|
Originally published In Press as doi:10.1074/jbc.M104009200 on August 23, 2001
J. Biol. Chem., Vol. 276, Issue 44, 40652-40658, November 2, 2001
26 S Proteasome-mediated Degradation of Topoisomerase II
Cleavable Complexes*
Yong
Mao,
Shyamal D.
Desai,
Chun-Yuan
Ting ,
Jaulang
Hwang , and
Leroy F.
Liu§
From the Department of Pharmacology, University of Medicine and
Dentistry of New Jersey-Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, Piscataway,
New Jersey 08854-5635 and the Institute of Molecular
Biology, Academia Sinica, Taipei, Taiwan
Received for publication, May 3, 2001, and in revised form, July 24, 2001
 |
ABSTRACT |
DNA topoisomerase II (TOP2) cleavable complexes
represent an unusual type of DNA damage characterized by reversible
TOP2-DNA cross-links and DNA double strand breaks. Many
antitumor drugs and physiological stresses are known to induce TOP2
cleavable complexes leading to apoptotic cell death and genomic
instability. However, the molecular mechanism(s) for repair of TOP2
cleavable complexes remains unclear. In the current studies, we show
that TOP2 cleavable complexes induced by the prototypic TOP2 poison VM-26 are proteolytically degraded by the ubiquitin/26 S proteasome pathway. Surprisingly the TOP2 isozyme is preferentially degraded over TOP2 isozyme. In addition, transcription inhibitors such as
5,6-dichlorobenzimidazole riboside and camptothecin can
substantially block VM-26-induced TOP2 degradation. These results
are consistent with a model in which the repair of TOP2 cleavable
complexes may involve transcription-dependent proteolysis
of TOP2 to reveal the protein-concealed double strand breaks.
 |
INTRODUCTION |
DNA topoisomerases are double-edged swords. They are essential for
many important processes of DNA such as DNA replication, RNA
transcription, chromosome condensation/decondensation, and chromosome
segregation (1). However, due to their delicate act on DNA, they are
also highly vulnerable to xenobiotics and physiological stresses to
produce topoisomerase-mediated DNA damage, mostly in the form of
topoisomerase cleavable complexes (2-5). So far, five human DNA
topoisomerases, topoisomerase I
(TOP1),1 TOP2 , TOP2 ,
TOP3 , and TOP3 , have been identified and characterized, and the
first three have been demonstrated to be important molecular targets
for antitumor drugs (1, 6-10).
Both hTOP2 isozymes have been demonstrated to be the cellular targets
for many clinically useful anticancer drugs such as VP-16 (etoposide)
and doxorubicin (11-13). In the presence of these TOP2-directed drugs
(TOP2 poisons), TOP2 isozymes are trapped as their covalent reaction
intermediates, the reversible TOP2 cleavable complexes in which each
TOP2 subunit is covalently linked to the 5'-phosphoryl ends of the
four-base staggered double strand breaks (14, 15). While the double
strand breaks within the TOP2 cleavable complexes are normally
concealed by TOP2, many of the cellular effects of TOP2 cleavable
complexes are clearly indicative of DNA damage. For example, TOP2
cleavable complexes induced by TOP2 poisons are known to induce DNA
damage responses (e.g. G2 arrest, elevation of
sister-chromatid exchanges, NF B activation, and p53 stabilization)
(16-19). DNA repair mutant cells (e.g. ataxia
telangiectasia, progeroid Werner's syndrome, and Rad52) are
also known to be hypersensitive to TOP2 poisons (20-22). However, how
TOP2-concealed DNA strand breaks are converted to DNA damage signals is
still unknown. Inhibitor studies have suggested that both DNA
replication and RNA transcription may be important for processing TOP2
cleavable complexes into DNA damage signals (23-25).
Repair of topoisomerase cleavable complexes is conceptually challenging
because of the bulkiness of the protein and the concealed nature of the
breaks. However, recent studies on TOP1 cleavable complexes have
suggested that both SUMO and ubiquitin pathways may be involved in
repair of TOP1 cleavable complexes (26, 27). While the role of SUMO-1
conjugation to TOP1 cleavable complexes is still unclear, the role of
ubiquitin conjugation to TOP1 cleavable complexes appears to trigger
degradation of TOP1 via the 26 S proteasome pathway (27). Proteolytic
degradation of TOP1 cleavable complexes removes the protein bulk and
presumably reveals the hidden strand breaks so that the normal DNA
repair process can occur (27, 28). Interestingly transcription
inhibitors have been shown to block TOP1 degradation suggesting the
involvement of RNA transcription in this particular repair
process.2
In the current study, we show that TOP2 cleavable complexes can also
trigger ubiquitin conjugation to TOP2 resulting in 26 S
proteasome-mediated degradation of TOP2. Surprisingly TOP2 is
preferentially degraded over TOP2 . In addition, transcription inhibitors can substantially block TOP2 degradation. These results are consistent with a model in which repair of TOP2 cleavable complexes may involve transcription-dependent proteolysis of
TOP2 to reveal protein-concealed double strand breaks.
 |
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES |
Materials--
ICRF-193 was purchased from ICN Biomedicals.
VM-26 was kindly provided by Bristol Myers Squibb Co. Aphidicolin,
cycloheximide, and 5,6-dichlorobenzimidazole riboside (DRB) were
purchased from Sigma. Z-DEVD-FMK was purchased from Calbiochem.
