scholarly journals Chloroethylnitrosourea-induced cell death and genotoxicity: Cell cycle dependence and the role of DNA double-strand breaks, HR and NHEJ

Cell Cycle ◽  
2012 ◽  
Vol 11 (14) ◽  
pp. 2606-2619 ◽  
Author(s):  
Teodora Nikolova ◽  
Frank Hennekes ◽  
Anita Bhatti ◽  
Bernd Kaina
Keyword(s):  
Cell Cycle ◽  
Cell Death ◽  
Double Strand Breaks ◽  
Dna Double Strand Breaks ◽  
Strand Breaks ◽  
Cell Cycle Dependence ◽  
Cycle Dependence

scholarly journals Cell Cycle Dependence of DNA-dependent Protein Kinase Phosphorylation in Response to DNA Double Strand Breaks

2005 ◽  
Vol 280 (15) ◽  
pp. 14709-14715 ◽  
Author(s):  
Benjamin P. C. Chen ◽  
Doug W. Chan ◽  
Junya Kobayashi ◽  
Sandeep Burma ◽  
Aroumougame Asaithamby ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cell Cycle ◽  
Protein Kinase ◽  
Double Strand Breaks ◽  
Dna Double Strand Breaks ◽  
Dependent Protein Kinase ◽  
Strand Breaks ◽  
Dependent Protein ◽  
Cell Cycle Dependence ◽  
Kinase Phosphorylation ◽  
Cycle Dependence

Induction of DNA double-strand breaks by 8-methoxycaffeine: cell cycle dependence and comparison with topoisomerase II inhibitors

1994 ◽  
Vol 15 (11) ◽  
pp. 2491-2496 ◽  
Author(s):  
Patrizia Russo ◽  
Guido Cimoli ◽  
Monica Valenti ◽  
Fabio De Sessa ◽  
Silvio Parodi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cell Cycle ◽  
Topoisomerase Ii ◽  
Double Strand Breaks ◽  
Dna Double Strand Breaks ◽  
Strand Breaks ◽  
Topoisomerase Ii Inhibitors ◽  
Cell Cycle Dependence ◽  
Cycle Dependence

scholarly journals PS2 - 153 Dianhydrogalactitol (VAL-083) Treatment Causes Irreparable DNA Double-Strand Breaks, S/G2 Phase Cell-Cycle Arrest and Cell Death in Cancer Cells

2016 ◽  
Vol 43 (S4) ◽  
pp. S12-S13
Author(s):  
B. Zhai ◽  
A. Steino ◽  
J. Bacha ◽  
D. Brown ◽  
M. Daugaard
Keyword(s):  
Cell Cycle ◽  
Dna Damage ◽  
Cell Death ◽  
Cell Cycle Arrest ◽  
Cancer Cells ◽  
Double Strand Breaks ◽  
Phase Cell ◽  
Dna Double Strand Breaks ◽  
Strand Breaks ◽  
Cycle Arrest

Dianhydrogalactitol (VAL-083) is a unique bi-functional alkylating agent causing N7-guanine-methylation and inter-strand DNA crosslinks. VAL-083 readily crosses the blood-brain barrier, accumulates in brain tumor tissue and has shown activity in prior NCI-sponsored clinical trials against various cancers, including glioblastoma (GBM) and medulloblastoma. VAL-083 is also active against GBM cancer stem cells and acts as a radiosensitizer independent of O6-methylguanine-DNA methyltransferase activity (in contrast to e.g. temozolomide and BCNU). Here we report new insights into VAL-083 mechanism of action by showing that VAL-083 induces irreversible cell-cycle arrest and cell death caused by replication-dependent DNA damage. In lung (H2122, H1792, H23, A549) and prostate (PC3, LNCaP) cancer cell lines VAL-083 treatment caused irreversible S/G2 cell-cycle arrest and cell death (IC50 range 3.06-25.7 µM). VAL-083 pulse-treatment led to persistent phosphorylation of DNA double-strand breaks (DSB) sensors ATM, single-strand DNA-binding Replication Protein A (RPA32), and histone variant H2A.X, suggesting persistent DNA lesions. After 10 months in culture with increasing VAL-083 concentrations, H1792 and LNCaP cells survive at concentrations up to 9.4 µM and 7.4 µM, respectively, suggesting that efficient resistance mechanisms are not easily acquired by the cancer cells. Taken together with previous results showing that VAL-083 circumvents cisplatin-resistance and is less dependent on p53 activity than cisplatin, these results suggest a molecular mechanism for VAL-083 that differs from both TMZ, BCNU and cisplatin. They further suggest that irreparable DNA damage induced by VAL-083 is impervious to common strategies employed by cancer cells to escape effects of alkylating drugs used in GBM treatment.

scholarly journals Inhibition of ATR Overcomes Chemotherapy Resistance in p53 Deficient Myeloma Cells

