2002
DOI: 10.1038/ncb892
|View full text |Cite|
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

53BP1 functions in an ATM-dependent checkpoint pathway that is constitutively activated in human cancer

Abstract: 53BP1 is a conserved nuclear protein that is implicated in the DNA damage response. After irradiation, 53BP1 localizes rapidly to nuclear foci, which represent sites of DNA double strand breaks, but its precise function is unclear. Using small interference RNA (siRNA), we demonstrate that 53BP1 functions as a DNA damage checkpoint protein. 53BP1 is required for at least a subset of ataxia telangiectasia-mutated (ATM)-dependent phosphorylation events at sites of DNA breaks and for cell cycle arrest at the G2-M … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

18
332
0
7

Year Published

2006
2006
2012
2012

Publication Types

Select...
9
1

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 388 publications
(363 citation statements)
references
References 24 publications
18
332
0
7
Order By: Relevance
“…The phosphorylation of Chk1 kinase, a mediator of DNA damage signaling, was more pronounced after knockdown of FATS expression in mouse embryonic fibroblast (MEF) cells after IR treatment (Figure 3b). To further verify this observation, we examined the effect of FATS knockdown on IR-induced nuclear foci of 53BP1, a mediator of DNA damage signaling (DiTullio et al, 2002). The nuclear staining of 53BP1 in unstressed cells was diffused, and a few nuclear foci of 53BP1 were observed 3 h after IR treatment in MEF cells.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 94%
“…The phosphorylation of Chk1 kinase, a mediator of DNA damage signaling, was more pronounced after knockdown of FATS expression in mouse embryonic fibroblast (MEF) cells after IR treatment (Figure 3b). To further verify this observation, we examined the effect of FATS knockdown on IR-induced nuclear foci of 53BP1, a mediator of DNA damage signaling (DiTullio et al, 2002). The nuclear staining of 53BP1 in unstressed cells was diffused, and a few nuclear foci of 53BP1 were observed 3 h after IR treatment in MEF cells.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 94%
“…The former variability likely reflects the diverse genetic backgrounds in our models, particularly the status of the p53 and RB tumor suppressors whose defects (in MDA-MB-468 and HS913T cells) correlated with rather poor responses compared with p53/RBproficient U2OS and A549 cells. RB and p53 are critical for proper execution of senescence (Collado et al, 2007; and their defects are often accompanied by enhanced constitutive DNA damage (DiTullio et al, 2002), also because such tumors breached the anticancer barrier of DNA damage checkpoints and senescence Halazonetis et al, 2008). The fact that HeLa cells responded relatively well to genotoxic drugs may reflect BrdU/ DMA-induced degradation of the papilloma virus oncoproteins E6 and E7 (Suzuki et al, 2001), thereby liberating the endogenous p53 and RB functions, and hence promoting the senescence response.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Insights into both of these fundamental issues have recently been obtained and helped to formulate the concept of DDR activation in response to tumorigenic insults and a candidate biological barrier that delays or prevents cancer progression in vivo. Arguably, the key initial observations that inspired the DDR barrier hypothesis were those of constitutively activated DNA damage signalling in subsets of human cancer cell lines, especially those defective in p53 function, and a broadly analogous phenomenon of chronically active DNA damage checkpoints, as exemplified by the presence of Thr68-phosphorylated, activated form of the checkpoint kinase Chk2 in clinical specimens of large subsets of human breast and lung carcinomas (DiTullio et al, 2002). Given that the biopsy specimens from such tumours were surgically removed before the patients were exposed to any adjuvant treatment, such constitutive DNA damage checkpoint signalling was not attributable to radiotherapy or chemotherapy.…”
Section: Dna Damage Response As An Anticancer Barrier: Initial Observmentioning
confidence: 99%