HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

J. Biol. Chem., Vol. 281, Issue 47, 35997-36003, November 24, 2006

This Article Abstract Full Text (PDF) All Versions of this Article: 281/47/35997    most recent M604149200v1 Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Zhang, A. Articles by Liu, L. F. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Zhang, A. Articles by Liu, L. F. Social Bookmarking                      What's this?

A Protease Pathway for the Repair of Topoisomerase II-DNA Covalent Complexes^*

From the Department of Pharmacology, University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey-Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, Piscataway, New Jersey 08854

Received for publication, May 1, 2006 , and in revised form, September 13, 2006.

	ABSTRACT

TOP ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES RESULTS DISCUSSION REFERENCES

 
Despite rapid advances in the field of DNA repair, little is known about the repair of protein-DNA adducts. Previous studies have demonstrated that topoisomerase II (TopII)-DNA adducts (TopII-DNA covalent complexes) are rapidly degraded by the proteasome. It has been hypothesized that proteasomal degradation of TopII-DNA covalent adducts exposes TopII-concealed DNA double-strand breaks (DSBs) for repair. To test this hypothesis, the anticancer drug, VP-16 (etoposide), was employed to induce TopII-DNA covalent complexes in mammalian cells, and the involvement of proteasome in processing TopII-DNA covalent complexes into DSBs was investigated. Consistent with the hypothesis, VP-16-induced DSBs as monitored by neutral comet assay, as well as DNA damage signals (e.g. -H2AX) were significantly reduced in the presence of the proteasome inhibitor, MG132. Using both top2 knock-out mouse embryonic fibroblasts and Top2 small interfering RNA knockdown PC12 cells, as well as postmitotic neurons in which TopII was absent, we showed that VP-16-induced DNA damage signals were attenuated upon proteasome inhibition, suggesting the involvement of proteasome in the repair/processing of both TopII-DNA and TopII-DNA adducts. By contrast, hydrogen peroxide-induced -H2AX was unaffected upon proteasome inhibition, suggesting a specific requirement of the proteasome pathway in the processing of TopII-DNA covalent complexes into DNA damage.

	INTRODUCTION

TOP ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES RESULTS DISCUSSION REFERENCES

 
VP-16 (etoposide), a prototypic topoisomerase II (TopII)³ poison which stabilizes both TopII- and TopII-DNA covalent complexes (1), is widely used as a DNA damaging agent that induces DNA double-strand breaks (DSBs) (2). However, little is known about the mechanism by which TopII-DNA covalent complexes are transformed into DSBs. In vitro, the VP-16-stabilized TopII-DNA covalent complex presumably reflects the key covalent reaction intermediate, the reversible TopII cleavage complex in which each TopII subunit is covalently linked to the 5'-phosphoryl ends of the four-base staggered DSBs (3). In vivo, VP-16, as well as other TopII poisons, is known to induce DNA damage signals indicative of chromosomal DNA damage. For example, TopII poisons are known to cause G₂ cell cycle arrest (4), elevation of sister chromatid exchanges (5, 6) and chromosomal aberrations (7), ATM autophosphorylation (at Ser-1981) (8), H2AX phosphorylation (at Ser-139) (8), NFB activation (9, 10), and p53 stabilization (11). However, how TopII-concealed DSBs are converted into DNA damage that is recognizable by the DNA damage repair system is not clear.

A previous study has shown that TopII poisons induce proteasome-mediated degradation of TopII, a process referred to as TopII down-regulation (12). TopII down-regulation was shown to be transcription-dependent and exhibits a preference for the TopII isozyme. This phenomenon of proteasome-dependent degradation of TopII is highly reminiscent of proteasome-dependent degradation of topoisomerase I (TopI) induced by the TopI poison, camptothecin (13, 14). It has been hypothesized that, similar to TopI cleavage complexes, TopII cleavage complexes are degraded by the proteasome to reveal topoisomerase-concealed DNA strand breaks for repair (12). In this study, we have tested the hypothesis that proteasome degradation of TopII cleavage complexes transforms TopII-concealed strand breaks into DSBs that are recognizable by the DNA damage signaling pathways.

	EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES

TOP ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES RESULTS DISCUSSION REFERENCES

 
Materials—4,4-(2,3-Butanediyl)-bis(2,6-piperazinedione) (ICRF-193) was purchased from ICN Biomedicals. Etoposide (VP-16), carbobenzoxyl-leucinyl-leucinyl-leucinal (MG132), cycloheximide (CHX), 5,6-dichlorobenzimidazole 1--D-ribofuranoside (DRB), aphidicolin, and 4',6-diamidino-2-phenyindole were purchased from Sigma. Lactacystin was purchased from A.G. Scientific, Inc. The pancaspase inhibitor, benzyloxycarbonyl-VAD-fluoromethyl ketone (Z-VAD-FMK), was purchased from Promega Corp. Neurobasal medium and B27 supplement were purchased from Invitrogen Corp. The anti-ATM-S1981-P antibody was purchased from Rockland Immunochemicals. Anti--H2AX antibodies were purchased from Trevigen and Upstate%20Biotechnology">Upstate Biotechnology. The anti-ATM-S1981-P monoclonal antibody was purchased from Cell Signaling Technology, Inc. The anti-TopII and TopII antibodies were purchased from Santa Cruz Biotechonology, Inc.

Isolation of top2^+/- and top2^-/- Mouse Embryonic Fibroblasts (MEFs)—Embryonic day-12.5 (E12.5) mouse embryos (top2^+/- and top2^-/- (15)) were dissected free of brains and livers, finely minced, and then suspended in trypsin-EDTA. The cell suspensions were incubated at 37 °C for 5 min, followed by termination with Dulbecco's modified Eagle's medium supplemented with 10% fetal calf serum. The single cell suspensions were centrifuged to obtain cell pellets which were then re-suspended in fresh culture medium and plated in culture dishes. MEFs were then transformed with SV40 large T-antigen by co-transfection a SV40 T-antigen plasmid (pAN2) and a neo^r plasmid (at a ratio of 4:1). 48 h post-transfection, cells were selected with G418 (500 µg/ml) for 10 to 15 days. Transformed cells were then cloned.

Comet Assay—Wild type transformed MEFs were pretreated with 2 µM MG132 for 30 min, followed by co-treatment with 250 µM VP-16 for 1.5 h. Cells were then washed three times with fresh medium (with or without 2 µM MG132 as indicated) and incubated for additional 30 min (for reversal of topoisomerase II cleavage complexes). For comet assay, treated cells were scraped from plates and pelletted, followed by re-suspension in 1x PBS (10,000 cells/ml). 50 µl of the cell suspension was then mixed with 500 µl 0.5% low melting point agarose at 37 °C. 75 µl of the cell/agarose mixture was transferred onto glass slides. Slides were then immersed in prechilled lysis buffer (2.5 M NaCl, 100 mM EDTA, 10 mM Tris, pH 10.0, 1% Triton X-100, and 10% Me₂SO) for 1 h, followed by equilibration in 1x Tris borate-EDTA buffer for 30 min. Slides were electrophoresed in 1x Tris borate-EDTA at 1.5 volt/cm for 5 min and stained with Vistra Green (Amersham Biosciences). Images were visualized under a fluorescence microscope and captured with a CCD camera. The comet tail moment was determined using the Comet Assay IV software (Perceptive Instruments), and the mean ± S.E. of the comet tail moment was obtained from 50 cells for each treatment group. Statistical analysis of the mean comet tail moments was performed using Student's t test.

TopII Knockdown by Small Interfering RNA in PC12 Cells— Based on the 643-bp partial rat TopII cDNA sequence reported in the data base (GenBank^TM accession number D14046 [GenBank] ), which corresponds to the N-terminal domain of the protein, the sequence 5'-GCCCCCGTTATATCTTCAC-3' was selected for shRNA-mediated knockdown of rat TopII. The duplex DNA (5'-TGCCCCCGTTATATCTTCACTTCAAGAGAGTGAAGATATAACGGGGGCTTTTTC-3') was made and cloned into the LentiLox 3.7 vector (obtained from Dr. Van Parijs, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA). The Top2 shRNA LentiLox 3.7 DNA was then mixed with the ViralPower^TM Packaging Mix (containing pLP1, pLP2, and pLP/VSVG DNAs, which provide necessary proteins for virus production) and used for transfection into 293T cells with Lipofectamine^TM 2000 (Invitrogen) to generate the lentiviral stock. Cultured PC12 cells were infected with rat Top2 shRNA lentivirus. Single colonies were isolated and characterized. The PC12-I4 clone was shown to express reduced levels of Top2 mRNA and TopII protein. The PC12-C4 clone was isolated from control lentivirus (vector only)-infected PC12 cells.

