Literature DB >> 29950726

High speed of fork progression induces DNA replication stress and genomic instability.

Apolinar Maya-Mendoza1, Pavel Moudry2,3, Joanna Maria Merchut-Maya2, MyungHee Lee2, Robert Strauss2, Jiri Bartek4,5,6.   

Abstract

Accurate replication of DNA requires stringent regulation to ensure genome integrity. In human cells, thousands of origins of replication are coordinately activated during S phase, and the velocity of replication forks is adjusted to fully replicate DNA in pace with the cell cycle1. Replication stress induces fork stalling and fuels genome instability2. The mechanistic basis of replication stress remains poorly understood despite its emerging role in promoting cancer2. Here we show that inhibition of poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) increases the speed of fork elongation and does not cause fork stalling, which is in contrast to the accepted model in which inhibitors of PARP induce fork stalling and collapse3. Aberrant acceleration of fork progression by 40% above the normal velocity leads to DNA damage. Depletion of the treslin or MTBP proteins, which are involved in origin firing, also increases fork speed above the tolerated threshold, and induces the DNA damage response pathway. Mechanistically, we show that poly(ADP-ribosyl)ation (PARylation) and the PCNA interactor p21Cip1 (p21) are crucial modulators of fork progression. PARylation and p21 act as suppressors of fork speed in a coordinated regulatory network that is orchestrated by the PARP1 and p53 proteins. Moreover, at the fork level, PARylation acts as a sensor of replication stress. During PARP inhibition, DNA lesions that induce fork arrest and are normally resolved or repaired remain unrecognized by the replication machinery. Conceptually, our results show that accelerated replication fork progression represents a general mechanism that triggers replication stress and the DNA damage response. Our findings contribute to a better understanding of the mechanism of fork speed control, with implications for genomic (in)stability and rational cancer treatment.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29950726     DOI: 10.1038/s41586-018-0261-5

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Nature        ISSN: 0028-0836            Impact factor:   49.962


  155 in total

1.  Activation of PARP-1 by snoRNAs Controls Ribosome Biogenesis and Cell Growth via the RNA Helicase DDX21.

Authors:  Dae-Seok Kim; Cristel V Camacho; Anusha Nagari; Venkat S Malladi; Sridevi Challa; W Lee Kraus
Journal:  Mol Cell       Date:  2019-07-24       Impact factor: 17.970

Review 2.  PARP-1 and its associated nucleases in DNA damage response.

Authors:  Yijie Wang; Weibo Luo; Yingfei Wang
Journal:  DNA Repair (Amst)       Date:  2019-07-08

3.  CARM1 regulates replication fork speed and stress response by stimulating PARP1.

Authors:  Marie-Michelle Genois; Jean-Philippe Gagné; Takaaki Yasuhara; Jessica Jackson; Sneha Saxena; Marie-France Langelier; Ivan Ahel; Mark T Bedford; John M Pascal; Alessandro Vindigni; Guy G Poirier; Lee Zou
Journal:  Mol Cell       Date:  2021-01-06       Impact factor: 17.970

4.  PTEN and DNA-PK determine sensitivity and recovery in response to WEE1 inhibition in human breast cancer.

Authors:  Andrä Brunner; Aldwin Suryo Rahmanto; Henrik Johansson; Marcela Franco; Johanna Viiliäinen; Mohiuddin Gazi; Oliver Frings; Erik Fredlund; Charles Spruck; Janne Lehtiö; Juha K Rantala; Lars-Gunnar Larsson; Olle Sangfelt
Journal:  Elife       Date:  2020-07-06       Impact factor: 8.140

Review 5.  Replication Stress: An Achilles' Heel of Glioma Cancer Stem-like Cells.

Authors:  Meredith A Morgan; Christine E Canman
Journal:  Cancer Res       Date:  2018-11-29       Impact factor: 12.701

6.  Chk1 loss creates replication barriers that compromise cell survival independently of excess origin firing.

Authors:  Marina A González Besteiro; Nicolás L Calzetta; Sofía M Loureiro; Martín Habif; Rémy Bétous; Marie-Jeanne Pillaire; Antonio Maffia; Simone Sabbioneda; Jean-Sébastien Hoffmann; Vanesa Gottifredi
Journal:  EMBO J       Date:  2019-07-11       Impact factor: 11.598

7.  A P53-Independent DNA Damage Response Suppresses Oncogenic Proliferation and Genome Instability.

Authors:  Katerina D Fagan-Solis; Dennis A Simpson; Rashmi J Kumar; Luciano G Martelotto; Lisle E Mose; Naim U Rashid; Alice Y Ho; Simon N Powell; Y Hannah Wen; Joel S Parker; Jorge S Reis-Filho; John H J Petrini; Gaorav P Gupta
Journal:  Cell Rep       Date:  2020-02-04       Impact factor: 9.423

8.  HLTF Promotes Fork Reversal, Limiting Replication Stress Resistance and Preventing Multiple Mechanisms of Unrestrained DNA Synthesis.

Authors:  Gongshi Bai; Chames Kermi; Henriette Stoy; Carl J Schiltz; Julien Bacal; Angela M Zaino; M Kyle Hadden; Brandt F Eichman; Massimo Lopes; Karlene A Cimprich
Journal:  Mol Cell       Date:  2020-05-21       Impact factor: 17.970

9.  Hair follicle stem cell replication stress drives IFI16/STING-dependent inflammation in hidradenitis suppurativa.

Authors:  Cindy Orvain; Yea-Lih Lin; Francette Jean-Louis; Hakim Hocini; Barbara Hersant; Yamina Bennasser; Nicolas Ortonne; Claire Hotz; Pierre Wolkenstein; Michele Boniotto; Pascaline Tisserand; Cécile Lefebvre; Jean-Daniel Lelièvre; Monsef Benkirane; Philippe Pasero; Yves Lévy; Sophie Hüe
Journal:  J Clin Invest       Date:  2020-07-01       Impact factor: 14.808

10.  Combined TP53 and RB1 Loss Promotes Prostate Cancer Resistance to a Spectrum of Therapeutics and Confers Vulnerability to Replication Stress.

Authors:  Michael D Nyquist; Alexandra Corella; Ilsa Coleman; Navonil De Sarkar; Arja Kaipainen; Gavin Ha; Roman Gulati; Lisa Ang; Payel Chatterjee; Jared Lucas; Colin Pritchard; Gail Risbridger; John Isaacs; Bruce Montgomery; Colm Morrissey; Eva Corey; Peter S Nelson
Journal:  Cell Rep       Date:  2020-05-26       Impact factor: 9.423

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.