DOCSLIB.ORG

ATR-Chk1 Activation Mitigates Replication Stress Caused by Mismatch Repair-Dependent Processing of DNA Damage

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
ATR-Chk1 Activation Mitigates Replication Stress Caused by Mismatch Repair-Dependent Processing of DNA Damage ATR-Chk1 activation mitigates replication stress caused by mismatch repair-dependent processing of DNA damage Dipika Guptaa,b, Bo Lina,b,1, Ann Cowanc,d, and Christopher D. Heinena,b,2 aNeag Comprehensive Cancer Center, UConn Health, Farmington, CT 06030-3101; bCenter for Molecular Oncology, UConn Health, Farmington, CT 06030- 3101; cR. D. Berlin Center for Cell Analysis and Modeling, UConn Health, Farmington, CT 06030; and dDepartment of Molecular Biology and Biophysics, UConn Health, Farmington, CT 06030 Edited by Richard D. Kolodner, Ludwig Institute for Cancer Research, La Jolla, CA, and approved December 29, 2017 (received for review December 1, 2017) The mismatch repair pathway (MMR) is essential for removing that the cells continue into a second cell cycle is not clear. Per- DNA polymerase errors, thereby maintaining genomic stability. sistent single-stranded gaps remain after MMR activity that are Loss of MMR function increases mutation frequency and is proposed to become double-strand breaks (DSB) in the next associated with tumorigenesis. However, how MMR is executed S phase, causing the G2 arrest (5). A second model suggests that at active DNA replication forks is unclear. This has important im- the MMR proteins recognize MeG/T and directly recruit proteins plications for understanding how MMR repairs O6-methylguanine/ involved in signaling cell cycle arrest such as Ataxia telangiec- thymidine (MeG/T) mismatches created upon exposure to DNA tasia and Rad3-related (ATR), Ataxia telangiectasia mutated alkylating agents. If MeG/T lesion recognition by MMR initiates (ATM), and the checkpoint kinases Chk1 and Chk2 (3). As the mismatch excision, the reinsertion of a mismatched thymidine dur- MMR proteins respond to MeG/T in the first S phase, it is un- ing resynthesis could initiate futile repair cycles. One consequence clear why cell cycle arrest does not occur until the second cell of futile repair cycles might be a disruption of overall DNA repli- cycle after MeG/T formation (6). Improved understanding of the cation in the affected cell. Herein, we show that in MMR-proficient cellular response in the first S phase following MMR recognition HeLa cancer cells, treatment with a DNA alkylating agent slows S of MeG/T lesions may help resolve these questions. phase progression, yet cells still progress into the next cell cycle. In Interestingly, we recently reported that human pluripotent the first S phase following treatment, they activate ataxia telan- stem cells (hPSCs) underwent extensive apoptosis within the first giectasia and Rad3-related (ATR)-Checkpoint Kinase 1 (Chk1) sig- S phase after alkylation damage (7). This immediate response naling, which limits DNA damage, while inhibition of ATR kinase appeared to conflict with the futile cycle model leading us to activity accelerates DNA damage accumulation and sensitivity to consider whether direct signaling was occurring. However, we the DNA alkylating agent. We also observed that exposure of noted that hPSCs failed to activate Chk1 or Chk2, which are key human embryonic stem cells to alkylation damage severely com- regulators of the MMR-dependent damage response in human promised DNA replication in a MMR-dependent manner. These cancer cell lines. An earlier study suggested that hPSCs may lack cells fail to activate the ATR-Chk1 signaling axis, which may limit a replication stress response and, as a result, are extremely their ability to handle replication stress. Accordingly, they accu- sensitive to replication fork perturbations (8). We therefore hy- mulate double-strand breaks and undergo immediate apoptosis. pothesized that MMR processing of MeG/T lesions might be Our findings implicate the MMR-directed response to alkylation damage as a replication stress inducer, suggesting that repeated Significance MMR processing of mismatches