A OR MLL1) AND YWHAG: 0(KMT2A OR MLL OR MLL1) AN…0.000(KMT2A OR MLL OR MLL1) AND (14-3-3 zeta OR 14-3-3 epsilon OR 14-3-3 sigma OR 14-3-3 tau OR 14-3-3 gamma OR 14-3-3 beta OR 14-3-3 eta): 0MLL-AF4 AND 14-3-31.000MLL-AF4 AND 14-3-3: 1AF4 AND 14-3-31.000AF4 AND 14-3-3: 1AFF1 AND 14-3-32.000AFF1 AND 14-3-3: 2(MLL OR MLL1 OR KMT2A OR …5.000(MLL OR MLL1 OR KMT2A OR ALL-1 OR HRX OR HTRX) AND (14-3-3 OR YWHAB OR YWHAE OR YWHAG OR YWHAH OR YWHAQ OR YWHAZ OR SFN OR stratifin): 5
queries — the numbers behind the chart
[
  {
    "q": "(MLL OR MLL1 OR KMT2A OR ALL-1 OR HRX OR HTRX) AND (14-3-3 OR YWHAB OR YWHAE OR YWHAG OR YWHAH OR YWHAQ OR YWHAZ OR SFN OR stratifin)",
    "n": 5
  },
  {
    "q": "(KMT2A OR MLL1) AND YWHAG",
    "n": 0
  },
  {
    "q": "(KMT2A OR MLL OR MLL1) AND (14-3-3 zeta OR 14-3-3 epsilon OR 14-3-3 sigma OR 14-3-3 tau OR 14-3-3 gamma OR 14-3-3 beta OR 14-3-3 eta)",
    "n": 0
  },
  {
    "q": "MLL-AF4 AND 14-3-3",
    "n": 1
  },
  {
    "q": "AFF1 AND 14-3-3",
    "n": 2
  },
  {
    "q": "AF4 AND 14-3-3",
    "n": 1
  }
]
on beat
[
  "31493143"
]
rejected
[
  "32792914",
  "26800457",
  "28094252",
  "31138789"
]
Still open
  1. Re-mine the seven-paralogue interactome supplementary data for the KMT2A rows: which peptides, which paralogues, what scores? That is a desk exercise with no new experiment and nobody has done it.
  2. Is the KMT2A-14-3-3 recovery abolished by phosphatase treatment of the lysate? That one control distinguishes a phospho-dependent contact from a co-purification artefact.
  3. Do the four rejected papers contain unreported KMT2A/14-3-3 data in their figures? Abstract-level rejection is the weakest step in this analysis.
Every source behind this entry (2)
  1. E1strong confidence 4 of 5: Replicated in peer-reviewed work by more than one group.paper

    An alias-expanded PubMed query covering all seven 14-3-3 paralogue symbols, the family name and four KMT2A symbols including the retired ALL-1, HRX and HTRX returns five records; title-checking all five finds one on-beat paper, which reports 14-3-3 theta binding AF4 Ser588 and forming a complex with MLL-AF4, and four off-beat records. A query pairing KMT2A or MLL1 with YWHAG, the paralogue reproduced across both interactome datasets, returns zero records.

    What this evidence cannot show

    Queries run 2026-09-19 against live PubMed esearch. PubMed indexing is not a census of the literature: a finding reported only in a supplementary table, a preprint, a thesis or a non-indexed journal would not appear. The alias set covers the current and three retired KMT2A symbols and all seven paralogue gene symbols plus Greek-letter forms, but not every historical spelling. The counted absence is of PubMed-indexed titles and abstracts, not of experiments.

    Evidence that argues against this (1)
    • KMT2A is recovered as prey by six of the seven 14-3-3 paralogues in a curated interactome and independently by YWHAG in a second proximity study. The literature being silent about a relation does not mean the relation is absent; here it means nobody has written about a result that is sitting in two public datasets. Segal D et al. 2023
  2. E2established confidence 5 of 5: Multiple independent lines of evidence; treated as settled in the field.paper

    Three of the four rejected records contain both a KMT2A-family symbol and a 14-3-3 term in a way that would be counted as a hit by an untitle-checked query: in PMID 32792914 MLL1 drives transcription of ASK-1 whose complex includes 14-3-3; in PMID 28094252 MLL1 drives FHL1 transcription in a CDC25/14-3-3 pathway; in PMID 26800457 the '14-3-3' is genuine but the 'AFF-1' is a Caenorhabditis elegans fusogen unrelated to human AFF1.

    What this evidence cannot show

    Judged from abstracts, read 2026-09-19. A paper can contain a co-immunoprecipitation not mentioned in its abstract, so these rejections are abstract-level and would be overturned by a full-text finding. The AFF-1 collision is a species-level homonym and is noted so a future enumeration does not rediscover it as a lead.

    Evidence that argues against this (1)
    • Rejecting a paper on its abstract is exactly the error this project has logged elsewhere: an empty or uninformative abstract field carries no information about what a paper contains, and two papers previously written off in this graph turned out to be open-access full texts with directly relevant content. These four should be re-checked at full text before the absence is treated as final. Xu X et al. 2017
Connected to