A method for assaying the sensitivity of Drosophila replication checkpoint mutants to anti-cancer and DNA-damaging drugs.

Genome ◽  
2002 ◽  
Vol 45 (5) ◽  
pp. 881-889 ◽  
Author(s):  
Colleen M Radcliffe ◽  
Elizabeth A Silva ◽  
Shelagh D Campbell
Keyword(s):  
Dna Damage ◽  
Dna Replication ◽  
Cell Cycle Progression ◽  
Tumor Formation ◽  
Cycle Progression ◽  
Replication Checkpoint ◽  
Anti Cancer ◽  
Dna Replication Checkpoint ◽  
Checkpoint Genes ◽  
Regulate Cell Cycle Progression

In multi-cellular organisms, failure to properly regulate cell-cycle progression can result in inappropriate cell death or uncontrolled cell division leading to tumor formation. To guard against such events, conserved regulatory mechanisms called "checkpoints" block progression into mitosis in response to DNA damage and incomplete replication, as well as in response to other signals. Checkpoint mutants in organisms as diverse as yeast and humans are sensitive to various chemical agents that inhibit DNA replication or cause DNA damage. This phenomenon is the primary rationale for chemotherapy, which uses drugs that preferentially target tumor cells with compromised checkpoints. In this study, we demonstrate the use of Drosophila checkpoint mutants as a system for assaying the effects of various DNA-damaging and anti-cancer agents in a developing multicellular organism. Dwee1, grp and mei-41 are genes that encode kinases that function in the DNA replication checkpoint. We tested zygotic mutants of each gene for sensitivity to the DNA replication inhibitor hydroxyurea (HU), methyl methanosulfonate (MMS), ara-C, cisplatin, and the oxygen radical generating compound paraquat. The mutants show distinct differences in their sensitivity to each of the drugs tested, suggesting an underlying complexity in the responses of individual checkpoint genes to genotoxic stress.Key words: hydroxyurea (HU), ara-C, cisplatin, methyl methane sulfonate (MMS), paraquat.

The Spd1p S phase inhibitor can activate the DNA replication checkpoint pathway in fission yeast

2000 ◽  
Vol 113 (23) ◽  
pp. 4341-4350 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. Borgne ◽  
P. Nurse
Keyword(s):  
Cell Cycle ◽  
Dna Replication ◽  
Cell Cycle Progression ◽  
S Phase ◽  
Checkpoint Control ◽  
Replication Checkpoint ◽  
Checkpoint Pathway ◽  
Dna Replication Checkpoint ◽  
A Cell ◽  
Checkpoint Genes

Spd1p (for S phase delayed) is a cell cycle inhibitor in Schizosaccharomyces pombe. Spd1p overexpression blocks the onset of both S phase and mitosis. In this study, we have investigated the mechanisms by which Spd1p overexpression blocks cell cycle progression, focussing on the block over mitotic onset. High levels of Spd1p lead to an increase in Y15 phosphorylation of Cdc2p and we show that the block over G(2) requires the Wee1p kinase and is dependent on the rad and chk1/cds1 checkpoint genes. We propose that high levels of Spd1p in G(2) cells activate the DNA replication checkpoint control, which leads to a Wee1p-dependent increase of Cdc2p Y15 phosphorylation blocking onset of mitosis. The Spd1p block at S phase onset may act by interfering directly with DNA replication, and also activates the G(2)rad/hus checkpoint pathway to block mitosis.

scholarly journals Regulation of Cell Division in Bacteria by Monitoring Genome Integrity and DNA Replication Status

2019 ◽  
Vol 202 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter E. Burby ◽  
Lyle A. Simmons
Keyword(s):  
Cell Cycle ◽  
Dna Damage ◽  
Cell Division ◽  
Dna Replication ◽  
Cell Cycle Progression ◽  
Genome Instability ◽  
Sos Response ◽  
Bacterial Cells ◽  
Cycle Progression ◽  
Content Type