may occur that can disrupt S phase progression. Mismatch repair pathway (MMR)-mediated mismatch correc- DNA mismatch repair | DNA replication stress | ATR-Chk1 signaling | tion has largely been recapitulated in the test tube using intra-S phase checkpoint | human embryonic stem cells mismatch-containing DNA substrates. However, a long- standing question remains: How does MMR respond to MeG/T mismatches caused by alkylation damage, and does this affect he DNA mismatch repair (MMR) pathway repairs mis- cellular replication forks? We demonstrate that MMR-mediated Tmatches made by the DNA polymerase and, thus, is essential processing of MeG/T mismatches creates replication stress, for genomic stability (1). Germ-line mutations in MMR genes perhaps due to iterative futile repair cycles that affects DNA cause the colorectal cancer predisposition syndrome Lynch syn- – – replication. Activation of an ensuing ATR-Chk1 mediated rep- CELL BIOLOGY drome, while 10 40% of spontaneous colorectal and other can- lication stress response becomes important for mitigating DNA cers also lose MMR function (2). In addition to repairing damage accumulation and prolonging cell survival. This study mismatches, MMR also plays a role in the cellular response to provides evidence that MMR processing may disturb replica- certain forms of DNA damage (3). For example, treatment of tion forks encountering alkylation damage, which has impor- MMR-proficient cells with SN1 DNA alkylating agents leads to tant implications for sensitivity to DNA alkylating agents and decreased growth and increased cell death compared with for the MMR mechanism. MMR-deficient cells (3). How MMR contributes to this response 6 remains unresolved. SN1 alkylating agents create O -methyl- Author contributions: D.G. and C.D.H. designed research; D.G., B.L., and C.D.H. performed Me guanine ( G) lesions, which get mispaired with thymidine in S research; D.G., B.L., A.C., and C.D.H. analyzed data; and D.G. and C.D.H. wrote the paper. Me phase. MMR proteins respond to G/T mismatches immedi- The authors declare no conflict of interest. ately; however, these cells arrest in the G2 phase of the sub- This article is a PNAS Direct Submission. sequent cell cycle (3). Two models have been proposed to Published under the PNAS license. explain these results. One model suggests that recognition of 1Present address: Department of Pathology, SUNY Downstate Medical Center, Brooklyn, Me G/T by the MMR proteins triggers excision of the thymidine- NY 11203. Me containing strand (3). However, persistence of the G on the 2To whom correspondence should be addressed. Email: [email protected]. Me template strand leads to G/T resynthesis, initiating iterative This article contains supporting information online at www.pnas.org/lookup/suppl/doi:10. futile repair cycles (4). How these futile cycles are resolved such 1073/pnas.1720355115/-/DCSupplemental. www.pnas.org/cgi/doi/10.1073/pnas.1720355115 PNAS | February 13, 2018 | vol. 115 | no. 7 | 1523–1528 Downloaded by guest on September 29, 2021 impeding DNA replication progression, resulting in replication stress that would be detrimental to hPSCs. If true, then MMR processing of MeG/T lesions might also induce a replication stress checkpoint in transformed cell models capable of evoking such a response. In this study, we used human embryonic stem cells (hESCs) and HeLa cervical cancer cells to explore the effect of MMR processing of MeG/T lesions on DNA replication. We find that alkylation damage disrupts DNA replication and produces hallmarks of replication stress in hESCs, while in transformed cells, an S phase checkpoint is activated, which prevents repli- cation fork collapse and prolongs survival. Results MMR Triggers Rapid Apoptosis in hESCs in Response to MeG Lesions. We previously reported that hPSCs treated with the DNA N N′ N alkylating agent -methyl- -nitro- -nitrosoguanidine (MNNG) Fig. 1. MMR-directed repair in MNNG-treated hESCs causes accumulation undergo rapid apoptosis within the first cell cycle (7). To confirm of ssDNA gaps. (A) WT and KO1 hESCs with BrdU-labeled parental DNA the MMR