scholarly journals Heterogeneous transcriptome response to DNA damage at single cell resolution

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sung Rye Park ◽  
Sim Namkoong ◽  
Zac Zezhi Zhang ◽  
Leon Friesen ◽  
Yu-Chih Chen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cell Cycle ◽  
Dna Damage ◽  
Cancer Cells ◽  
Cell Fate ◽  
Stress Responses ◽  
Cell Cycle Checkpoint ◽  
Specific Gene ◽  
Specific Cell ◽  
Transcriptional Responses ◽  
Transcriptome Response

Cancer cells often heterogeneously respond to genotoxic chemotherapy, leading to fractional killing and chemoresistance1, 2, which remain as the major obstacles in cancer treatment. It is widely believed that DNA damage induces a uniform response in regulating transcription and that cell fate is passively determined by a threshold mechanism evaluating the level of transcriptional responses3. On the contrary to this assumption, here we show that a surprisingly high level of heterogeneity exists in individual cell transcriptome responses to DNA damage, and that these transcriptome variations dictate the cell fate after DNA damage. Many DNA damage response genes, including tumor suppressor p53 targets, were exclusively expressed in only a subset of cells having specific cell fate, producing unique stress responses tailored for the fate that the cells are committed to. For instance, CDKN1A, the best known p53 target inhibiting cell cycle, was specifically expressed in a subset of cells undergoing cell cycle checkpoint, while other pro-apoptotic p53 targets were expressed only in cells undergoing apoptosis. A small group of cells exhibited neither checkpoint nor apoptotic responses, but produced a unique transcriptional program that conferred strong chemoresistance to the cells. The heterogeneous transcriptome response to DNA damage was also observed at the protein level in flow cytometry. Our results demonstrate that cell fate heterogeneity after DNA damage is mediated by distinct transcriptional programs generating fate-specific gene expression landscapes. This finding provides an important insight into understanding heterogeneous chemotherapy responses of cancer cells.

Molecular analyses of adaptive survival responses (ASRs): role of ASRs in radiotherapy

1998 ◽  
Vol 17 (8) ◽  
pp. 448-453 ◽  
Author(s):  
David A Boothman ◽  
Eric Odegaard ◽  
Chin-Rang Yang ◽  
Kelly Hosley ◽  
Marc S Mendonca
Keyword(s):  
Cell Cycle ◽  
Stress Responses ◽  
Strand Break ◽  
Cell Cycle Checkpoint ◽  
Cell Cycle Checkpoints ◽  
Specific Gene ◽  
High Dose ◽  
Neoplastic Cells ◽  
Normal Cells ◽  
Cycle Checkpoint

Adaptive survival responses (ASRs), whereby cells demonstrate a survival advantage when exposed to very low doses of ionizing radiation (IR) 4-24 h prior to a high dose challenge, were first reported over 15 years ago. These responses were linked to hormesis, which implied that exposure to low levels of IR may be beneficial to the cell. We postulate that increased survival does not necessarily mean that the treatment is beneficial.Studies at the molecular level indicate that ASRs are the result of misregulated cell cycle checkpoint responses, occurring in the G1 phase of the cell cycle after IR. Specific gene products (i.e., PCNA, cyclin D1, cyclin A, XIP8, xip5 and xip13) appear to control these cell cycle checkpoint responses. Certain neoplastic cells show potent ASRs because they bypass checkpoints which would otherwise lead to apoptosis or other forms of cell death (possibly necrosis), and/or these cancer cells lack genetic factors, such as specific caspases (cysteine aspartate-specific proteases), that control apoptosis. Alterations in these cell cycle checkpoints or apoptotic responses may also occur during IR-induced stress responses in normal cells, at critical times (10-18 days posttreatment) following IR. One IR-induced protein, XIP8, may be a critical controlling factor at this point where delayed-onset apoptosis occurs. Additionally, we have shown that the presence or absence (i.e., SCID cells) of nonhomologous DNA double strand break repair did not seem to influence ASRs, suggesting that ASRs may be caused by signal transduction stress responses.ASRs may be beneficial to survival, however, the consequence(s) of that survival may be dire. For example, many neoplastic cells exhibited far greater ASRs than normal cells. Additionally, ASRs were induced by as little as 1 cGy and and were enhanced by repeated exposures of low level radiation. The implications for radiotherapy are that when a patient arrives for port film imaging during the course of therapy, the dose-rate, overall level of exposure, and time between port film exposure and high dose IR treatment become potentially important factors for improved efficacy of treatment of certain cancers. Further research is warranted to determine what molecular factors are most important for ASRs, and current work is focusing on XIP8.