Blood ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 134 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 3109-3109
Author(s):  
Louise Bouard ◽  
Benoit Tessoulin ◽  
Géraldine Descamps ◽  
Cyrille Touzeau ◽  
Philippe Moreau ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cell Cycle ◽  
Cell Death ◽  
Dna Repair ◽  
Chemotherapy Resistance ◽  
S Phase ◽  
Double Strand Breaks ◽  
Dna Double Strand Breaks ◽  
Myeloma Cells ◽  
Strand Breaks ◽  
Cycle Arrest

In MM, as well as in most hematological malignancies, deficiency in p53 pathway (mainly because of TP53 deletion and/or mutation) is associated with resistance to treatments (Tessoulin Blood Reviews 2017; 31:251). Recent clinical studies have shown that deletion or mutation of TP53 are the most adverse prognostic values for patients (Thakurta Blood 2019;133:1217). Although these patients are easily identified, there is no dedicated therapies for them. p53 pathway is central for homeostasis and cell adaptation/response to many stresses, including DNA repair orchestration and survival regulation. In p53 deficient cells, DNA damaging drugs don't induce massive apoptosis and cells escape to death. In normal cells, DNA damaging drugs induce cell cycle arrest and DNA repair, mainly orchestrated by p53 target genes. Cell cycle arrest in S phase, which is critical for allowing homologous DNA repair, is activated by cell cycle check-point inhibitor such as Chk1, an ATR target. In p53 deficient cells, inhibiting check point inhibitor using ATR inhibitor should allow DNA damaged cells to progress into cell cycle despite the lack of repair and in fine induce replicative/mitotic catastrophe. The aim of this study was to assess whether inhibiting ATR in p53 deficient myeloma cells could overcome chemotherapy resistance. ATR inhibitor, VE-821, was assessed in 13 human myeloma cell lines (HMCLs) alone and in combination with DNA damaging agents, CX5461, a G quadruplex inhibitor, or melphalan, the « myeloma » alkylating drug. The HMCL cohort included 8 HMCLs, 5 TP53Abn and 5 TP53wt. Cell viability was assessed using Cell Titer Glo assay or using flow cytometry (loss of AnnexinV or CD138 staining in HMCLs or primary myeloma cells, respectively). In our cohort of 13 HMCLs and by contrast to previous results, CX5461 was more efficient in TP53wt than in TP53abn HMCLs (mean of death at 0.5mM was 43% versus 24%, p=0.04). Melphalan was also more potent in TP53wt than in TP53abn HMCLs (LD50 values were 26 mM versus 10 mM, p=0.008). By contrast, ATR inhibitor VE-821 (2.5mM) was efficient in both types of HMCLs (mean of death in TP53wt was 45% and 28% in TP53abn HMCLs, p=0.6). Combination of CX5641 (0.5mM) with VE-821 (2.5mM) was more efficient than each drug alone and efficacy was not dependent on TP53 status (mean of death in TP53wt was 69% versus 56% in TP53abn HMCLs, p=0.6): interestingly, combo was efficient in all TP53abn HMCLs, being either additive (n=5) or even synergistic (n=3). By contrast, combo was not efficient in all TP53wt HMCLs (either additive or antagonist). Combination of melphalan (10 mM) with VE-821 (2.5mM) was also synergistic in TP53abn HMCLs (mean of cell death was 9% with melphalan and 73% for combo, p<0.05). Preliminary results of combos in 6 consecutive primary samples with MM or plasma cell leukemia (3 TP53wt and 3 TP53abn) demonstrated efficacy. Indeed, in the 3 TP53abn samples, both CX5641/VE-821 and melphalan/VE-821 combos displayed synergism or additivity: median of expected values versus observed values was 61% versus 74% for CX5641/VE-821, and 98% versus 89% for melphalan/VE-821, respectively. In the 3 TP53wt samples, combos displayed additivity or antagonism: median of expected versus observed values was 15% versus 15% for CX5641/VE-821, and 100% versus 62% for melphalan/VE-821, respectively. In normal peripheral blood cells (n=2), both combos were not cytotoxic (mean values of cell death were 0% with CX5641/VE-821 and 3% with melphalan/VE-821). To decipher the molecular pathway involved in cell response, we monitored cell cycle using BrdU/IP assay, replicative stress response using Chk1 phosphorylation and DNA double strand breaks using Comets assays in 3 TP53abn HMCLs. At 24h, CX5641 induced an increase of cells in S (mean of increase 12%) and G2M phases (11%), while VE-821 didn't modify cell cycle. Combination of CX5641 with VE-821 induced a dramatic increase of cells in G2M (20%) (and in subG2 phase), and a decrease of cells in S phase (10%), indicating that cells blocked in S phase by CX5641 were released by VE-821.CX5641 induced Chk1 phosphorylation, which was inhibited by addition of VE-821, confirming the CX5641/ATR/Chk1 signaling. Finally, CX5641 and VE-821 induced comets, confirming irreversible DNA double strand breaks. All these results show that inhibition of ATR after inducing DNA damage in TP53abn myeloma cells efficiently induces cell death, while preserving normal cells. Disclosures Moreau: Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria.