dependence of this response, we used Clustered treated with 2 μM MNNG for 2 h. ssDNA gap formation was assessed 6 h later Regularly Interspaced Short Palindromic Repeats (CRISPR)/ by immunostaining with BrdU antibody under nondenaturing conditions. Cas9-mediated gene targeting to disrupt both alleles of the en- Nuclei are counterstained with DAPI. Experiments were performed in trip- dogenous MMR gene MSH2 in H1 hESCs. The knockout cells licate. (Scale bars: 10 μm.) (B) Quantitation of average nuclear BrdU intensity in MNNG-treated WT and KO1 hESCs from one representative experiment lost MSH2 protein expression and displayed a decrease in its > < – obligate partner MSH6 (9) (Fig. S1A). MMR-proficient wild- (n 190); * and **, P 0.0001, Mann Whitney test. type (WT) hESCs treated for 20 h with MNNG displayed a large fraction of cells with sub-G1 DNA content in cell cycle profiles as MNNG exposure (16). To test this, we treated cells with MNNG in well as increased cleaved-caspase-3 staining, both indicative of ap- the presence of a thymidine analog 5-ethynyl-2′-deoxyuridine B C optotic induction (Fig. S1 and ). In contrast, this response was (EdU) to mark actively replicating regions. We found γH2AX largely absent in two independent MSH2 knockout clones (KO1, B C foci were observed only in cells that incorporated EdU during KO2) (Fig. S1 and ). To assess if this result was in response to MNNG exposure mirroring DNA replication patterns (Fig. 2B). MeG lesions, MNNG sensitivity was examined in the presence or O6 6 Notably, although damage accumulated at sites of DNA replica- absence of -Benzylguanine (O BG), a pseudosubstrate-based tion, MNNG treatment markedly reduced total EdU incorporation inhibitor of methylguanine methyltransferase (MGMT), which Me in WT hESCs indicating that overall DNA replication was severely normally removes G lesions from DNA (10). In the presence C A 6 compromised (Fig. 2 and Fig. S3 ). These responses were of O BG, MNNG induced a dose-dependent decrease in cell MMR dependent, as MNNG-treated KO1 and KO2 cells accu- survival of WT hESCs while viability of KO1 cells was only mulated fewer γH2AX foci with less disruption to DNA repli- modestly affected (Fig.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • DNA Damage Checkpoint Dynamics Drive Cell Cycle Phase Transitions
    bioRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/137307; this version posted August 4, 2017. The copyright holder for this preprint (which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted bioRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made available under aCC-BY 4.0 International license. DNA damage checkpoint dynamics drive cell cycle phase transitions Hui Xiao Chao1,2, Cere E. Poovey1, Ashley A. Privette1, Gavin D. Grant3,4, Hui Yan Chao1, Jeanette G. Cook3,4, and Jeremy E. Purvis1,2,4,† 1Department of Genetics 2Curriculum for Bioinformatics and Computational Biology 3Department of Biochemistry and Biophysics 4Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill 120 Mason Farm Road Chapel Hill, NC 27599-7264 †Corresponding Author: Jeremy Purvis Genetic Medicine Building 5061, CB#7264 120 Mason Farm Road Chapel Hill, NC 27599-7264 [email protected] ABSTRACT DNA damage checkpoints are cellular mechanisms that protect the integrity of the genome during cell cycle progression. In response to genotoxic stress, these checkpoints halt cell cycle progression until the damage is repaired, allowing cells enough time to recover from damage before resuming normal proliferation. Here, we investigate the temporal dynamics of DNA damage checkpoints in individual proliferating cells by observing cell cycle phase transitions following acute DNA damage. We find that in gap phases (G1 and G2), DNA damage triggers an abrupt halt to cell cycle progression in which the duration of arrest correlates with the severity of damage. However, cells that have already progressed beyond a proposed “commitment point” within a given cell cycle phase readily transition to the next phase, revealing a relaxation of checkpoint stringency during later stages of certain cell cycle phases.