scholarly journals Inhibition of DNA Repair in Cancer Therapy: Toward a Multi-Target Approach

2020 ◽  
Vol 21 (18) ◽  
pp. 6684
Author(s):  
Samuele Lodovichi ◽  
Tiziana Cervelli ◽  
Achille Pellicioli ◽  
Alvaro Galli
Keyword(s):  
Cell Cycle ◽  
Dna Damage ◽  
Dna Repair ◽  
Cancer Therapy ◽  
Clinical Outcome ◽  
Cancer Cells ◽  
Cell Cycle Checkpoint ◽  
Normal Cells ◽  
Cycle Checkpoint ◽  
Repair Pathways

Alterations in DNA repair pathways are one of the main drivers of cancer insurgence. Nevertheless, cancer cells are more susceptible to DNA damage than normal cells and they rely on specific functional repair pathways to survive. Thanks to advances in genome sequencing, we now have a better idea of which genes are mutated in specific cancers and this prompted the development of inhibitors targeting DNA repair players involved in pathways essential for cancer cells survival. Currently, the pivotal concept is that combining the inhibition of mechanisms on which cancer cells viability depends is the most promising way to treat tumorigenesis. Numerous inhibitors have been developed and for many of them, efficacy has been demonstrated either alone or in combination with chemo or radiotherapy. In this review, we will analyze the principal pathways involved in cell cycle checkpoint and DNA repair focusing on how their alterations could predispose to cancer, then we will explore the inhibitors developed or in development specifically targeting different proteins involved in each pathway, underscoring the rationale behind their usage and how their combination and/or exploitation as adjuvants to classic therapies could help in patients clinical outcome.

scholarly journals WEE1 Inhibition Enhances Anti-Apoptotic Dependency as a Result of Premature Mitotic Entry and DNA Damage

Cancers ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 11 (11) ◽  
pp. 1743 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mathilde Rikje Willemijn de Jong ◽  
Myra Langendonk ◽  
Bart Reitsma ◽  
Pien Herbers ◽  
Marcel Nijland ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cell Cycle ◽  
Dna Damage ◽  
B Cell Lymphoma ◽  
Cell Cycle Checkpoint ◽  
Cell Cycle Checkpoints ◽  
Specific Cell ◽  
M Cell ◽  
Mitotic Entry ◽  
Enhanced Sensitivity ◽  
Cycle Checkpoint

Genomically unstable cancers are dependent on specific cell cycle checkpoints to maintain viability and prevent apoptosis. The cell cycle checkpoint protein WEE1 is highly expressed in genomically unstable cancers, including diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL). Although WEE1 inhibition effectively induces apoptosis in cancer cells, the effect of WEE1 inhibition on anti-apoptotic dependency is not well understood. We show that inhibition of WEE1 by AZD1775 induces DNA damage and pre-mitotic entry in DLBCL, thereby enhancing dependency on BCL-2 and/or MCL-1. Combining AZD1775 with anti-apoptotic inhibitors such as venetoclax (BCL-2i) or S63845 (MCL-1i) enhanced sensitivity in a cell-specific manner. In addition, we demonstrate that both G2/M cell cycle arrest and DNA damage induction put a similar stress on DLBCL cells, thereby enhancing anti-apoptotic dependency. Therefore, genotoxic or cell cycle disrupting agents combined with specific anti-apoptotic inhibitors may be very effective in genomic unstable cancers such as DLBCL and therefore warrants further clinical evaluation.

