4.7 Review

Do TUNEL and Other Apoptosis Assays Detect Cell Death in Preclinical Studies?

Journal

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/ijms21239090

Keywords

apoptosis; reversal; anastasis; DNA strand breakage; TUNEL; polyploid giant cancer cells; micronucleation; senescence; cancer therapy

Funding

  1. Canadian Breast Cancer Foundation-Prairies/North West Territories region

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The terminal deoxynucleotidyl transferase-mediated dUTP nick end labeling (TUNEL) assay detects DNA breakage by labeling the free 3-hydroxyl termini. Given that genomic DNA breaks arise during early and late stages of apoptosis, TUNEL staining continues to be widely used as a measure of apoptotic cell death. The advantages of the assay include its relative ease of performance and the broad availability of TUNEL assay kits for various applications, such as single-cell analysis of apoptosis in cell cultures and tissue samples. However, as briefly discussed herein, aside from some concerns relating to the specificity of the TUNEL assay itself, it was demonstrated some twenty years ago that the early stages of apoptosis, detected by TUNEL, can be reversed. More recently, compelling evidence from different biological systems has revealed that cells can recover from even late stage apoptosis through a process called anastasis. Specifically, such recovery has been observed in cells exhibiting caspase activation, genomic DNA breakage, phosphatidylserine externalization, and formation of apoptotic bodies. Furthermore, there is solid evidence demonstrating that apoptotic cells can promote neighboring tumor cell repopulation (e.g., through caspase-3-mediated secretion of prostaglandin E-2) and confer resistance to anticancer therapy. Accordingly, caution should be exercised in the interpretation of results obtained by the TUNEL and other apoptosis assays (e.g., caspase activation) in terms of apoptotic cell demise.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available