Staphylococcal S7 nuclease was purchased from Roche Molecular
Biochemicals. Antiserum against hTOP1 was obtained from
scleroderma patients. Rabbit antiserum against hTOP2 was raised
against the C-terminal one-third of hTOP2 (29). The anti-human
TOP2 antibodies was raised by immunization with an immunogen
containing GST and seven linear repeats of the peptide fragment of
human TOP2 from amino acid residues 1554 to 1565 (TOP2 -(1554-1565)). The construction of the DNA fragment encoding for seven repeats of TOP2 -(1554-1565) and the synthesis of
the immunogen GST-TOP2 -(1554-1565) followed the published procedure
(30). Briefly, the template-repeat polymerase chain reaction
method was applied to the construct DNA fragment encoding multiple
copies of TOP2 -(1554-1565). We designed two oligonucleotides, oligo
A and oligo B. Oligo A, 5'-AAT GAA GGC GAT TAT AAC CCT GGC AGG AAA ACA
TCC, encodes the target antigen (TOP2 -(1554-1565)), and oligo B,
5'-GTT ATA ATC GCC TTC ATT GGA TGT TTT CCT GCC AGG, is partly
complementary to oligo A. To incorporate restriction sites for
subcloning at both ends of the template-repeat polymerase chain
reaction products (BamHI at the 5'-end and EcoRI
at the 3'-end) as well as a stop codon at the 3'-end of the coding
region, a second round of polymerase chain reaction (adapter polymerase chain reaction) with two adapter primers, primer A (5'-G ATC GGA TCC
CCG GGA AAT GAA GGC GAT TAT AAC) and primer B (5'-A GCT TCT AGA ATT CTA
GGA TGT TTT CCT GCC AGG) was performed. The DNA fragment encoding the
seven repeats of TOP2 -(1554-1565) was subcloned into plasmid
pGST-KG at the 3'-end of GST DNA. The resulting plasmid, pGST-TOP2 -(1554-1565), was introduced into XL-10 Gold, and the expressed fusion protein (GST-TOP2 -(1554-1565)) was purified by
glutathione-Sepharose 4B affinity chromatography.
Cell Culture--
The mouse mammary carcinoma cell line ts85
(temperature-sensitive for the ubiquitin-activating enzyme, E1) (31)
was cultured in a humidified atmosphere of 5% CO2 at
30 °C in Dulbecco's minimum essential medium containing
penicillin-streptomycin and 10% fetal bovine serum. FM3A, the parental
cell line of ts85, was cultured under identical conditions at 37 °C.
Cells were shifted to the restrictive temperature by transferring the
culture dishes to a 42 °C incubator for 15 min and then maintaining
at 39 °C. HeLa, human breast cancer cell ZR75-1, human lung
fibroblast WI-38 and its transformed subline 2RA, and leukemic CEM and
U937 cells were cultured under similar conditions at 37 °C.
Cell Lysis and Immunoblotting Analysis--
Cells in
subconfluency were treated with 100 µM VM-26. At
different times, cells were lysed by an alkali solution as described previously (27). Briefly, 50 µl of alkali lysis buffer (200 mM NaOH, 2 mM EDTA) was added to each 35-mm
dish, and cells were scraped by a rubber policeman. The lysate was
neutralized by the addition of 8 µl of neutralizing buffer (1 M HCl, 600 mM Tris, pH 8.0), and the pH was
adjusted to 7-8. The neutralized lysates were mixed with 6.6 µl of a
10× S7 nuclease reaction buffer (50 mM MgCl2,
50 mM CaCl2, 5 mM dithiothreitol, 1 mM EDTA, 50 µg/ml leupeptin, 50 µg/ml aprotinin, 50 µg/ml pepstatin A, 1 mM phenylmethylsulfonyl fluoride)
and 60 units of staphylococcal S7 nuclease. The digestion was performed
at room temperature for 15 min. After nuclease digestion, 30 µl of a
3× SDS loading buffer (150 mM Tris-HCl, pH 6.8, 45% sucrose, 6 mM EDTA, 9% SDS, 0.03% bromphenol blue) was
added to the reaction. The samples were then analyzed by
SDS-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis and immunoblotted with
anti-hTOP2 and anti-hTOP2 antibodies, respectively.
 |
RESULTS |
The TOP2 Poison VM-26 Induces a Decrease of the hTOP2 Level in
HeLa Cells--
VM-26 represents a prototypic TOP2 poison that traps
both TOP2 and TOP2 into cleavable complexes (33). Previous
studies have demonstrated that VM-26 induces rapid SUMO-1 conjugation to hTOP2 (32). In the current study, we show that prolonged treatment
with VM-26 in HeLa cells resulted in a decrease of the hTOP2 level
(Fig. 1A). In the presence of
VM-26, the hTOP2 level was reduced more than 50% in 2 h. A
further decrease in the hTOP2 level was observed with increasing
time of VM-26 treatment (at least up to 6 h) (Fig. 1A).
The decrease in the level of hTOP2 was due to the presence of VM-26
since 1% Me2SO (solvent control) had no effect on
the level of hTOP2 during the 6-h incubation (data not shown).
Surprisingly the level of hTOP2 showed very little change over the
entire 6-h period (Fig. 1A). One possible explanation for
the preferential decrease of the hTOP2 level could be that hTOP2
was more efficiently trapped into cleavable complexes than hTOP2 by
VM-26. To examine this possibility, a band depletion assay (27) was
performed to monitor TOP2 cleavable complexes in HeLa cells treated
with VM-26 for 1-15 min (the short time treatment was used to avoid
the complication of proteolytic degradation of TOP2 over prolonged
treatment). As shown in Fig. 1B, both hTOP2 and hTOP2
are trapped by VM-26 into covalent protein·DNA complexes with equal
efficiency as evidenced by their disappearance in an SDS gel (band
depletion) in the absence of nuclease (S7) treatment. Treatment of the
lysates with staphylococcal nuclease S7 resulted in the reappearance of
the TOP2 bands due to the release of the TOP2·DNA covalent
complexes from DNA into free TOP2. These results suggest that VM-26
induces the formation of both TOP2 and TOP2 cleavable complexes
with equal efficiency. However, only TOP2 cleavable complexes are
proteolytically degraded over time. To confirm that the VM-26-induced
decrease of the TOP2 level is not a unique phenomenon in HeLa cells,
we have examined many other cells lines including the human lung
fibroblast cell WI-38 and its transformed subline 2RA, leukemic cell
lines such as U937 and CEM, and breast cancer cell lines ZR75-1 (see
Fig. 2). VM-26 was shown to induce a
decrease of the TOP2 level in all these cells. However, the TOP2
levels appeared not to be significantly affected in all these
cells.