ABSTRACT All organisms regulate cell cycle progression by coordinating cell division with DNA replication status. In eukaryotes, DNA damage or problems with replication fork progression induce the DNA damage response (DDR), causing cyclin-dependent kinases to remain active, preventing further cell cycle progression until replication and repair are complete. In bacteria, cell division is coordinated with chromosome segregation, preventing cell division ring formation over the nucleoid in a process termed nucleoid occlusion. In addition to nucleoid occlusion, bacteria induce the SOS response after replication forks encounter DNA damage or impediments that slow or block their progression. During SOS induction, Escherichia coli expresses a cytoplasmic protein, SulA, that inhibits cell division by directly binding FtsZ. After the SOS response is turned off, SulA is degraded by Lon protease, allowing for cell division to resume. Recently, it has become clear that SulA is restricted to bacteria closely related to E. coli and that most bacteria enforce the DNA damage checkpoint by expressing a small integral membrane protein. Resumption of cell division is then mediated by membrane-bound proteases that cleave the cell division inhibitor. Further, many bacterial cells have mechanisms to inhibit cell division that are regulated independently from the canonical LexA-mediated SOS response. In this review, we discuss several pathways used by bacteria to prevent cell division from occurring when genome instability is detected or before the chromosome has been fully replicated and segregated.

Overlapping Roles of the Spindle Assembly and DNA Damage Checkpoints in the Cell-Cycle Response to Altered Chromosomes in Saccharomyces cerevisiae

Genetics ◽  
2002 ◽  
Vol 161 (2) ◽  
pp. 521-534
Author(s):  
Peter M Garber ◽  
Jasper Rine
Keyword(s):  
Dna Damage ◽  
Dna Replication ◽  
Spindle Checkpoint ◽  
Dna Lesions ◽  
Replication Proteins ◽  
Replication Checkpoint ◽  
Dna Damage Checkpoints ◽  
Dna Replication Checkpoint ◽  
Mcm Proteins ◽  
Stalled Replication Forks

Abstract The MAD2-dependent spindle checkpoint blocks anaphase until all chromosomes have achieved successful bipolar attachment to the mitotic spindle. The DNA damage and DNA replication checkpoints block anaphase in response to DNA lesions that may include single-stranded DNA and stalled replication forks. Many of the same conditions that activate the DNA damage and DNA replication checkpoints also activated the spindle checkpoint. The mad2Δ mutation partially relieved the arrest responses of cells to mutations affecting the replication proteins Mcm3p and Pol1p. Thus a previously unrecognized aspect of spindle checkpoint function may be to protect cells from defects in DNA replication. Furthermore, in cells lacking either the DNA damage or the DNA replication checkpoints, the spindle checkpoint contributed to the arrest responses of cells to the DNA-damaging agent methyl methanesulfonate, the replication inhibitor hydroxyurea, and mutations affecting Mcm2p and Orc2p. Thus the spindle checkpoint was sensitive to a wider range of chromosomal perturbations than previously recognized. Finally, the DNA replication checkpoint did not contribute to the arrests of cells in response to mutations affecting ORC, Mcm proteins, or DNA polymerase δ. Thus the specificity of this checkpoint may be more limited than previously recognized.

DNA damage inhibits proteolysis of the B-type cyclin Clb5 in S. cerevisiae

1997 ◽  
Vol 110 (15) ◽  
pp. 1813-1820
Author(s):  
D. Germain ◽  
J. Hendley ◽  
B. Futcher
Keyword(s):  
Cell Cycle ◽  
Dna Damage ◽  
Tyrosine Phosphorylation ◽  
Cell Cycle Progression ◽  
Cycle Phase ◽  
Cycle Progression ◽  
Ubiquitin Pathway ◽  
Cyclin Dependent Kinases ◽  
Transition Points ◽  
Checkpoint Genes

