Article

Differential effects of poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibition on DNA break repair in human cells are revealed with Epstein-Barr virus.

Chromosome Stability Section, National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, National Institutes of Health, Research Triangle Park, NC 27709, USA.
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (Impact Factor: 9.81). 04/2012; 109(17):6590-5. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1118078109
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors can generate synthetic lethality in cancer cells defective in homologous recombination. However, the mechanism(s) by which they affect DNA repair has not been established. Here we directly determined the effects of PARP inhibition and PARP1 depletion on the repair of ionizing radiation-induced single- and double-strand breaks (SSBs and DSBs) in human lymphoid cell lines. To do this, we developed an in vivo repair assay based on large endogenous Epstein-Barr virus (EBV) circular episomes. The EBV break assay provides the opportunity to assess quantitatively and simultaneously the induction and repair of SSBs and DSBs in human cells. Repair was efficient in G1 and G2 cells and was not dependent on functional p53. shRNA-mediated knockdown of PARP1 demonstrated that the PARP1 protein was not essential for SSB repair. Among 10 widely used PARP inhibitors, none affected DSB repair, although an inhibitor of DNA-dependent protein kinase was highly effective at reducing DSB repair. Only Olaparib and Iniparib, which are in clinical cancer therapy trials, as well as 4-AN inhibited SSB repair. However, a decrease in PARP1 expression reversed the ability of Iniparib to reduce SSB repair. Because Iniparib disrupts PARP1-DNA binding, the mechanism of inhibition does not appear to involve trapping PARP at SSBs.

0 Bookmarks
 · 
82 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Deregulation of the transforming acidic coiled-coil protein 3 (TACC3), an important factor in the centrosome-microtubule system, has been linked to a variety of human cancer types. We have recently reported on the oncogenic potential of TACC3; however, the molecular mechanisms by which TACC3 mediates oncogenic function remain to be elucidated. In this study, we show that high levels of TACC3 lead to the accumulation of DNA double-strand breaks (DSBs) and disrupt the normal cellular response to DNA damage, at least in part, by negatively regulating the expression of ataxia telangiectasia mutated (ATM) and the subsequent DNA damage response (DDR) signaling cascade. Cells expressing high levels of TACC3 display defective checkpoints and DSB-mediated homologous recombination (HR) and non-homologous end joining (NHEJ) repair systems, leading to genomic instability. Importantly, high levels of TACC3 confer cellular sensitization to radiation and poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibition. Overall, our findings provide critical information regarding the mechanisms by which TACC3 contributes to genomic instability, potentially leading to cancer development, and suggest a novel prognostic, diagnostic and therapeutic strategy for the treatment of cancer types expressing high levels of TACC3.Oncogene advance online publication, 28 April 2014; doi:10.1038/onc.2014.105.
    Oncogene 04/2014; · 8.56 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: DNA is subject to many endogenous and exogenous insults that impair DNA replication and proper chromosome segregation. DNA double-strand breaks (DSBs) are one of the most toxic of these lesions and must be repaired to preserve chromosomal integrity. Eukaryotes are equipped with several different, but related, repair mechanisms involving homologous recombination, including single-strand annealing, gene conversion, and break-induced replication. In this review, we highlight the chief sources of DSBs and crucial requirements for each of these repair processes, as well as the methods to identify and study intermediate steps in DSB repair by homologous recombination.
    Cold Spring Harbor perspectives in biology 08/2014; · 8.23 Impact Factor
  • Source
    Experimental Cell Research 11/2014; · 3.37 Impact Factor

Full-text (2 Sources)

Download
32 Downloads
Available from
May 22, 2014