View larger version (49K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 1.
VM-26 induces a time-dependent
decrease in the hTOP2 level in HeLa
cells. A, HeLa cells were treated with 100 µM VM-26 for different times and lysed with the alkaline
lysis procedure as described under "Experimental Procedures."
Lysates were analyzed by immunoblotting with anti-hTOP2 ,
anti-hTOP2 , and anti-hTOP1 antibodies, respectively. B, a
band depletion assay to assess the amounts of TOP2 cleavable complexes
induced by VM-26 in HeLa cells. HeLa cells were treated with 100 µM VM-26 for 0, 1, 2, 5, and 15 min (lanes
1-5, respectively), and cells were lysed with alkaline lysis
buffer followed by neutralization. Neutralized lysates were incubated
with or without S7 nuclease for 15 min (for releasing TOP2 from
covalent TOP2·DNA complexes from DNA, lane 6). All samples
were analyzed by immunoblotting with antibodies against hTOP2 ,
hTOP2 , or hTOP1. ', minutes.
|
|

View larger version (42K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 2.
VM-26-induced decrease in the
TOP2 level in different cell lines.
A, U937 and CEM leukemic cells were treated with VM-26 for
increasing times. Cell lysates were analyzed by immunoblotting as
described under "Experimental Procedures." The antibody used in
this experiment was anti-hTOP2 that recognizes both hTOP2 and
hTOP2 . B, human lung fibroblast WI-38 and its
SV40-transformed subline 2RA cells were treated with VM-26. Cell
lysates were analyzed by immunoblotting with anti-hTOP2 and
anti-hTOP2 antibodies, respectively. C, ZR75-1 breast
cancer cells were treated with VM-26. Cell lysates were analyzed by
immunoblotting with anti-hTOP2 and anti-hTOP2 antibodies,
respectively. The VM26 concentration used in these experiments was 100 µM.
|
|
VM-26 Increases the Rate of hTOP2 Degradation--
The decrease
of the hTOP2 level induced by VM-26 could be due to an increase in
the rate of degradation, a decrease in the rate of synthesis, or a
combination of both. To test these possibilities, the degradation assay
was performed in the presence of the protein synthesis inhibitor
cycloheximide. As shown in Fig. 3
(compare lanes 5 and 6) in the presence of VM-26,
hTOP2 was more than 80% degraded in 2.5 h. Co-treatment with
cycloheximide had no effect on the VM-26-induced decrease of the
hTOP2 level (Fig. 3, compare lanes 5 and 6 with lanes 7 and 8), suggesting that VM-26-induced down-regulation is not due to a decreased rate of TOP2
protein synthesis. As a control experiment, we showed that neither the
hTOP2 nor the hTOP2 level was significantly affected by
cycloheximide treatment alone, suggesting that neither isozyme was
rapidly turning over in the absence of VM-26. Consequently the
VM-26-induced decrease in the level of TOP2 is primarily due to an
increased rate of degradation of TOP2 , and this process will
henceforth be referred to as TOP2 down-regulation.

View larger version (26K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 3.
VM-26-induced decrease of
hTOP2 is not due to a decreased rate of
protein synthesis. HeLa cells were treated with either 30 µM cycloheximide or 1% Me2SO
(DMSO) (solvent used for cycloheximide) for 0 and 2.5 h
(lanes 1-4). Another set of cells was treated with 100 µM VM-26 in the presence (lanes 7 and
8) or absence (lanes 5 and 6) of
cycloheximide. All samples were analyzed by immunoblotting with
antibodies against hTOP2 and hTOP2 , respectively.
|
|
Involvement of 26 S Proteasome in hTOP2
Down-regulation--
VM-26 is a potent inducer of apoptotic cell death
(34). Therefore, VM-26-induced degradation of TOP2 could be due to
the activation of caspases. To examine this possibility, we performed the degradation assay in the presence of the caspase inhibitor Z-DEVD-FMK (35). As shown in Fig.
4A, treatment of Z-DEVD-FMK had no effect on VM-26-induced hTOP2 down-regulation. On the other
hand, treatment of cells with the proteasome inhibitor MG132 nearly
completely blocked the degradation of hTOP2 (Fig. 4B, lanes 5-8). This result suggests that the 26 S proteasome
rather than an apoptotic caspase may be involved in the degradation of hTOP2 . To further confirm the involvement of the ubiqutin/26 S
proteasome pathway, we tested the degradation of TOP2 induced by
VM-26 in a pair of mouse cell lines. The ts85 cells contain a
temperature-sensitive E1 enzyme for ubiquitin conjugation. At the
nonpermissive temperature, E1 enzyme is inactivated, and ubiquitin conjugation to substrates is inhibited (31). We performed the degradation assays in both ts85 cells and their parental cells (FM3A).
The degradation of TOP2 was substantially blocked when cells were
shifted to the nonpermissive temperature (Fig.
5A, compare lanes
1-3 with lanes 4-6). By contrast, at both
temperatures, VM-26 induced equally efficient degradation of TOP2 in
FM3A cells (Fig. 5B).

View larger version (57K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 4.