Cell cycle progression is mediated by waves of specific cyclin dependent kinases (CDKs) in all eukaryotes. Cyclins are degraded by the ubiquitin pathway of proteolysis. The recent identification of several components of the cyclin proteolysis machinery has highlighted both the importance of proteolysis at multiple transition points in the cell cycle and the involvement of other substrates degraded by the same machinery. In this study, we have investigated the effects of DNA damage on the cyclin proteolytic machinery in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. We find that the half-life of the B-type cyclin Clb5 is markedly increased following DNA damage while that of G1 cyclins is not. This effect is independent of cell cycle phase. Clb5 turnover requires p34CDC28 activity. Stabilisation of Clb5 correlates with an increase in tyrosine phosphorylation of p34CDC28, but stabilisation does not require this tyrosine phosphorylation. The stabilisation is independent of the checkpoint genes Mec1 and Rad53. These observations establish a new link between the regulation of proteolysis and DNA damage.

Cdc18p can block mitosis by two independent mechanisms

1998 ◽  
Vol 111 (20) ◽  
pp. 3101-3108 ◽  
Author(s):  
E. Greenwood ◽  
H. Nishitani ◽  
P. Nurse
Keyword(s):  
Dna Replication ◽  
S Phase ◽  
Checkpoint Control ◽  
Replication Checkpoint ◽  
Mitotic Kinase ◽  
C Terminus ◽  
N Terminus ◽  
Dna Replication Checkpoint ◽  
Checkpoint Genes

The DNA replication checkpoint is required to maintain the integrity of the genome, inhibiting mitosis until S phase has been successfully completed. The checkpoint preventing premature mitosis in Schizosaccharomyces pombe relies on phosphorylation of the tyrosine-15 residue on cdc2p to prevent its activation and hence mitosis. The cdc18 gene is essential for both generating the DNA replication checkpoint and the initiation of S phase, thus providing a key role for the overall control and coordination of the cell cycle. We show that the C terminus of the protein is capable of both initiating DNA replication and the checkpoint function of cdc18p. The C terminus of cdc18p acts upstream of the DNA replication checkpoint genes rad1, rad3, rad9, rad17, hus1 and cut5 and requires the wee1p/mik1p tyrosine kinases to block mitosis. The N terminus of cdc18p can also block mitosis but does so in the absence of the DNA replication checkpoint genes and the wee1p/mik1p kinases therefore acting downstream of these genes. Because the N terminus of cdc18p associates with cdc2p in vivo, we suggest that by binding the cdc2p/cdc13p mitotic kinase directly, it exerts an effect independently of the normal checkpoint control, probably in an unphysiological manner.

scholarly journals Inactivation of CtIP Leads to Early Embryonic Lethality Mediated by G1 Restraint and to Tumorigenesis by Haploid Insufficiency

2005 ◽  
Vol 25 (9) ◽  
pp. 3535-3542 ◽  
Author(s):  
Phang-Lang Chen ◽  
Feng Liu ◽  
Suna Cai ◽  
Xiaoqin Lin ◽  
Aihua Li ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cell Cycle ◽  
Transcriptional Repression ◽  
Cell Cycle Progression ◽  
Tumor Formation ◽  
3T3 Cells ◽  
Embryonic Fibroblasts ◽  
Cycle Progression ◽  
Early Embryonic Lethality ◽  
Nih 3T3 ◽  
Regulate Cell Cycle Progression

ABSTRACT CtIP interacts with a group of tumor suppressor proteins including RB (retinoblastoma protein), BRCA1, Ikaros, and CtBP, which regulate cell cycle progression through transcriptional repression as well as chromatin remodeling. However, how CtIP exerts its biological function in cell cycle progression remains elusive. To address this issue, we generated an inactivated Ctip allele in mice by inserting a neo gene into exon 5. The corresponding Ctip − / − embryos died at embryonic day 4.0 (E4.0), and the blastocysts failed to enter S phase but accumulated in G1, leading to a slightly elevated cell death. Mouse NIH 3T3 cells depleted of Ctip were arrested at G1 with the concomitant increase in hypophosphorylated Rb and Cdk inhibitors, p21. However, depletion of Ctip failed to arrest Rb − / − mouse embryonic fibroblasts (MEF) or human osteosarcoma Saos-2 cells at G1, suggesting that this arrest is RB dependent. Importantly, the life span of Ctip +/ − heterozygotes was shortened by the development of multiple types of tumors, predominantly, large lymphomas. The wild-type Ctip allele and protein remained detectable in these tumors, suggesting that haploid insufficiency of Ctip leads to tumorigenesis. Taken together, this finding uncovers a novel G1/S regulation in that CtIP counteracts Rb-mediated G1 restraint. Deregulation of this function leads to a defect in early embryogenesis and contributes, in part, to tumor formation.

