4.8 Article

Three Epstein-Barr virus latency proteins independently promote genomic instability by inducing DNA damage, inhibiting DNA repair and inactivating cell cycle checkpoints

期刊

ONCOGENE
卷 28, 期 45, 页码 3997-4008

出版社

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/onc.2009.258

关键词

Epstein-Barr virus; genomic instability; DNA repair; mitotic spindle checkpoint

资金

  1. Swedish Cancer Society
  2. Swedish Medical Research Council
  3. Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden
  4. INCA [LSHC-CT-2005-018704]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Epstein-Barr virus (EBV) has been implicated in the pathogenesis of human malignancies, but its contribution to tumorigenesis is not well understood. EBV carriage is associated with increased genomic instability in Burkitt's lymphoma, suggesting that viral products may induce this tumor phenotype. Using a panel of transfected sublines of the B-lymphoma line BJAB expressing the viral genes associated with latent infection, we show that the EBV nuclear antigens, EBNA-1 and EBNA-3C, and the latent membrane protein 1, LMP-1, independently promote genomic instability, as detected by nonclonal chromosomal aberrations, DNA breaks and phosphorylation of histone H2AX. EBNA-1 promotes the generation of DNA damage by inducing reactive oxygen species (ROS), whereas DNA repair is inhibited in LMP-1-expressing cells through downregulation of the DNA damage-sensing kinase, ataxia telangiectasia mutated (ATM), reduction of phosphorylation of its downstream targets Chk2 and inactivation of the G(2) checkpoint. EBNA-3C enhances the propagation of damaged DNA through inactivation of the mitotic spindle checkpoint and transcriptional downregulation of BubR1. Thus, multiple cellular functions involved in the maintenance of genome integrity seem to be independently targeted by EBV, pointing to the induction of genomic instability as a critical event in viral oncogenesis. Oncogene (2009) 28, 3997-4008; doi:10.1038/onc.2009.258; published online 31 August 2009

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据