VM-26-induced down-regulation of
hTOP2 is abolished by 26 S proteasome but not
caspase inhibitors. A, the caspase inhibitor Z-DEVD-FMK
does not affect VM-26-induced down-regulation of TOP2 . HeLa cells
were treated with 100 µM VM-26 for 3 and 6 h
(lanes 7 and 8) in the presence (lanes
7 and 8) or absence (lanes 3 and
4) of the caspase inhibitor Z-DEVD-FMK (50 µM). As a control experiment, HeLa cells were also
treated with 1% Me2SO (solvent control for VM-26
treatment) for 0 and 3 h in the presence (lanes 5 and
6) or absence (lanes 1 and 2) of the
caspase inhibitor Z-DEVD-FMK. B, VM-26-induced
down-regulation of hTOP2 is blocked by the 26 S proteasome inhibitor
MG132. HeLa cells were treated with 100 µM VM-26 in the
presence (lanes 5-8) or absence (lanes 1-4) of
10 µM MG132 for increasing times. Cell lysates were
analyzed by immunoblotting with anti-hTOP2 , anti-hTOP2 , and
anti-hTOP1 antibodies, respectively.
|
|

View larger version (47K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 5.
The ubiquitin-activating enzyme E1 is
involved in VM-26-induced down-regulation of
TOP2 . A, the mouse cell line
ts85 with temperature-sensitive mutant E1 was treated with 100 µM VM-26 for different times at both the permissive
(30 °C) and nonpermissive (39 °C) temperatures. Cell lysates were
analyzed by immunoblotting with anti-hTOP2 and anti-hTOP2
antibodies, respectively. B, the parental FM3A cells were
treated with VM-26, and cell lysates were immunoblotted with
anti-hTOP2 antibodies as described in A.
|
|
The sensitivity to the 26 S proteasome inhibitor and the formation of
ubiquitin-TOP2 conjugates provide support of the notion that
VM-26-induced TOP2 down-regulation is mediated by a ubiquitin/26 S
proteasome pathway.
Involvement of RNA Transcription in VM-26-induced hTOP2
Down-regulation--
Previous studies have suggested that both DNA
replication and RNA transcription may be involved in the processing of
TOP2 cleavable complexes into DNA damage signals (23). To test whether DNA replication and/or RNA transcription is involved in TOP2 down-regulation, we have examined the effect of various inhibitors on
VM-26-induced TOP2 down-regulation. As shown in Fig.
6A, inhibition of DNA
replication by aphidicolin did not affect VM-26-induced hTOP2
down-regulation. However, inhibition of transcription by DRB
substantially affected hTOP2 down-regulation (Fig. 6B,
compare lanes 1-3 and lanes 4-6). To confirm
this result, we also tested another potent transcription inhibitor
camptothecin (CPT) (36). As shown in Fig.
7A, treatment of the breast
cancer ZR75-1 cells with either DRB or CPT efficiently blocked
VM-26-induced down-regulation of hTOP2 . To rule out the possibility
that the effect is due to a reduced level of the cleavable complexes in
the presence of DRB or CPT, the band depletion assay was performed. As
shown in Fig. 7B, treatment of ZR75-1 cells with either DRB
or CPT had no effect on the amounts of VM-26-induced TOP2 cleavable
complexes. Since CPT can induce TOP1-mediated DNA damage, the blockage
of hTOP2 degradation by CPT could also be an indirect result of a
DNA damage response rather than a direct result of transcription inhibition. To rule out this possibility, we have tested the effect of
another DNA damage agent, cisplatin, on TOP2 down-regulation. As
shown in Fig. 7C, treatment of ZR75-1 cells with cisplatin had no effect on VM-26-induced down-regulation of hTOP2 .

View larger version (45K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 6.
The effect of replication and transcription
inhibitors on VM-26-induced down-regulation of hTOP2
in HeLa cells. A, the replication inhibitor
aphidicolin does not affect VM-26-induced down-regulation of hTOP2 .
HeLa cells were treated with 100 µM VM-26 in the presence
(lanes 5-8) or absence (lanes 1-4) of 10 µM aphidicolin for increasing times. Cell lysates were
analyzed by immunoblotting with hTOP2 antibodies. B, the
transcription inhibitor DRB abolishes VM-26-induced down-regulation of
hTOP2 . HeLa cells were treated with 100 µM VM-26 in
the presence (lanes 4-6) or absence (lanes 1-3)
of 100 µM DRB. Cell lysates were analyzed by
immunoblotting with anti-hTOP2 and anti-hTOP2 antibodies,
respectively.
|
|

View larger version (43K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 7.
The transcription inhibitor CPT abolishes
VM-26-induced down-regulation of hTOP2 .
A, both DRB and CPT block VM-26-induced hTOP2
down-regulation. The breast cancer ZR75-1 cells were treated with 100 µM VM-26 in the presence of 100 µM DRB
(lanes 4-6), 20 µM CPT (lanes
7-9), or 1% Me2SO (solvent control for DRB and CPT)
(lanes 1-3) for 0, 2.5, and 5 h. Cells were lysed by
the alkaline lysis procedure as described under "Experimental
Procedures," and cell lysates were treated with staphylococcal
nuclease S7 to free hTOP2 from covalent hTOP2 ·DNA complexes.