    [Show full text]
  • Cell Cycle Arrest and DNA Endoreduplication Following P21waf1/Cip1 Expression
    Oncogene (1998) 17, 1691 ± 1703 1998 Stockton Press All rights reserved 0950 ± 9232/98 $12.00 http://www.stockton-press.co.uk/onc Cell cycle arrest and DNA endoreduplication following p21Waf1/Cip1 expression Stewart Bates, Kevin M Ryan, Andrew C Phillips and Karen H Vousden ABL Basic Research Program, NCI-FCRDC, Building 560, Room 22-96, West 7th Street, Frederick, Maryland 21702-1201, USA p21Waf1/Cip1 is a major transcriptional target of p53 and there are an increasing number of regulatory mechan- has been shown to be one of the principal mediators of isms that serve to inhibit cdk activity. Primary amongst the p53 induced G1 cell cycle arrest. We show that in these is the expression of cdk inhibitors (CDKIs) that addition to the G1 block, p21Waf1/Cip1 can also contribute can bind to and inhibit cyclin/cdk complexes (Sherr to a delay in G2 and expression of p21Waf1/Cip1 gives rise and Roberts, 1996). These fall into two classes, the to cell cycle pro®les essentially indistinguishable from INK family which bind to cdk4 and cdk6 and inhibit those obtained following p53 expression. Arrest of cells complex formation with D-cyclins, and the p21Waf1/Cip1 in G2 likely re¯ects an inability to induce cyclin B1/cdc2 family that bind to cyclin/cdk complexes and inhibit kinase activity in the presence of p21Waf1/Cip1, although the kinase activity. inecient association of p21Waf1/Cip1 and cyclin B1 The p21Waf1/Cip1 family of CDKIs include p21Waf1/Cip1, suggests that the mechanism of inhibition is indirect. p27 and p57 and are broad range inhibitors of cyclin/ Cells released from an S-phase block were not retarded cdk complexes (Gu et al., 1993; Harper et al., 1993; in their ability to progress through S-phase by the Xiong et al., 1993; Firpo et al., 1994; Polyak et al., presence of p21Waf1/Cip1, despite ecient inhibition of 1994; Toyoshima and Hunter, 1994; Lee et al., 1995; cyclin E, A and B1 dependent kinase activity, suggesting Matsuoka et al., 1995).
    [Show full text]
  • Molecular Anatomy and Regulation of a Stable Replisome at a Paused Eukaryotic DNA Replication Fork
    Downloaded from genesdev.cshlp.org on September 29, 2021 - Published by Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press Molecular anatomy and regulation of a stable replisome at a paused eukaryotic DNA replication fork Arturo Calzada,1,2,3 Ben Hodgson,1,3 Masato Kanemaki,1 Avelino Bueno,2 and Karim Labib1,4 1Paterson Institute for Cancer Research, Christie Hospital NHS Trust, Manchester M20 4BX, United Kingdom; 2Cancer Research Institute, University of Salamanca/CSIC, 37007 Salamanca, Spain Eukaryotic cells regulate the progression and integrity of DNA replication forks to maintain genomic stability and couple DNA synthesis to other processes. The budding yeast proteins Mrc1 and Tof1 associate with the putative MCM–Cdc45 helicase and limit progression of the replisome when nucleotides are depleted, and the checkpoint kinases Mec1 and Rad53 stabilize such stalled forks and prevent disassembly of the replisome. Forks also pause transiently during unperturbed chromosome replication, at sites where nonnucleosomal proteins bind DNA tightly. We describe a method for inducing prolonged pausing of forks at protein barriers assembled at unique sites on a yeast chromosome, allowing us to examine for the first time the effects of pausing upon replisome integrity. We show that paused forks maintain an intact replisome that contains Mrc1, Tof1, MCM–Cdc45, GINS, and DNA polymerases ␣ and ␧ and that recruits the Rrm3 helicase. Surprisingly, pausing does not require Mrc1, although Tof1 and Csm3 are both important. In addition, the integrity of the paused forks does not require Mec1, Rad53, or recombination. We also show that paused forks at analogous barriers in the rDNA are regulated similarly. These data indicate that paused and stalled eukaryotic replisomes resemble each other but are regulated differently.