Repair pathway choice for double-strand breaks

2020 ◽  
Vol 64 (5) ◽  
pp. 765-777 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yixi Xu ◽  
Dongyi Xu
Keyword(s):  
Cell Cycle ◽  
Double Strand Breaks ◽  
Homologous Region ◽  
Gene Repair ◽  
Repair Pathway ◽  
Dna Double Strand Breaks ◽  
Environmental Radiation ◽  
Strand Breaks ◽  
Dna End Resection ◽  
End Resection

Abstract Deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) is at a constant risk of damage from endogenous substances, environmental radiation, and chemical stressors. DNA double-strand breaks (DSBs) pose a significant threat to genomic integrity and cell survival. There are two major pathways for DSB repair: nonhomologous end-joining (NHEJ) and homologous recombination (HR). The extent of DNA end resection, which determines the length of the 3′ single-stranded DNA (ssDNA) overhang, is the primary factor that determines whether repair is carried out via NHEJ or HR. NHEJ, which does not require a 3′ ssDNA tail, occurs throughout the cell cycle. 53BP1 and the cofactors PTIP or RIF1-shieldin protect the broken DNA end, inhibit long-range end resection and thus promote NHEJ. In contrast, HR mainly occurs during the S/G2 phase and requires DNA end processing to create a 3′ tail that can invade a homologous region, ensuring faithful gene repair. BRCA1 and the cofactors CtIP, EXO1, BLM/DNA2, and the MRE11–RAD50–NBS1 (MRN) complex promote DNA end resection and thus HR. DNA resection is influenced by the cell cycle, the chromatin environment, and the complexity of the DNA end break. Herein, we summarize the key factors involved in repair pathway selection for DSBs and discuss recent related publications.

scholarly journals Genetic Separation of Sae2 Nuclease Activity from Mre11 Nuclease Functions in Budding Yeast

2017 ◽  
Vol 37 (24) ◽  
Author(s):  
Sucheta Arora ◽  
Rajashree A. Deshpande ◽  
Martin Budd ◽  
Judy Campbell ◽  
America Revere ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Nuclease Activity ◽  
Double Strand Breaks ◽  
Endonuclease Activity ◽  
Dna Double Strand Breaks ◽  
Dna Breaks ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Strand Breaks ◽  
Dna Ends

ABSTRACT Sae2 promotes the repair of DNA double-strand breaks in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. The role of Sae2 is linked to the Mre11/Rad50/Xrs2 (MRX) complex, which is important for the processing of DNA ends into single-stranded substrates for homologous recombination. Sae2 has intrinsic endonuclease activity, but the role of this activity has not been assessed independently from its functions in promoting Mre11 nuclease activity. Here we identify and characterize separation-of-function mutants that lack intrinsic nuclease activity or the ability to promote Mre11 endonucleolytic activity. We find that the ability of Sae2 to promote MRX nuclease functions is important for DNA damage survival, particularly in the absence of Dna2 nuclease activity. In contrast, Sae2 nuclease activity is essential for DNA repair when the Mre11 nuclease is compromised. Resection of DNA breaks is impaired when either Sae2 activity is blocked, suggesting roles for both Mre11 and Sae2 nuclease activities in promoting the processing of DNA ends in vivo. Finally, both activities of Sae2 are important for sporulation, indicating that the processing of meiotic breaks requires both Mre11 and Sae2 nuclease activities.

scholarly journals TOPOVIBL-REC114 interaction regulates meiotic DNA double-strand breaks

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alexandre Nore ◽  
Ariadna B Juarez-Martinez ◽  
Julie AJ Clement ◽  
Christine Brun ◽  
Bouboub Diagouraga ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Dna Cleavage ◽  
Point Mutations ◽  
Double Strand Breaks ◽  
Dna Double Strand Breaks ◽  
Catalytic Complex ◽  
Strand Breaks ◽  
Genome Wide ◽  
Dna Cleavage Activity ◽  
Meiotic Dsbs

Meiosis requires the formation of programmed DNA double strand breaks (DSBs), essential for fertility and for generating genetic diversity. In male and female meiotic cells, DSBs are induced by the catalytic activity of the TOPOVIL complex formed by SPO11 and TOPOVIBL. To ensure genomic integrity, DNA cleavage activity is tightly regulated, and several accessory factors (REC114, MEI4, IHO1, and MEI1) are needed for DSB formation in mice. How and when these proteins act is not understood. Here, we show that REC114 is a direct partner of TOPOVIBL, and identified their conserved interacting domains by structural analysis. We then analysed the role of this interaction by monitoring meiotic DSBs in female and male mice carrying point mutations in TOPOVIBL that decrease or disrupt its binding to REC114. In these mutants, DSB activity was strongly reduced genome-wide in oocytes, but only in sub-telomeric regions in spermatocytes. In addition, in mutant spermatocytes, DSB activity was delayed in autosomes. These results provide evidence that REC114 is a key member of the TOPOVIL catalytic complex, and that the REC114/TOPOVIBL interaction ensures the efficiency and timing of DSB activity by integrating specific chromosomal features.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document