B, DRB and CPT do not affect VM-26-induced formation of
hTOP2 cleavable complexes. Cells were treated with VM-26 in the
presence of DRB and CPT exactly the same as described in A
except that the treatment step with staphylococcal nuclease S7 was
omitted. In the absence of the nuclease, hTOP2 cannot be released
from the hTOP2 ·DNA covalent complexes. Consequently by comparing
A and B, the amounts of hTOP2 covalent
complexes can be estimated. C, ZR75-1 cells were treated
with 100 µM VM-26 in the presence (lanes 5-8)
or absence (lanes 1-4) of 40 µM cisplatin
(CDDP) for increasing times from 0 to 6 h. Cell lysates
were analyzed by immunoblotting with anti-hTOP2 and anti-hTOP1
antibodies, respectively.
|
|
 |
DISCUSSION |
VM-26 is a potent inducer of TOP2 cleavable complex formation on
chromosomal DNA. Different from other DNA damages, these TOP2 cleavable
complexes are highly reversible. In addition, the DNA strand breaks are
protein-linked and protein-concealed (14, 15). It has been suggested
that the DNA-damaging effect of TOP2 cleavable complexes is dependent
upon the cellular processing of TOP2 cleavable complexes into DNA
damage (12). DNA replication, RNA transcription, helicase activity, and
proteolysis have been speculated to be potentially capable of
converting TOP2 cleavable complexes into DNA damage (23-25). However,
the demonstration that any of these cellular processes is actually
involved in processing TOP2 cleavable complexes into DNA damage
in vivo is still lacking. Our current results suggest that
both proteolysis and RNA transcription may be involved in the
processing of hTOP2 cleavable complexes into DNA damage. In
addition, proteolysis via the ubiquitin/26 S proteasome pathway and
transcription appear to be coupled.
VM-26-induced down-regulation of TOP2 appears to be quite similar to
CPT-induced down-regulation of TOP1. Both processes are dependent on
the formation of topoisomerase cleavable complexes and involve
ubiquitin/26 S proteasome (27). In addition, both processes appear to
be transcription-dependent.2 CPT-induced
down-regulation has been suggested to be triggered by collision between
TOP1 cleavable complexes and RNA polymerase elongation complexes.
Down-regulation of TOP1 presumably reveals the TOP1-concealed single
strand breaks so that repair can occur.2 By analogy, we
propose that TOP2 cleavable complexes can also collide with RNA
polymerase elongation complexes resulting in transcription arrest (see
Fig. 8). Proteolysis of TOP2 cleavable complexes by ubiquitin/26 S proteasome results in exposure of the
protein-concealed double strand breaks (Fig. 8). The exposed double
strand breaks can then be repaired by either homologous recombination
or nonhomologous end joining (37, 38). Alternatively unrepaired double
strand breaks can trigger apoptotic cell death (39). It has been
reported that proteasome inhibitors can block VP-16-induced apoptosis
(40, 41). The inhibition of VM-26-induced apoptosis by proteasome
inhibitors is not due to inhibition of NF B activation (40, 41). Our
current model could explain why the 26 S proteasome inhibitor MG132
inhibits VM-26-induced apoptosis since the inhibitor blocks TOP2
down-regulation and hence the formation of the apoptosis-inducing
double strand breaks. However, VM-26-induced apoptosis is likely to
be mediated by multiple mechanisms, and degradation of TOP2
cleavable complexes may represent only one of these mechanisms.

View larger version (32K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 8.
A working model for VM-26-induced
down-regulation of TOP2 . In the presence
of VM-26, TOP2 is trapped as covalent TOP2·DNA cleavable complexes
on DNA. These TOP2 cleavable complexes block transcription and
trigger ubiquitin/26 S proteasome-dependent degradation of
TOP2 . The consequence of TOP2 degradation is the
revelation of the DNA double strand break. The double strand
break can either be repaired by homologous recombination and/or
nonhomologous end joining or induce apoptotic cell death.
Ub, ubiquitin.
|
|
The preferential degradation of TOP2 over TOP2 in VM-26-treated
cells is intriguing. Apparently preferential degradation is not due to
more efficient trapping of TOP2 cleavable complexes by VM-26. It
appears that TOP2 cleavable complexes must be more efficiently
recognized by the ubiqutin/26 S proteasome pathway than are TOP2
cleavable complexes. The preferential recognition by the ubiquitin/26 S
proteasome pathway may reflect the functional difference between the
two isozymes. These two isoforms are encoded by distinct genes but
share about 72% identity in their primary sequences (42-44).
Immunohistochemical studies have shown that TOP2 is only present in
proliferating tissues including tumors, while TOP2 is present in all
tissues including terminally differentiated tissues (45, 46). The two
isoforms are regulated very differently in cells. The TOP2 level
peaks in G2/M phase, while the TOP2 level is not
significantly changed throughout the cell cycle (47). TOP2 plays
important roles in chromosome condensation, segregation, and sister
chromatin separation (48, 49). The cellular function of TOP2 is much
less clear. However, recent studies have hinted at the possibility that
TOP2 , like TOP1, is involved in RNA transcription. TOP2 has been
shown to be essential during mouse neuronal development (50). Studies
in rat cerebellum have suggested the involvement of TOP2 in neuronal
differentiation by regulating the transcription of neuronal genes (51).
TOP2 has also been located in the transcribed regions of human rDNA
repeats (52). One possible explanation for the preferential degradation
of TOP2 over TOP2 is that TOP2 is preferentially located
within the transcribed region, while TOP2 may be located in other
regions. TOP2 cleavable complexes located within the transcribed
region may block RNA polymerase elongation complexes leading to
transcription arrest (see the model in Fig. 8). The ubiquitin/26 S
proteasome pathway may be associated with or recruited to arrested RNA
polymerase complexes to effect proteolytic degradation of TOP2
cleavable complexes.