scholarly journals Cellular responses to a prolonged delay in mitosis are determined by a DNA damage response controlled by Bcl-2 family proteins

Open Biology ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 5 (3) ◽  
pp. 140156 ◽  
Author(s):  
Didier J. Colin ◽  
Karolina O. Hain ◽  
Lindsey A. Allan ◽  
Paul R. Clarke
Keyword(s):  
Cell Cycle ◽  
Dna Damage ◽  
Protein Kinases ◽  
Cell Fate ◽  
Dna Damage Response ◽  
Cell Cycle Progression ◽  
Cycle Progression ◽  
Anti Cancer ◽  
Damage Response ◽  
Microtubule Poisons

Anti-cancer drugs that disrupt mitosis inhibit cell proliferation and induce apoptosis, although the mechanisms of these responses are poorly understood. Here, we characterize a mitotic stress response that determines cell fate in response to microtubule poisons. We show that mitotic arrest induced by these drugs produces a temporally controlled DNA damage response (DDR) characterized by the caspase-dependent formation of γH2AX foci in non-apoptotic cells. Following exit from a delayed mitosis, this initial response results in activation of DDR protein kinases, phosphorylation of the tumour suppressor p53 and a delay in subsequent cell cycle progression. We show that this response is controlled by Mcl-1, a regulator of caspase activation that becomes degraded during mitotic arrest. Chemical inhibition of Mcl-1 and the related proteins Bcl-2 and Bcl-x L by a BH3 mimetic enhances the mitotic DDR, promotes p53 activation and inhibits subsequent cell cycle progression. We also show that inhibitors of DDR protein kinases as well as BH3 mimetics promote apoptosis synergistically with taxol (paclitaxel) in a variety of cancer cell lines. Our work demonstrates the role of mitotic DNA damage responses in determining cell fate in response to microtubule poisons and BH3 mimetics, providing a rationale for anti-cancer combination chemotherapies.

scholarly journals The DNA damage and the DNA replication checkpoints converge at the MBF transcription factor

2013 ◽  
Vol 24 (21) ◽  
pp. 3350-3357 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tsvetomira Ivanova ◽  
Isabel Alves-Rodrigues ◽  
Blanca Gómez-Escoda ◽  
Chaitali Dutta ◽  
James A. DeCaprio ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Dna Damage ◽  
Dna Replication ◽  
Fission Yeast ◽  
Yeast Cells ◽  
Replication Checkpoint ◽  
Dna Damaging Agents ◽  
Dna Replication Checkpoint ◽  
Transcriptional Complex ◽  
Carboxy Terminal ◽  
Cycle Regulation

In fission yeast cells, Cds1 is the effector kinase of the DNA replication checkpoint. We previously showed that when the DNA replication checkpoint is activated, the repressor Yox1 is phosphorylated and inactivated by Cds1, resulting in activation of MluI-binding factor (MBF)–dependent transcription. This is essential to reinitiate DNA synthesis and for correct G1-to-S transition. Here we show that Cdc10, which is an essential part of the MBF core, is the target of the DNA damage checkpoint. When fission yeast cells are treated with DNA-damaging agents, Chk1 is activated and phosphorylates Cdc10 at its carboxy-terminal domain. This modification is responsible for the repression of MBF-dependent transcription through induced release of MBF from chromatin. This inactivation of MBF is important for survival of cells challenged with DNA-damaging agents. Thus Yox1 and Cdc10 couple normal cell cycle regulation in unperturbed conditions and the DNA replication and DNA damage checkpoints into a single transcriptional complex.

