Simran Kaur1,2, Zubaidah M Ramdzan1, Marie-Christine Guiot3,4, Li Li1, Lam Leduy1, Dindial Ramotar5, Siham Sabri6, Bassam Abdulkarim6, Alain Nepveu1,2,6. 1. Goodman Cancer Research Centre, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada. 2. Departments of Biochemistry, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada. 3. Pathology, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada. 4. Departments of Pathology, Neurology, and Neurosurgery, Montreal Neurological Institute and Hospital, Montreal, Quebec, Canada. 5. Maisonneuve-Rosemont Hospital, Research Center, Faculty of Medicine, University of Montreal, Montreal, Quebec, Canada. 6. Oncology, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
Abstract
Background: Cut Like homeobox 1 (CUX1), which encodes an auxiliary factor in base excision repair, resides on 7q22.1, the most frequently and highly amplified chromosomal region in glioblastomas. The resistance of glioblastoma cells to the mono-alkylating agent temozolomide is determined to some extent by the activity of apurinic/apyrimidinic endonuclease 1 (APE1). Methods: To monitor the effect of CUX1 and its CUT domains on APE1 activity, DNA repair assays were performed with purified proteins and cell extracts. CUX1 protein expression was analyzed by immunohistochemistry using a tumor microarray of 150 glioblastoma samples. The effect of CUX1 knockdown and overexpression on the resistance of glioblastoma cell lines to temozolomide was investigated. Results: We show that CUT domains stimulate APE1 activity. In agreement with these findings, CUX1 knockdown causes an increase in the number of abasic sites in genomic DNA and a decrease in APE1 activity as measured in cell extracts. Conversely, ectopic CUX1 expression increases APE1 activity and lowers the number of abasic sites. Having established that CUX1 is expressed at high levels in most glioblastomas, we next show that the resistance of glioblastoma cells to temozolomide and to a combined treatment of temozolomide and ionizing radiation is reduced following CUX1 knockdown, but increased by overexpression of CUX1 or a short protein containing only 2 CUT domains, which is active in DNA repair but devoid of transcriptional activity. Conclusion: These findings indicate that CUX1 expression level impacts on the response of glioblastoma cells to treatment and identifies the CUT domains as potential therapeutic targets.
Background: Cut Like homeobox 1 (CUX1), which encodes an auxiliary factor in base excision repair, resides on 7q22.1, the most frequently and highly amplified chromosomal region in glioblastomas. The resistance of glioblastoma cells to the mono-alkylating agent temozolomide is determined to some extent by the activity of apurinic/apyrimidinic endonuclease 1 (APE1). Methods: To monitor the effect of CUX1 and its CUT domains on APE1 activity, DNA repair assays were performed with purified proteins and cell extracts. CUX1 protein expression was analyzed by immunohistochemistry using a tumor microarray of 150 glioblastoma samples. The effect of CUX1 knockdown and overexpression on the resistance of glioblastoma cell lines to temozolomide was investigated. Results: We show that CUT domains stimulate APE1 activity. In agreement with these findings, CUX1 knockdown causes an increase in the number of abasic sites in genomic DNA and a decrease in APE1 activity as measured in cell extracts. Conversely, ectopic CUX1 expression increases APE1 activity and lowers the number of abasic sites. Having established that CUX1 is expressed at high levels in most glioblastomas, we next show that the resistance of glioblastoma cells to temozolomide and to a combined treatment of temozolomide and ionizing radiation is reduced following CUX1 knockdown, but increased by overexpression of CUX1 or a short protein containing only 2 CUT domains, which is active in DNA repair but devoid of transcriptional activity. Conclusion: These findings indicate that CUX1 expression level impacts on the response of glioblastoma cells to treatment and identifies the CUT domains as potential therapeutic targets.
Authors: Patrick Michl; Antoine R Ramjaun; Olivier E Pardo; Patricia H Warne; Martin Wagner; Richard Poulsom; Corrado D'Arrigo; Kenneth Ryder; Andre Menke; Thomas Gress; Julian Downward Journal: Cancer Cell Date: 2005-06 Impact factor: 31.743
Authors: Roger Stupp; Monika E Hegi; Warren P Mason; Martin J van den Bent; Martin J B Taphoorn; Robert C Janzer; Samuel K Ludwin; Anouk Allgeier; Barbara Fisher; Karl Belanger; Peter Hau; Alba A Brandes; Johanna Gijtenbeek; Christine Marosi; Charles J Vecht; Karima Mokhtari; Pieter Wesseling; Salvador Villa; Elizabeth Eisenhauer; Thierry Gorlia; Michael Weller; Denis Lacombe; J Gregory Cairncross; René-Olivier Mirimanoff Journal: Lancet Oncol Date: 2009-03-09 Impact factor: 41.316
Authors: Nam Sung Moon; Wendy Rong Zeng; Peter Premdas; Marianne Santaguida; Ginette Bérubé; Alain Nepveu Journal: Int J Cancer Date: 2002-08-01 Impact factor: 7.396
Authors: Monika E Hegi; Lili Liu; James G Herman; Roger Stupp; Wolfgang Wick; Michael Weller; Minesh P Mehta; Mark R Gilbert Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2008-09-01 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Lior Weissman; Dong-Gyu Jo; Martin M Sørensen; Nadja C de Souza-Pinto; William R Markesbery; Mark P Mattson; Vilhelm A Bohr Journal: Nucleic Acids Res Date: 2007-08-17 Impact factor: 16.971
Authors: Aruna S Jaiswal; Elizabeth A Williamson; Gayathri Srinivasan; Kimi Kong; Carrie L Lomelino; Robert McKenna; Christi Walter; Patrick Sung; Satya Narayan; Robert Hromas Journal: DNA Repair (Amst) Date: 2019-12-13
Authors: Mai Aly; Zubaidah M Ramdzan; Yasunobu Nagata; Suresh K Balasubramanian; Naoko Hosono; Hideki Makishima; Valeria Visconte; Teodora Kuzmanovic; Vera Adema; Aziz Nazha; Bartlomiej P Przychodzen; Cassandra M Kerr; Mikkael A Sekeres; Mohamed E Abazeed; Alain Nepveu; Jaroslaw P Maciejewski Journal: Blood Adv Date: 2019-07-23
Authors: Yuanliang Yan; Zhijie Xu; Xi Chen; Xiang Wang; Shuangshuang Zeng; Zijin Zhao; Long Qian; Zhi Li; Jie Wei; Lei Huo; Xuejun Li; Zhicheng Gong; Lunquan Sun Journal: Front Cell Dev Biol Date: 2019-10-02