2021
DOI: 10.1126/sciadv.abe3882
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Cell cycle inertia underlies a bifurcation in cell fates after DNA damage

Abstract: The G1-S checkpoint is thought to prevent cells with damaged DNA from entering S phase and replicating their DNA and efficiently arrests cells at the G1-S transition. Here, using time-lapse imaging and single-cell tracking, we instead find that DNA damage leads to highly variable and divergent fate outcomes. Contrary to the textbook model that cells arrest at the G1-S transition, cells triggering the DNA damage checkpoint in G1 phase route back to quiescence, and this cellular rerouting can be initiated at any… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

2
25
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6
2
1

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 28 publications
(27 citation statements)
references
References 42 publications
2
25
0
Order By: Relevance
“…This corresponds with early reports of restriction point timing (Campisi et al, 1982;Foster et al, 2010;Yen & Pardee, 1978). This could reflect an increasing rate of p21 degradation as cells approach the G1/S transition (Heldt et al, 2018;Nathans et al, 2021) or could be the result of a change in the dependency of cells on CDK4/6 activity for cell cycle progression at the restriction point. Since we see no change in sensitivity of G1 cells to Palbociclib in the absence of p21 and/or p27, it is likely that it is the latter hypothesis that is correct here and that cells only require CDK4/6 activity in early and mid G1 to complete the cell cycle.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 88%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…This corresponds with early reports of restriction point timing (Campisi et al, 1982;Foster et al, 2010;Yen & Pardee, 1978). This could reflect an increasing rate of p21 degradation as cells approach the G1/S transition (Heldt et al, 2018;Nathans et al, 2021) or could be the result of a change in the dependency of cells on CDK4/6 activity for cell cycle progression at the restriction point. Since we see no change in sensitivity of G1 cells to Palbociclib in the absence of p21 and/or p27, it is likely that it is the latter hypothesis that is correct here and that cells only require CDK4/6 activity in early and mid G1 to complete the cell cycle.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 88%
“…In this case, whilst CDK4/6 may be inhibited by Palbociclib during the whole cell cycle, this does not affect progression until G1. Alternatively, this could be explained by the indirect model (Figure 1a) as p21 is degraded abruptly at S-phase entry (Barr et al, 2017;Bornstein et al, 2003;Heldt et al, 2018;Nathans et al, 2021) and is therefore only present at high levels during G1 (Rubin et al 2020).…”
Section: P21 and P27 Are Not Required For Entry Into G1 Arrest With Palbociclib In Rpe1 Cellsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This corresponds with early reports of restriction point timing [ 60 62 ]. This could reflect an increasing rate of p21 degradation as cells approach the G1/S transition [ 50 , 51 ] or could be the result of a change in the dependency of cells on CDK4/6 activity for cell cycle progression at the restriction point. Since we see no change in sensitivity of G1 cells to palbociclib in the absence of p21 and/or p27, it is likely that it is the latter hypothesis that is correct here and that cells only require CDK4/6 activity in early and mid G1 to complete the cell cycle [ 15 , 46 ].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…CDK2 encodes a form of protein-dependent kinases ( Nathans et al, 2021 ), involved in cell cycle regulation, with a critical role during the G1 to S phase transition. Decreased CDK2 expression can block cell cycle progression and inhibit the proliferation of pulmonary artery smooth muscle cells.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%