    [Show full text]
  • Incision of Damaged DNA in the Presence of an Impaired Smc5/6 Complex Imperils Genome Stability Jie Peng and Wenyi Feng*
    10216–10229 Nucleic Acids Research, 2016, Vol. 44, No. 21 Published online 17 August 2016 doi: 10.1093/nar/gkw720 Incision of damaged DNA in the presence of an impaired Smc5/6 complex imperils genome stability Jie Peng and Wenyi Feng* Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, State University of New York Upstate Medical University, Syracuse, NY 13210, USA Received February 01, 2016; Revised August 05, 2016; Accepted August 08, 2016 ABSTRACT cleotide excision repair (RER) pathways, respectively (7). / Virtually all DNA repair pathways require recognition and The Smc5 6 complex is implicated in homologous subsequent excisions of the damaged nucleotide, giving rise recombination-mediated DNA repair during DNA to a single-stranded gap in the DNA polymer (7). The mech- damage or replication stress. Here, we analysed anisms ensuring such a structural alteration of the chro- genome-wide replication dynamics in a hypomorphic mosome is efficiently repaired and does not lead to further budding yeast mutant, smc6-P4. The overall replica- degradation are underexplored. Conceivably, these mecha- tion dynamics in the smc6 mutant is similar to that nisms would involve protein complexes directly interacting in the wild-type cells. However, we captured a dif- with the chromosomal DNA and implicated in DNA dam- ference in the replication profile of an early S phase age or replication stress response. sample in the mutant, prompting the hypothesis that One of the three evolutionarily conserved Structure the mutant incorporates ribonucleotides and/or ac- Maintenance of Chromosome (SMC) protein complexes, the Smc5/6 complex, plays a key role in DNA damage re- cumulates single-stranded DNA gaps during replica- pair.
    [Show full text]
  • Role of Cyclin-Dependent Kinase 1 in Translational Regulation in the M-Phase
    cells Review Role of Cyclin-Dependent Kinase 1 in Translational Regulation in the M-Phase Jaroslav Kalous *, Denisa Jansová and Andrej Šušor Institute of Animal Physiology and Genetics, Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic, Rumburska 89, 27721 Libechov, Czech Republic; [email protected] (D.J.); [email protected] (A.Š.) * Correspondence: [email protected] Received: 28 April 2020; Accepted: 24 June 2020; Published: 27 June 2020 Abstract: Cyclin dependent kinase 1 (CDK1) has been primarily identified as a key cell cycle regulator in both mitosis and meiosis. Recently, an extramitotic function of CDK1 emerged when evidence was found that CDK1 is involved in many cellular events that are essential for cell proliferation and survival. In this review we summarize the involvement of CDK1 in the initiation and elongation steps of protein synthesis in the cell. During its activation, CDK1 influences the initiation of protein synthesis, promotes the activity of specific translational initiation factors and affects the functioning of a subset of elongation factors. Our review provides insights into gene expression regulation during the transcriptionally silent M-phase and describes quantitative and qualitative translational changes based on the extramitotic role of the cell cycle master regulator CDK1 to optimize temporal synthesis of proteins to sustain the division-related processes: mitosis and cytokinesis. Keywords: CDK1; 4E-BP1; mTOR; mRNA; translation; M-phase 1. Introduction 1.1. Cyclin Dependent Kinase 1 (CDK1) Is a Subunit of the M Phase-Promoting Factor (MPF) CDK1, a serine/threonine kinase, is a catalytic subunit of the M phase-promoting factor (MPF) complex which is essential for cell cycle control during the G1-S and G2-M phase transitions of eukaryotic cells.
