4.8 Article

Forced activation of Cdk1 via wee1 inhibition impairs homologous recombination

Journal

ONCOGENE
Volume 32, Issue 24, Pages 3001-3008

Publisher

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/onc.2012.296

Keywords

Wee1; homologous recombination; DNA repair; cell cycle checkpoint; MK-1775

Funding

  1. NWO-VENI grant [916.76.062]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

In response to DNA breaks, the 'DNA damage response' provokes a cell cycle arrest to facilitate DNA repair. Recent findings have indicated that cells can respond to DNA damage throughout the cell cycle, except during mitosis. Specifically, various mitotic kinases, including Cdk1, Aurora A and Plk1, were shown to inactivate key DNA damage checkpoint proteins when cells enter mitosis. Aberrant activation of mitotic kinases during interphase could therefore modulate cellular responses to DNA damage. In this study, our aim was to determine how aberrant activation of Cdk1 affects the cellular responses to DNA damage. We used Wee1 inhibition, using MK-1775, to force Cdk1 activation, which did not cause cytotoxicity in non-transformed cells. Instead, it accelerated mitotic entry and caused radio sensitization in p53-defective cancer cells, but not in p53-proficient cancer cells. Interestingly, we showed that Wee1 inhibition leads to elevation of Cdk1 activity in interphase cells. When we subsequently analyzed DNA damage responses in cells with forced Cdk1 activation, we observed a marked reduction of 53BP1 at sites of DNA damage along with an increase in g-H2AX staining after irradiation, indicative of defective DNA repair. Indeed, when DNA repair was analyzed using in vivo endonuclease-induced homologous recombination (HR) assays, compromised DNA repair after Wee1 inhibition was confirmed. This defect in HR was accompanied by increased phosphorylation of BRCA2 at the Cdk1 phosphorylation site S3291. Taken together, our results indicate that Wee1 inhibition leads to forced Cdk1 activation in interphase cells, which interferes with normal DNA damage responses.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available