TOP2 cleavable complexes have been associated with both antitumor as
well as carcinogenic activities of TOP2 poisons. The use of
TOP2-directed anticancer drugs such as etoposide (VP-16) and
doxorubicin is associated with the high incidence of secondary leukemia, therapy-related acute myeloid leukemia (53, 54). Therapy-related acute myeloid leukemia associated with the use of
TOP2-directed drugs is characterized by translocation of the mixed
lineage leukemia gene to its over 30 partner genes (55). All
translocations of the mixed lineage leukemia gene occur within an
8.3-kilobase region termed the breakpoint cluster region (56, 57). Recent studies have demonstrated that TOP2 can specifically form
TOP2 cleavable complexes within the mixed lineage leukemia breakpoint
cluster region, suggesting a direct role of TOP2 in mixed lineage
leukemia gene translocations (58). Our current demonstration that
TOP2 cleavable complexes can be efficiently degraded into
translocation-competent double strand breaks within the transcribed
regions may suggest the involvement of TOP2 cleavable complexes in
chromosomal translocations. It remains to be determined whether TOP2
and TOP2 cleavable complexes may play different roles in their
antitumor and carcinogenic activities.
 |
FOOTNOTES |
*
This work was supported by National Institutes of Health
Grants GM27731 and CA 39662, Grant NSC 89-2320-B001-075 from the National Science Council of Taiwan, and Academia Sinica.The costs of publication of this
article were defrayed in part by the
payment of page charges. The article
must therefore be hereby marked
"advertisement" in
accordance with 18 U.S.C. Section
1734 solely to indicate this fact.
§
To whom correspondence should be addressed: Dept. of Pharmacology,
UMDNJ-Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, 675 Hoes Ln., Piscataway, NJ
08854. Tel.: 732-235-4912; Fax: 732-235-4073; E-mail: lliu@umdnj.edu.
Published, JBC Papers in Press, August 23, 2001, DOI 10.1074/jbc.M104009200
2
S. D. Desai, D. Rodriguez-Rodriguez, and
L. F. Liu, unpublished results.
 |
ABBREVIATIONS |
The abbreviations used are:
TOP, topoisomerase;
htop, human TOP;
VM-26 (teniposide), 4'-demethylepipodophyllotoxin
thenylidene- -D-glucoside;
VP-16 (etoposide), demethylepipodophyllotoxin ethylidene- -D-glucoside;
Z-DEVD-FMK, Z-Asp(OCH3)-Glu(OCH3)-Val-Asp(OCH3)-fluoromethyl
ketone;
DRB, 5,6-dichlorobenzimidazole riboside, CPT, camptothecin;
GST, glutathione S-transferase;
E1, ubiquitin-activating
enzyme.
 |
REFERENCES |
| 1.
|
Wang, J. C.
(1996)
Annu. Rev. Biochem.
65,
635-692
|
| 2.
|
Liu, L. F.,
Duann, P.,
Lin, C. T.,
D'Arpa, P.,
and Wu, J.
(1996)
Ann. N. Y. Acad. Sci.
803,
44-49
|
| 3.
|
Kingma, P. S.,
and Osheroff, N.
(1998)
Biochim. Biophys. Acta
1400,
223-232
|
| 4.
|
Nambi, P.,
Mattern, M.,
Bartus, J. O.,
Aiyar, N.,
and Crooke, S. T.
(1989)
Biochem. J.
262,
485-489
|
| 5.
|
Li, T. K.,
Chen, A. Y., Yu, C.,
Mao, Y.,
Wang, H.,
and Liu, L. F.
(1999)
Genes Dev.
13,
1553-1560
|
| 6.
|
Champoux, J. J.,
and Dulbecco, R.
(1972)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
69,
143-146
|
| 7.
|
Chung, T. D.,
Drake, F. H.,
Tan, K. B.,
Per, S. R.,
Crooke, S. T.,
and Mirabelli, C. K.
(1989)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
86,
9431-9435
|
| 8.
|
Hanai, R.,
Caron, P. R.,
and Wang, J. C.
(1996)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
93,
3653-3657
|
| 9.
|
Ng, S. W.,
Liu, Y.,
Hasselblatt, K. T.,
Mok, S. C.,
and Berkowitz, R. S.
(1999)
Nucleic Acids Res.
27,
993-1000
|
| 10.
|
Tsai-Pflugfelder, M.,
Liu, L. F.,
Liu, A. A.,
Tewey, K. M.,
Whang-Peng, J.,
Knutsen, T.,
Huebner, K.,
Croce, C. M.,
and Wang, J. C.
(1988)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
85,
7177-7181
|
| 11.
|
Liu, L. F.
(1989)
Annu. Rev. Biochem.
58,
351-375
|
| 12.
|
D'Arpa, P.,
and Liu, L. F.
(1989)
Biochim. Biophys. Acta
989,
163-177
|
| 13.
|
Errington, F.,
Willmore, E.,
Tilby, M. J.,
Li, L.,
Li, G.,
Li, W.,
Baguley, B. C.,
and Austin, C. A.
(1999)
Mol. Pharmacol.
56,
1309-1316
|
| 14.
|
Sander, M.,
and Hsieh, T.
(1983)
J. Biol. Chem.
258,
8421-8428
|
| 15.
|
Zechiedrich, E. L.,
Christiansen, K.,
Andersen, A. H.,
Westergaard, O.,
and Osheroff, N.
(1989)
Biochemistry
28,
6229-6236
|
| 16.
|
Smith, P. J.,
Soues, S.,
Gottlieb, T.,
Falk, S. J.,
Watson, J. V.,
Osborne, R. J.,
and Bleehen, N. M.
(1994)
Br. J. Cancer
70,
914-921
|
| 17.
|
Pommier, Y.,
Kerrigan, D.,
Covey, J. M.,
Kao-Shan, C. S.,
and Whang-Peng, J.
(1988)
Cancer Res.
48,
512-516
|
| 18.
|
Boland, M. P.,
Fitzgerald, K. A.,
and O'Neill, L. A.
(2000)
J. Biol. Chem.
275,
25231-25238
|
| 19.
|
Moreland, N.,
Finlay, G. J.,
Dragunow, M.,
Holdaway, K. M.,
and Baguley, B. C.
(1997)
Eur. J. Cancer
33,
1668-1676
|
| 20.
|
Elli, R.,
Chessa, L.,
Antonelli, A.,
Petrinelli, P.,
Ambra, R.,
and Marcucci, L.
(1996)
Cancer Genet. Cytogenet.
