Adenovirus DNA polymerase is one of three viral proteins and two cellular proteins required for replication of the adenovirus genome. During initiation of viral DNA synthesis the viral DNA polymerase transfers dCMP onto the adenovirus preterminal protein, to which it is tightly bound. The domain structure of the 140 kDa DNA polymerase has been probed by partial proteolysis and the sites of proteolytic cleavage determined by N-terminal sequencing. At least four domains can be recognised within the DNA polymerase. Adenovirus preterminal protein interacts with three of the four proteolytically derived domains. This was confirmed by cloning and expression of each of the individual domains. These data indicate that, like other members of the pol alpha family of DNA polymerases, the adenovirus DNA polymerase has a multidomain structure and that interaction with preterminal protein takes place with non-contiguous regions of the polypeptide chain over a large surface area of the viral DNA polymerase.

HT1080/DR4 (DR4) is a doxorubicin-resistant human fibrosarcoma line that exhibits 150-fold cross-resistance to etoposide but does not overexpress P-glycoprotein (one mechanism of multiple drug resistance). We examined another possible mechanism that could explain resistance to both doxorubicin and etoposide: a quantitative or qualitative alteration in topoisomerase II, the putative nuclear target of these agents. The amount of immunoreactive topoisomerase II present in whole-cell lysates and nuclear extracts was three- to 10-fold lower in DR4 than in HT1080 cells. However, the topoisomerase II in nuclear extracts from both lines was sensitive to the effects of amsacrine (AMSA) and etoposide. Following treatment with AMSA, etoposide, and 5-iminodaunorubicin, topoisomerase II-mediated DNA cleavage in DR4 cells and nuclei was reduced compared with cleavage in HT1080 parent cells and nuclei. The difference between the HT1080 and DR4 lines in AMSA- and 5-iminodaunorubicin-induced cleavage was similar in cells and nuclei and could be due to the lower amount of DR4 topoisomerase II. By contrast, the difference between the HT1080 and DR4 lines in etoposide-induced DNA cleavage was much greater in cells than in nuclei. This finding suggested that cytosolic factors, removed from isolated nuclei, could influence the susceptibility of intact cells to the cytotoxic and DNA-cleaving actions of etoposide. The specific activities of several antioxidant enzymes, components of the cell's defense against free-radical damage that may be produced by doxorubicin or etoposide, were significantly different in HT1080 and DR4 cytosolic extracts. These differences may constitute an additional mechanism of resistance. Regardless, the magnitude of the resistance of DR4 to doxorubicin and etoposide cannot be explained solely on the basis of a topoisomerase II-related mechanism.

No abstract

HL-60/AMSA is a human leukemia cell line that is 50-100-fold more resistant than its drug-sensitive HL-60 parent line to the cytotoxic actions of the DNA intercalator amsacrine (m-AMSA). HL-60/AMSA topoisomerase II is also resistant to the inhibitory actions of m-AMSA. HL-60/AMSA cells and topoisomerase II are cross-resistant to anthracycline and ellipticine intercalators but relatively sensitive to the nonintercalating topoisomerase II reactive epipodophyllotoxin etoposide. We now demonstrate that HL-60/AMSA and its topoisomerase II are cross-resistant to the DNA intercalators mitoxantrone and amonafide, thus strongly indicating that HL-60/AMSA and its topoisomerase II are resistant to topoisomerase II reactive intercalators but not to nonintercalators. At high concentrations, mitoxantrone and amonafide were also found to inhibit their own, m-AMSA's, and etoposide's abilities to stabilize topoisomerase II-DNA complexes. This appears to be due to the ability of these concentrations of mitoxantrone and amonafide to inhibit topoisomerase II mediated DNA strand passage at a point in the topoisomerization cycle prior to the acquisition of the enzyme-DNA configuration that yields DNA cleavage and topoisomerase II-DNA cross-links. In addition, amonafide can inhibit the cytotoxic actions of m-AMSA and etoposide. Taken together, these results suggest that the cytotoxicity of m-AMSA and etoposide is initiated primarily by the stabilization of the topoisomerase II-DNA complex. Other topoisomerase II reactive drugs may inhibit the enzyme at other steps in the topoisomerization cycle, particularly at elevated concentrations.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

No abstract