    [Show full text]
  • Working on Genomic Stability: from the S-Phase to Mitosis
    G C A T T A C G G C A T genes Review Working on Genomic Stability: From the S-Phase to Mitosis Sara Ovejero 1,2,3,* , Avelino Bueno 1,4 and María P. Sacristán 1,4,* 1 Instituto de Biología Molecular y Celular del Cáncer (IBMCC), Universidad de Salamanca-CSIC, Campus Miguel de Unamuno, 37007 Salamanca, Spain; [email protected] 2 Institute of Human Genetics, CNRS, University of Montpellier, 34000 Montpellier, France 3 Department of Biological Hematology, CHU Montpellier, 34295 Montpellier, France 4 Departamento de Microbiología y Genética, Universidad de Salamanca, Campus Miguel de Unamuno, 37007 Salamanca, Spain * Correspondence: [email protected] (S.O.); [email protected] (M.P.S.); Tel.: +34-923-294808 (M.P.S.) Received: 31 January 2020; Accepted: 18 February 2020; Published: 20 February 2020 Abstract: Fidelity in chromosome duplication and segregation is indispensable for maintaining genomic stability and the perpetuation of life. Challenges to genome integrity jeopardize cell survival and are at the root of different types of pathologies, such as cancer. The following three main sources of genomic instability exist: DNA damage, replicative stress, and chromosome segregation defects. In response to these challenges, eukaryotic cells have evolved control mechanisms, also known as checkpoint systems, which sense under-replicated or damaged DNA and activate specialized DNA repair machineries. Cells make use of these checkpoints throughout interphase to shield genome integrity before mitosis. Later on, when the cells enter into mitosis, the spindle assembly checkpoint (SAC) is activated and remains active until the chromosomes are properly attached to the spindle apparatus to ensure an equal segregation among daughter cells.
    [Show full text]
  • S41467-017-00634-0.Pdf
    ARTICLE DOI: 10.1038/s41467-017-00634-0 OPEN BRCA2 suppresses replication stress-induced mitotic and G1 abnormalities through homologous recombination Weiran Feng 1,2 & Maria Jasin1,2 Mutations in the tumor suppressor BRCA2 predominantly predispose to breast cancer. Paradoxically, while loss of BRCA2 promotes tumor formation, it also causes cell lethality, although how lethality is triggered is unclear. Here, we generate BRCA2 conditional non- transformed human mammary epithelial cell lines using CRISPR-Cas9. Cells are inviable upon BRCA2 loss, which leads to replication stress associated with under replication, causing mitotic abnormalities, 53BP1 nuclear body formation in the ensuing G1 phase, and G1 arrest. Unexpected from other systems, the role of BRCA2 in homologous recombination, but not in stalled replication fork protection, is primarily associated with supporting human mammary epithelial cell viability, and, moreover, preventing replication stress, a hallmark of pre- cancerous lesions. Thus, we uncover a DNA under replication-53BP1 nuclear body formation- G1 arrest axis as an unanticipated outcome of homologous recombination deficiency, which triggers cell lethality and, we propose, serves as a barrier that must be overcome for tumor formation. 1 Developmental Biology Program, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 1275 York Avenue, New York, NY 10065, USA. 2 Louis V. Gerstner Jr. Graduate School of Biomedical Sciences, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 1275 York Avenue, New York, NY 10065, USA. Correspondence and requests for materials should be addressed to M.J. (email: [email protected]) NATURE COMMUNICATIONS | 8: 525 | DOI: 10.1038/s41467-017-00634-0 | www.nature.com/naturecommunications 1 ARTICLE NATURE COMMUNICATIONS | DOI: 10.1038/s41467-017-00634-0 onoallelic inheritance of a deleterious mutation in Results the BRCA1 or BRCA2 tumor suppressor confers BRCA2 is essential for human mammary MCF10A cell viability.