scholarly journals Fate Specification and Tissue-specific Cell Cycle Control of the Caenorhabditis elegans Intestine

2010 ◽  
Vol 21 (5) ◽  
pp. 725-738 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alexandra Segref ◽  
Juan Cabello ◽  
Caroline Clucas ◽  
Ralf Schnabel ◽  
Iain L. Johnstone
Keyword(s):  
Cell Cycle ◽  
Caenorhabditis Elegans ◽  
Cell Fate ◽  
Mammalian Cells ◽  
Cell Cycle Control ◽  
Cell Number ◽  
Embryonic Cell ◽  
Cell Cycle Checkpoint ◽  
Specific Cell ◽  
Fate Specification

Coordination between cell fate specification and cell cycle control in multicellular organisms is essential to regulate cell numbers in tissues and organs during development, and its failure may lead to oncogenesis. In mammalian cells, as part of a general cell cycle checkpoint mechanism, the F-box protein β-transducin repeat-containing protein (β-TrCP) and the Skp1/Cul1/F-box complex control the periodic cell cycle fluctuations in abundance of the CDC25A and B phosphatases. Here, we find that the Caenorhabditis elegans β-TrCP orthologue LIN-23 regulates a progressive decline of CDC-25.1 abundance over several embryonic cell cycles and specifies cell number of one tissue, the embryonic intestine. The negative regulation of CDC-25.1 abundance by LIN-23 may be developmentally controlled because CDC-25.1 accumulates over time within the developing germline, where LIN-23 is also present. Concurrent with the destabilization of CDC-25.1, LIN-23 displays a spatially dynamic behavior in the embryo, periodically entering a nuclear compartment where CDC-25.1 is abundant.

scholarly journals Acceleration or Brakes: Which Is Rational for Cell Cycle-Targeting Neuroblastoma Therapy?

Biomolecules ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (5) ◽  
pp. 750
Author(s):  
Kiyohiro Ando ◽  
Akira Nakagawara
Keyword(s):  
Cell Cycle ◽  
Dna Damage ◽  
Cell Cycle Progression ◽  
Parp Inhibitors ◽  
Cell Cycle Checkpoint ◽  
Mitotic Catastrophe ◽  
Malignant Neoplasms ◽  
Checkpoint Kinases ◽  
Molecular Features ◽  
Cycle Checkpoint

Unrestrained proliferation is a common feature of malignant neoplasms. Targeting the cell cycle is a therapeutic strategy to prevent unlimited cell division. Recently developed rationales for these selective inhibitors can be subdivided into two categories with antithetical functionality. One applies a “brake” to the cell cycle to halt cell proliferation, such as with inhibitors of cell cycle kinases. The other “accelerates” the cell cycle to initiate replication/mitotic catastrophe, such as with inhibitors of cell cycle checkpoint kinases. The fate of cell cycle progression or arrest is tightly regulated by the presence of tolerable or excessive DNA damage, respectively. This suggests that there is compatibility between inhibitors of DNA repair kinases, such as PARP inhibitors, and inhibitors of cell cycle checkpoint kinases. In the present review, we explore alterations to the cell cycle that are concomitant with altered DNA damage repair machinery in unfavorable neuroblastomas, with respect to their unique genomic and molecular features. We highlight the vulnerabilities of these alterations that are attributable to the features of each. Based on the assessment, we offer possible therapeutic approaches for personalized medicine, which are seemingly antithetical, but both are promising strategies for targeting the altered cell cycle in unfavorable neuroblastomas.

scholarly journals The Interactions of DNA Repair, Telomere Homeostasis, and p53 Mutational Status in Solid Cancers: Risk, Prognosis, and Prediction