87,
112-116
|
| 21.
|
Nitiss, J. L.,
Liu, Y. X.,
Harbury, P.,
Jannatipour, M.,
Wasserman, R.,
and Wang, J. C.
(1992)
Cancer Res.
52,
4467-4472
|
| 22.
|
Nitiss, J.,
and Wang, J. C.
(1988)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
85,
7501-7505
|
| 23.
|
D'Arpa, P.
(1994)
Adv. Pharmacol.
29B,
127-143
|
| 24.
|
D'Arpa, P.,
Beardmore, C.,
and Liu, L. F.
(1990)
Cancer Res.
50,
6919-6924
|
| 25.
|
Bodley, A. L.,
Huang, H. C., Yu, C.,
and Liu, L. F.
(1993)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
13,
6190-6200
|
| 26.
|
Mao, Y.,
Sun, M.,
Desai, S. D.,
and Liu, L. F.
(2000)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
97,
4046-4051
|
| 27.
|
Desai, S. D.,
Liu, L. F.,
Vazquez-Abad, D.,
and D'Arpa, P.
(1997)
J. Biol. Chem.
272,
24159-24164
|
| 28.
|
Desai, S. D.,
Li, T.-K.,
Rodriguez-Bauman, A.,
Rubin, E. H.,
and Liu, L. F.
(2001)
Cancer Res.
61,
5926-5932
|
| 29.
|
Hwang, J. L.,
Shyy, S. H.,
Chen, A. Y.,
Juan, C. C.,
and Whang-Peng, J.
(1989)
Cancer Res.
49,
958-962
|
| 30.
|
Hsu, C. T.,
Ting, C. Y.,
Ting, C. J.,
Chen, T. Y.,
Lin, C. P.,
Whang-Peng, J.,
and Hwang, J.
(2000)
Cancer Res.
60,
3701-3705
|
| 31.
|
Finley, D.,
Ciechanover, A.,
and Varshavsky, A.
(1984)
Cell
37,
43-55
|
| 32.
|
Mao, Y.,
Desai, S. D.,
and Liu, L. F.
(2000)
J. Biol. Chem.
275,
26066-26073
|
| 33.
|
Long, B. H.
(1992)
Semin. Oncol.
19,
3-19
|
| 34.
|
Nakajima, T.,
Morita, K.,
Ohi, N.,
Arai, T.,
Nozaki, N.,
Kikuchi, A.,
Osaka, F.,
Yamao, F.,
and Oda, K.
(1996)
J. Biol. Chem.
271,
24842-24849
|
| 35.
|
Santoro, M. F.,
Annand, R. R.,
Robertson, M. M.,
Peng, Y. W.,
Brady, M. J.,
Mankovich, J. A.,
Hackett, M. C.,
Ghayur, T.,
Walter, G.,
Wong, W. W.,
and Giegel, D. A.
(1998)
J. Biol. Chem.
273,
13119-13128
|
| 36.
|
Kumar, A.,
and Wu, R. S.
(1973)
J. Mol. Biol.
80,
265-276
|
| 37.
|
van Gent, D. C.,
Hoeijmakers, J. H.,
and Kanaar, R.
(2001)
Nat. Rev. Genet.
2,
196-206
|
| 38.
|
Hiom, K.
(1999)
Curr. Biol.
9,
R446-R448
|
| 39.
|
Charcosset, J. Y.,
Soues, S.,
and Laval, F.
(1993)
Bull. Cancer
80,
923-954
|
| 40.
|
Tabata, M.,
Tabata, R.,
Grabowski, D. R.,
Bukowski, R. M.,
Ganapathi, M. K.,
and Ganapathi, R.
(2001)
J. Biol. Chem.
276,
8029-8036
|
| 41.
|
Watanabe, K.,
Kubota, M.,
Hamahata, K.,
Liu, Y.,
and Usami, I.
(2000)
Biochem. Pharmacol.
60,
823-830
|
| 42.
|
Tan, K. B.,
Dorman, T. E.,
Falls, K. M.,
Chung, T. D.,
Mirabelli, C. K.,
Crooke, S. T.,
and Mao, J.
(1992)
Cancer Res.
52,
231-234
|
| 43.
|
Jenkins, J. R.,
Ayton, P.,
Jones, T.,
Davies, S. L.,
Simmons, D. L.,
Harris, A. L.,
Sheer, D.,
and Hickson, I. D.
(1992)
Nucleic Acids Res.
20,
5587-5592
|
| 44.
|
Drake, F. H.,
Hofmann, G. A.,
Bartus, H. F.,
Mattern, M. R.,
Crooke, S. T.,
and Mirabelli, C. K.
(1989)
Biochemistry
28,
8154-8160
|
| 45.
|
Bauman, M. E.,
Holden, J. A.,
Brown, K. A.,
Harker, W. G.,
and Perkins, S. L.
(1997)
Mod. Pathol.
10,
168-175
|
| 46.
|
Tsutsui, K.,
Tsutsui, K.,
Hosoya, O.,
Sano, K.,
and Tokunaga, A.
(2001)
J. Comp. Neurol.
431,
228-239
|
| 47.
|
Woessner, R. D.,
Mattern, M. R.,
Mirabelli, C. K.,
Johnson, R. K.,
and Drake, F. H.
(1991)
Cell Growth Differ.
2,
209-214
|
| 48.
|
Sumner, A. T.
(1996)
Chromosome Res.
4,
5-14
|
| 49.
|
Grue, P.,
Grasser, A.,
Sehested, M.,
Jensen, P. B.,
Uhse, A.,
Straub, T.,
Ness, W.,
and Boege, F.
(1998)
J. Biol. Chem.
273,
33660-33666
|
| 50.
|
Yang, X.,
Li, W.,
Prescott, E. D.,
Burden, S. J.,
and Wang, J. C.