scholarly journals Cdc25A Serine 123 Phosphorylation Couples Centrosome Duplication with DNA Replication and Regulates Tumorigenesis

2008 ◽  
Vol 28 (24) ◽  
pp. 7442-7450 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sathyavageeswaran Shreeram ◽  
Weng Kee Hee ◽  
Dmitry V. Bulavin
Keyword(s):  
Cell Cycle ◽  
Dna Damage ◽  
Dna Replication ◽  
Cell Cycle Progression ◽  
Phosphorylation Site ◽  
Centrosome Duplication ◽  
Cycle Progression ◽  
Cdc25a Phosphatase

ABSTRACT The cell division cycle 25A (Cdc25A) phosphatase is a critical regulator of cell cycle progression under normal conditions and after stress. Stress-induced degradation of Cdc25A has been proposed as a major way of delaying cell cycle progression. In vitro studies pointed toward serine 123 as a key site in regulation of Cdc25A stability after exposure to ionizing radiation (IR). To address the role of this phosphorylation site in vivo, we generated a knock-in mouse in which alanine was substituted for serine 123. The Cdc25 S123A knock-in mice appeared normal, and, unexpectedly, cells derived from them exhibited unperturbed cell cycle and DNA damage responses. In turn, we found that Cdc25A was present in centrosomes and that Cdc25A levels were not reduced after IR in knock-in cells. This resulted in centrosome amplification due to lack of induction of Cdk2 inhibitory phosphorylation after IR specifically in centrosomes. Further, Cdc25A knock-in animals appeared sensitive to IR-induced carcinogenesis. Our findings indicate that Cdc25A S123 phosphorylation is crucial for coupling centrosome duplication to DNA replication cycles after DNA damage and therefore is likely to play a role in the regulation of tumorigenesis.

scholarly journals Wee1 Rather Than Plk1 Is Inhibited by AZD1775 at Therapeutically Relevant Concentrations

Cancers ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 11 (6) ◽  
pp. 819 ◽  
Author(s):  
Angela Flavia Serpico ◽  
Giuseppe D’Alterio ◽  
Cinzia Vetrei ◽  
Rosa Della Monica ◽  
Luca Nardella ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cell Cycle Progression ◽  
Mitotic Catastrophe ◽  
Cyclin Dependent Kinase ◽  
Cycle Progression ◽  
Replication Checkpoint ◽  
Dna Damaging Agents ◽  
Dna Replication Checkpoint ◽  
Wee1 Kinase ◽  
Damaged Dna

Wee1 kinase is an inhibitor of cyclin-dependent kinase (cdk)s, crucial cell cycle progression drivers. By phosphorylating cdk1 at tyrosine 15, Wee1 inhibits activation of cyclin B-cdk1 (Cdk1), preventing cells from entering mitosis with incompletely replicated or damaged DNA. Thus, inhibiting Wee1, alone or in combination with DNA damaging agents, can kill cancer cells by mitotic catastrophe, a tumor suppressive response that follows mitosis onset in the presence of under-replicated or damaged DNA. AZD1775, an orally available Wee1 inhibitor, has entered clinical trials for cancer treatment following this strategy, with promising results. Recently, however, AZD1775 has been shown to inhibit also the polo-like kinase homolog Plk1 in vitro, casting doubts on its mechanism of action. Here we asked whether, in the clinically relevant concentration range, AZD1775 inhibited Wee1 or Plk1 in transformed and non-transformed human cells. We found that in the clinically relevant, nanomolar, concentration range AZD1775 inhibited Wee1 rather than Plk1. In addition, AZD1775 treatment accelerated mitosis onset overriding the DNA replication checkpoint and hastened Plk1-dependent phosphorylation. On the contrary selective Plk1 inhibition exerted opposite effects. Thus, at therapeutic concentrations, AZD1775 inhibited Wee1 rather than Plk1. This information will help to better interpret results obtained by using AZD1775 both in the clinical and experimental settings and provide a stronger rationale for combination therapies.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document