Literature DB >> 25636482

Modeling the study of DNA damage responses in mice.

Julia Specks1, Maria Nieto-Soler, Andres J Lopez-Contreras, Oscar Fernandez-Capetillo.   

Abstract

Damaged DNA has a profound impact on mammalian health and overall survival. In addition to being the source of mutations that initiate cancer, the accumulation of toxic amounts of DNA damage can cause severe developmental diseases and accelerate aging. Therefore, understanding how cells respond to DNA damage has become one of the most intense areas of biomedical research in the recent years. However, whereas most mechanistic studies derive from in vitro or in cellulo work, the impact of a given mutation on a living organism is largely unpredictable. For instance, why BRCA1 mutations preferentially lead to breast cancer whereas mutations compromising mismatch repair drive colon cancer is still not understood. In this context, evaluating the specific physiological impact of mutations that compromise genome integrity has become crucial for a better dimensioning of our knowledge. We here describe the various technologies that can be used for modeling mutations in mice and provide a review of the genes and pathways that have been modeled so far in the context of DNA damage responses.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25636482      PMCID: PMC4878652          DOI: 10.1007/978-1-4939-2297-0_21

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Methods Mol Biol        ISSN: 1064-3745


  152 in total

1.  MDC1 maintains genomic stability by participating in the amplification of ATM-dependent DNA damage signals.

Authors:  Zhenkun Lou; Katherine Minter-Dykhouse; Sonia Franco; Monica Gostissa; Melissa A Rivera; Arkady Celeste; John P Manis; Jan van Deursen; André Nussenzweig; Tanya T Paull; Frederick W Alt; Junjie Chen
Journal:  Mol Cell       Date:  2006-01-20       Impact factor: 17.970

2.  Transgenesis by means of blastocyst-derived embryonic stem cell lines.

Authors:  A Gossler; T Doetschman; R Korn; E Serfling; R Kemler
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  1986-12       Impact factor: 11.205

3.  Loss of Bard1, the heterodimeric partner of the Brca1 tumor suppressor, results in early embryonic lethality and chromosomal instability.

Authors:  Ellen E McCarthy; Julide T Celebi; Richard Baer; Thomas Ludwig
Journal:  Mol Cell Biol       Date:  2003-07       Impact factor: 4.272

4.  Targeted disruption of ATM leads to growth retardation, chromosomal fragmentation during meiosis, immune defects, and thymic lymphoma.

Authors:  Y Xu; T Ashley; E E Brainerd; R T Bronson; M S Meyn; D Baltimore
Journal:  Genes Dev       Date:  1996-10-01       Impact factor: 11.361

5.  Involvement of mammalian Mus81 in genome integrity and tumor suppression.

Authors:  John Peter McPherson; Bénédicte Lemmers; Richard Chahwan; Ashwin Pamidi; Eva Migon; Elzbieta Matysiak-Zablocki; Mary Ellen Moynahan; Jeroen Essers; Katsuhiro Hanada; Anuradha Poonepalli; Otto Sanchez-Sweatman; Rama Khokha; Roland Kanaar; Maria Jasin; M Prakash Hande; Razqallah Hakem
Journal:  Science       Date:  2004-06-18       Impact factor: 47.728

6.  The basal-like mammary carcinomas induced by Brca1 or Bard1 inactivation implicate the BRCA1/BARD1 heterodimer in tumor suppression.

Authors:  Reena Shakya; Matthias Szabolcs; Ellen McCarthy; Elson Ospina; Katia Basso; Subhadra Nandula; Vundavalli Murty; Richard Baer; Thomas Ludwig
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2008-04-28       Impact factor: 11.205

7.  Selective disruption of genes expressed in totipotent embryonal stem cells.

Authors:  H von Melchner; J V DeGregori; H Rayburn; S Reddy; C Friedel; H E Ruley
Journal:  Genes Dev       Date:  1992-06       Impact factor: 11.361

8.  BRCA1 RING function is essential for tumor suppression but dispensable for therapy resistance.

Authors:  Rinske Drost; Peter Bouwman; Sven Rottenberg; Ute Boon; Eva Schut; Sjoerd Klarenbeek; Christiaan Klijn; Ingrid van der Heijden; Hanneke van der Gulden; Ellen Wientjens; Mark Pieterse; Aurelie Catteau; Pete Green; Ellen Solomon; Joanna R Morris; Jos Jonkers
Journal:  Cancer Cell       Date:  2011-12-13       Impact factor: 31.743

9.  Lymphocyte-specific compensation for XLF/cernunnos end-joining functions in V(D)J recombination.

Authors:  Gang Li; Frederick W Alt; Hwei-Ling Cheng; James W Brush; Peter H Goff; Mike M Murphy; Sonia Franco; Yu Zhang; Shan Zha
Journal:  Mol Cell       Date:  2008-09-05       Impact factor: 17.970

10.  The E mu-myc transgenic mouse. A model for high-incidence spontaneous lymphoma and leukemia of early B cells.

Authors:  A W Harris; C A Pinkert; M Crawford; W Y Langdon; R L Brinster; J M Adams
Journal:  J Exp Med       Date:  1988-02-01       Impact factor: 14.307

View more
  2 in total

Review 1.  DNA mismatch repair and the DNA damage response.

Authors:  Zhongdao Li; Alexander H Pearlman; Peggy Hsieh
Journal:  DNA Repair (Amst)       Date:  2015-12-02

2.  Ablating putative Ku70 phosphorylation sites results in defective DNA damage repair and spontaneous induction of hepatocellular carcinoma.

Authors:  Janapriya Saha; Jinsung Bae; Shih-Ya Wang; Huiming Lu; Lori J Chappell; Purva Gopal; Anthony J Davis
Journal:  Nucleic Acids Res       Date:  2021-09-27       Impact factor: 16.971

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.