(2000)
Science
287,
131-134
|
| 51.
|
Tsutsui, K.,
Tsutsui, K.,
Sano, K.,
Kikuchi, A.,
and Tokunaga, A.
(2001)
J. Biol. Chem.
276,
5769-5778
|
| 52.
|
Govoni, M.,
Neri, S.,
Labella, T.,
Sylvester, J. E.,
Novello, F.,
and Pession, A.
(1995)
Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun.
213,
282-288
|
| 53.
|
Felix, C. A.
(1998)
Biochim. Biophys. Acta
1400,
233-255
|
| 54.
|
Ratain, M. J.,
and Rowley, J. D.
(1992)
Ann. Oncol.
3,
107-111
|
| 55.
|
Rowley, J. D.
(1998)
Annu. Rev. Genet.
32,
495-519
|
| 56.
|
Broeker, P. L.,
Super, H. G.,
Thirman, M. J.,
Pomykala, H.,
Yonebayashi, Y.,
Tanabe, S.,
Zeleznik-Le, N.,
and Rowley, J. D.
(1996)
Blood
87,
1912-1922
|
| 57.
|
Hunger, S. P.,
Tkachuk, D. C.,
Amylon, M. D.,
Link, M. P.,
Carroll, A. J.,
Welborn, J. L.,
Willman, C. L.,
and Cleary, M. L.
(1993)
Blood
81,
3197-3203
|
| 58.
|
Strick, R.,
Strissel, P. L.,
Borgers, S.,
Smith, S. L.,
and Rowley, J. D.
(2000)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
97,
4790-4795
|
Copyright © 2001 by The American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Inc.

CiteULike Complore Connotea Del.icio.us Digg Reddit Technorati What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:

|
 |

|
 |
 
C.-P. Lin, Y. Ban, Y. L. Lyu, S. D. Desai, and L. F. Liu
A Ubiquitin-Proteasome Pathway for the Repair of Topoisomerase I-DNA Covalent Complexes
J. Biol. Chem.,
July 25, 2008;
283(30):
21074 - 21083.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
A. M. Azarova, Y. L. Lyu, C.-P. Lin, Y.-C. Tsai, J. Y.-N. Lau, J. C. Wang, and L. F. Liu
From the Cover: Roles of DNA topoisomerase II isozymes in chemotherapy and secondary malignancies
PNAS,
June 26, 2007;
104(26):
11014 - 11019.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
M. S. Nayak, J.-M. Yang, and W. N. Hait
Effect of a Single Nucleotide Polymorphism in the Murine Double Minute 2 Promoter (SNP309) on the Sensitivity to Topoisomerase II-Targeting Drugs
Cancer Res.,
June 15, 2007;
67(12):
5831 - 5839.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
A. Zhang, Y. L. Lyu, C.-P. Lin, N. Zhou, A. M. Azarova, L. M. Wood, and L. F. Liu
A Protease Pathway for the Repair of Topoisomerase II-DNA Covalent Complexes
J. Biol. Chem.,
November 24, 2006;
281(47):
35997 - 36003.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
J. Yun, A. Tomida, T. Andoh, and T. Tsuruo
Interaction between Glucose-regulated Destruction Domain of DNA Topoisomerase II{alpha} and MPN Domain of Jab1/CSN5
J. Biol. Chem.,
July 23, 2004;
279(30):
31296 - 31303.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
N. Adachi, H. Suzuki, S. Iiizumi, and H. Koyama
Hypersensitivity of Nonhomologous DNA End-joining Mutants to VP-16 and ICRF-193: IMPLICATIONS FOR THE REPAIR OF TOPOISOMERASE II-MEDIATED DNA DAMAGE
J. Biol. Chem.,
September 19, 2003;
278(38):
35897 - 35902.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
N. Zhou, H. Xiao, T.-K. Li, A. Nur-E-Kamal, and L. F. Liu
DNA Damage-mediated Apoptosis Induced by Selenium Compounds
J. Biol. Chem.,
August 8, 2003;
278(32):
29532 - 29537.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
Y. L. Lyu and J. C. Wang
Aberrant lamination in the cerebral cortex of mouse embryos lacking DNA topoisomerase II{beta}
PNAS,
June 10, 2003;
100(12):
7123 - 7128.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
E. J. Licitra, V. Vyas, K. Nelson, R. Musanti, S. Beers, C. Thomas, E. Poplin, S. Smith, Y. Lin, Larry. J. Schaaf, et al.
Phase I Evaluation of Sequential Topoisomerase Targeting with Irinotecan/Cisplatin Followed by Etoposide in Patients with Advanced Malignancy
Clin. Cancer Res.,
May 1, 2003;
9(5):
1673 - 1679.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
S. D. Desai, H. Zhang, A. Rodriguez-Bauman, J.-M. Yang, X. Wu, M. K. Gounder, E. H. Rubin, and L. F. Liu
Transcription-Dependent Degradation of Topoisomerase I-DNA Covalent Complexes
Mol. Cell. Biol.,
April 1, 2003;
23(7):
2341 - 2350.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
H. Xiao, Y. Mao, S. D. Desai, N. Zhou, C.-Y. Ting, J. Hwang, and L. F. Liu
The topoisomerase IIbeta circular clamp arrests transcription and signals a 26S proteasome pathway
PNAS,
March 18, 2003;
100(6):
3239 - 3244.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
P. Rallabhandi, K. Hashimoto, Y.-Y. Mo, W. T. Beck, P. K. Moitra, and P. D'Arpa
Sumoylation of Topoisomerase I Is Involved in Its Partitioning between Nucleoli and Nucleoplasm and Its Clearing from Nucleoli in Response to Camptothecin
J. Biol. Chem.,
October 11, 2002;
277(42):
40020 - 40026.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|
Copyright © 2001 by the American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology.
|
Advertisement
Advertisement
|