    [Show full text]
  • Cell Cycle Phase Influences Tumour Cell Sensitivity to Aminolaevulinic Acid-Induced Photodynamic Therapy in Vitro
    Britsh Joumal of Cancer (1998) 78(1). 50-55 C 1998 Cancer Research Cafpaign Cell cycle phase influences tumour cell sensitivity to aminolaevulinic acid-induced photodynamic therapy in vitro L WyIdl, 0 Smith2, J Lawry2, MWR Reed' and NJ Brown' IDepartment of Surgical and Anaesthetc Sciences. Sheffield University, Sheffield Sl0 2JF. UK. 2lnstitute for Cancer Studies, Sheffield University. Sheffield S10 2JF, UK Summary Photodynamic therapy (PDT) is a form of cancer treatment based on the destruction of cells by the interaction of light, oxygen and a photosensitizer. Aminolaevulinic acid (ALA) is the prodrug of the photosensitizer protoporphyrin IX (PpIX). ALA-induced PDT depends on the rate of cellular synthesis of PpIX, which may vary with cell cycle phase. This study has investigated the relationship between cell cycle phase, PpIX generation and phototoxicity in synchronized and unsynchronized bladder cancer cells (HT1197). In unsynchronized cells, relative PpIX fluorescence values (arbitrary units) were significantly different between cell cycle phases after a 1-h ALA incubation (G, 24.8 ± 0.7; S-phase, 32.7 ± 0.8, P < 0.05; G2 35.4 ± 0.8, P < 0.05). In synchronized cells after a 1 -h ALA incubation, cells in G, produced less PpIX than those in S-phase or G2 [6.65 ± 1.1 ng per 10 cells compared with 15.5 ± 2.1 (P < 0.05), and 8.1 ± 1.8 ng per 105 cells (not significant) respectively] and were significantty less sensitive to ALA-induced PDT (% survival, G, 76.2 ± 8.3; S-phase 49.7 ± 4.6, P < 0.05; G2 44.2 ± 2.4, P < 0.05).
    [Show full text]
  • Activity of the GR in G2 and Mitosis
    0888-8809/02/$15.00/0 Molecular Endocrinology 16(6):1352–1366 Printed in U.S.A. Copyright © 2002 by The Endocrine Society Activity of the GR in G2 and Mitosis G. ALEXANDER ABEL, GABRIELA M. WOCHNIK, JOE¨ LLE RU¨ EGG, AUDREY ROUYER, FLORIAN HOLSBOER, AND THEO REIN Max Planck Institute of Psychiatry, Munich D-80804, Germany To elucidate the mechanisms mediating the re- DEX-inducible in G2. Even in mitotic cells, only the ported transient physiological glucocorticoid re- stably transfected MMTV promoter was repressed, sistance in G2/M cell cycle phase, we sought to whereas the same promoter transiently trans- Downloaded from https://academic.oup.com/mend/article/16/6/1352/2741824 by guest on 29 September 2021 establish a model system of glucocorticoid-resis- fected was inducible. The use of Hoechst 33342 for tant cells in G2. We synchronized various cell lines synchronization in previous studies probably in G2 to measure dexamethasone (DEX)-induced caused a misinterpretation, because we detected transactivation of either two endogenous promot- interference of this drug with GR-dependent tran- ers (rat tyrosine aminotransferase and mouse me- scription independent of the cell cycle. Finally, GR tallothionein I) or the mouse mammary tumor virus activated a simple promoter in G2, excluding a (MMTV) promoter stably or transiently transfected. functional effect of cell cycle-dependent phos- To circumvent the need for synchronization drugs, phorylation of GR, as implied previously. We con- we stably transfected an MMTV-driven green fluo- clude that GR itself is fully functional throughout rescent protein to directly correlate DEX-induced the entire cell cycle, but GR responsiveness is re- transactivation with the cell cycle position for each pressed in mitosis due to chromatin condensation cell of an asynchronous population using flow cy- rather than to specific modification of GR.
    [Show full text]
  • Exploiting DNA Replication Stress for Cancer Treatment Tajinder Ubhi1,2 and Grant W
    Published OnlineFirst April 9, 2019; DOI: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-18-3631 Cancer Review Research Exploiting DNA Replication Stress for Cancer Treatment Tajinder Ubhi1,2 and Grant W. Brown1,2 Abstract Complete and accurate DNA replication is fundamental to associated with such therapies. We discuss how replication cellular proliferation and genome stability. Obstacles that stress modulates the cell-intrinsic innate immune response delay, prevent, or terminate DNA replication cause the phe- and highlight the integration of replication stress with immu- nomena termed DNA replication stress. Cancer cells exhibit notherapies. Together, exploiting replication stress for cancer chronic replication stress due to the loss of proteins that treatment seems to be a promising strategy as it provides a protect or repair stressed replication forks and due to the selective means of eliminating tumors, and with continuous continuous proliferative signaling, providing an exploitable advances in our knowledge of the replication stress response therapeutic vulnerability in tumors. Here, we outline current and lessons learned from current therapies in use, we are and pending therapeutic approaches leveraging tumor-specific moving toward honing the potential of targeting replication replication stress as a target, in addition to the challenges stress in the clinic. Introduction mental. In this review, we provide a summary of the therapies centered on enhancing both endogenous and drug-induced rep- The DNA replication machinery successfully carries out accu- lication stress and discuss the rationales associated with them. We rate genome duplication in the face of numerous obstacles, many also highlight the potential of using replication stress to stimulate of which cause DNA replication stress.