Cancers ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (3) ◽  
pp. 479
Author(s):  
Pavel Vodicka ◽  
Ladislav Andera ◽  
Alena Opattova ◽  
Ludmila Vodickova
Keyword(s):  
Cell Cycle ◽  
Dna Damage ◽  
Dna Repair ◽  
Dna Lesions ◽  
Cell Cycle Checkpoint ◽  
Solid Cancer ◽  
Genomic Integrity ◽  
Repair Capacity ◽  
Mutational Status ◽  
Telomere Homeostasis

The disruption of genomic integrity due to the accumulation of various kinds of DNA damage, deficient DNA repair capacity, and telomere shortening constitute the hallmarks of malignant diseases. DNA damage response (DDR) is a signaling network to process DNA damage with importance for both cancer development and chemotherapy outcome. DDR represents the complex events that detect DNA lesions and activate signaling networks (cell cycle checkpoint induction, DNA repair, and induction of cell death). TP53, the guardian of the genome, governs the cell response, resulting in cell cycle arrest, DNA damage repair, apoptosis, and senescence. The mutational status of TP53 has an impact on DDR, and somatic mutations in this gene represent one of the critical events in human carcinogenesis. Telomere dysfunction in cells that lack p53-mediated surveillance of genomic integrity along with the involvement of DNA repair in telomeric DNA regions leads to genomic instability. While the role of individual players (DDR, telomere homeostasis, and TP53) in human cancers has attracted attention for some time, there is insufficient understanding of the interactions between these pathways. Since solid cancer is a complex and multifactorial disease with considerable inter- and intra-tumor heterogeneity, we mainly dedicated this review to the interactions of DNA repair, telomere homeostasis, and TP53 mutational status, in relation to (a) cancer risk, (b) cancer progression, and (c) cancer therapy.

scholarly journals SOG1 transcription factor promotes the onset of endoreduplication under salinity stress in Arabidopsis

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Kalyan Mahapatra ◽  
Sujit Roy
Keyword(s):  
Cell Cycle ◽  
Dna Damage ◽  
Cell Death ◽  
Transcription Factor ◽  
Programmed Cell Death ◽  
Salinity Stress ◽  
Crucial Role ◽  
Genome Stability ◽  
Cell Cycle Checkpoint ◽  
Cell Cycle Regulators

AbstractAs like in mammalian system, the DNA damage responsive cell cycle checkpoint functions play crucial role for maintenance of genome stability in plants through repairing of damages in DNA and induction of programmed cell death or endoreduplication by extensive regulation of progression of cell cycle. ATM and ATR (ATAXIA-TELANGIECTASIA-MUTATED and -RAD3-RELATED) function as sensor kinases and play key role in the transmission of DNA damage signals to the downstream components of cell cycle regulatory network. The plant-specific NAC domain family transcription factor SOG1 (SUPPRESSOR OF GAMMA RESPONSE 1) plays crucial role in transducing signals from both ATM and ATR in presence of double strand breaks (DSBs) in the genome and found to play crucial role in the regulation of key genes involved in cell cycle progression, DNA damage repair, endoreduplication and programmed cell death. Here we report that Arabidopsis exposed to high salinity shows generation of oxidative stress induced DSBs along with the concomitant induction of endoreduplication, displaying increased cell size and DNA ploidy level without any change in chromosome number. These responses were significantly prominent in SOG1 overexpression line than wild-type Arabidopsis, while sog1 mutant lines showed much compromised induction of endoreduplication under salinity stress. We have found that both ATM-SOG1 and ATR-SOG1 pathways are involved in the salinity mediated induction of endoreduplication. SOG1was found to promote G2-M phase arrest in Arabidopsis under salinity stress by downregulating the expression of the key cell cycle regulators, including CDKB1;1, CDKB2;1, and CYCB1;1, while upregulating the expression of WEE1 kinase, CCS52A and E2Fa, which act as important regulators for induction of endoreduplication. Our results suggest that Arabidopsis undergoes endoreduplicative cycle in response to salinity induced DSBs, showcasing an adaptive response in plants under salinity stress.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document