    [Show full text]
  • Exploiting DNA Replication Stress for Cancer Treatment Tajinder Ubhi1,2 and Grant W
    Published OnlineFirst April 9, 2019; DOI: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-18-3631 Cancer Review Research Exploiting DNA Replication Stress for Cancer Treatment Tajinder Ubhi1,2 and Grant W. Brown1,2 Abstract Complete and accurate DNA replication is fundamental to associated with such therapies. We discuss how replication cellular proliferation and genome stability. Obstacles that stress modulates the cell-intrinsic innate immune response delay, prevent, or terminate DNA replication cause the phe- and highlight the integration of replication stress with immu- nomena termed DNA replication stress. Cancer cells exhibit notherapies. Together, exploiting replication stress for cancer chronic replication stress due to the loss of proteins that treatment seems to be a promising strategy as it provides a protect or repair stressed replication forks and due to the selective means of eliminating tumors, and with continuous continuous proliferative signaling, providing an exploitable advances in our knowledge of the replication stress response therapeutic vulnerability in tumors. Here, we outline current and lessons learned from current therapies in use, we are and pending therapeutic approaches leveraging tumor-specific moving toward honing the potential of targeting replication replication stress as a target, in addition to the challenges stress in the clinic. Introduction mental. In this review, we provide a summary of the therapies centered on enhancing both endogenous and drug-induced rep- The DNA replication machinery successfully carries out accu- lication stress and discuss the rationales associated with them. We rate genome duplication in the face of numerous obstacles, many also highlight the potential of using replication stress to stimulate of which cause DNA replication stress.
    [Show full text]
  • Checkpoint Kinase 1 (Chk1) Is Required for Mitotic Progression Through Negative Regulation of Polo-Like Kinase 1 (Plk1)
    Checkpoint kinase 1 (Chk1) is required for mitotic progression through negative regulation of polo-like kinase 1 (Plk1) Jiabin Tang*†, Raymond L. Erikson*‡, and Xiaoqi Liu*†§¶ *Department of Molecular and Cellular Biology, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA 02138; †Department of Biochemistry and the Cancer Center, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN 47907; and §The Walther Cancer Institute, Indianapolis, IN 46202 Contributed by Raymond L. Erikson, June 14, 2006 Although the essential function of checkpoint kinase 1 (Chk1) in Results DNA damage response has been well established, the role of Chk1 Chk1 Is Required for Cell Proliferation and Survival. To investigate in normal cell cycle progression is unclear. By using RNAi to the function of Chk1 during normal cell cycle progression in the specifically deplete Chk1, we determined loss-of-function pheno- absence of DNA damage, we first used vector-based RNAi to types in HeLa cells. A vector-based RNAi approach showed that specifically deplete Chk1 in HeLa cells. As indicated by Western Chk1 is required for normal cell proliferation and survival, inas- blotting, Chk1 was depleted efficiently with this approach (Fig. much as a dramatic cell-cycle arrest at G2͞M phase and massive 1A). We next determined whether Chk1 depletion influences the apoptosis were observed in Chk1-deficient cells. Coupling of siRNA proliferation of HeLa cells. Although transfection with the with cell synchronization further revealed that Chk1 depletion control vector did not affect the growth rate of the cells, leads to metaphase block, as indicated by various mitotic markers. transfection with the plasmid pBS͞U6-Chk1 strongly inhibited Neither bipolar spindle formation nor centrosome functions were cell proliferation (Fig.
    [Show full text]