Neuronal Cultures—Cerebellar granule neurons (CGNs) were isolated as described by Levi et al. (16) from postnatal day-8 (P8) Sprague-Dawley rats. Briefly, cerebella were isolated free of meninges and blood vessels in basal medium Eagle buffered with 20 mM HEPES, pH 7.4, at 4 °C. Cerebella were then minced and incubated in 0.08% trypsin/basal medium Eagle-HEPES for 15 min at 37 °C. DNase I (0.05%) plus the soybean trypsin inhibitor (0.025%) were then added to halt trypsinization. The cell suspension was triturated using a fire-polished Pasteur pipette, followed by centrifugation at 300 x g for 10 min. The cell pellets were resuspended in neurobasal medium supplemented with B27 supplement (Invitrogen), 25 mM KCl, 0.5 mM glutamine, and penicillin/streptomycin (100 units/ml and 100 µg/ml, respectively), followed by passing through a 40-µm nylon filter (Sefar America, Inc.). All culture dishes and glass coverslips were precoated with 0.01% poly-L-lysine. Cortical neurons (CNs) were isolated from E17.5 mouse embryos following the same procedure as described above.

Immunocytochemistry—For immunocytochemistry, CGNs or CNs (1.5 x 10⁵ cells/well) were plated onto glass coverslips in a 24-well plate and cultured. Neuron cells cultured for 2 day in vitro (2 DIV), were treated with VP-16 or camptothecin for 1 h followed by fixation with 4% paraformaldehyde in PBS at 4 °C for 10 min. Fixed neurons were rinsed once with PBS and then incubated with PBS containing 10% fetal calf serum, 0.2% Triton X-100 and 0.1% sodium azide for 30 min at room temperature. For antibody staining, neurons were incubated with anti-ATM-S1981-P (1 to 500 dilution) or anti--H2AX(1 to 200 dilution) antibody in PBS containing 1% fetal calf serum, 0.2% Triton X-100 and 0.1% sodium azide overnight at 4 °C. After several rinses with PBS, neurons were incubated with appropriate secondary antibody (Jackson Immuno-Research). Neurons on glass coverslips were then washed with PBS followed by counterstaining with 4',6-diamidino-2-phenyindole. The glass coverslips were mounted with an aqueous mounting medium (Gel/Mount) (Biomeda Corporation). Fluorescence images were captured using a CCD camera mounted on a Zeiss fluorescence microscope.

Immunoblotting—Immunoblotting was performed as described previously (17). Briefly, protein samples in SDS gel sample buffer were boiled for 10 min and then analyzed by SDS-PAGE. After electrophoresis, proteins were transferred onto nitrocellulose membranes. Membranes were immersed in 5% milk for 1 h, followed by incubation with specific antibody overnight. Membranes were then washed with TBST (50 mM Tris-HCl, pH 7.4, 150 mM NaCl, 0.1% Tween 20) and incubated with the secondary antibody for 1 h. Bound secondary antibody was detected by either x-ray films or the Kodak Image Station 2000R (for quantification) using ECL reagents (Pierce).

	RESULTS

TOP ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES RESULTS DISCUSSION REFERENCES

 
VP-16 Induces Proteasome-dependent Degradation of TopII and DNA Damage—Previous studies have demonstrated that TopII poisons induce proteasome-mediated degradation of TopII in mammalian cells (12). Indeed, as shown in Fig. 1A, VP-16 induced a time-dependent degradation of TopII (also TopII, but to a lesser extent) in transformed MEFs. Consistent with results obtained from previous studies, degradation of TopII was largely prevented by co-treatment with the proteasome inhibitor MG132 (2 µM) (Fig. 1A), suggesting the involvement of proteasome in TopII down-regulation. It has been proposed that proteasomal degradation of TopII cleavage complexes represents a novel repair pathway, which processes TopII-DNA covalent complexes into reparable DSBs (12). To test this possibility, we measured the amount of DSBs in VP-16-treated MEFs using neutral comet assay in the presence and absence of the proteasome inhibitor MG132. As shown in Fig. 1, B and C, VP-16 (250 µM for 1.5 h) treatment induced a statistically significant increase in average comet tail moment compared with Me₂SO (0.25%, solvent control) treatment (1.9-fold, p value < 0.001, t test), suggesting induction of DSBs by VP-16. Co-treatment with the proteasome inhibitor MG132 largely abolished this VP-16 signal (p value < 0.001, t test), suggesting the involvement of the proteasome in the induction of DSBs by VP-16. In these experiments, the comet signal most likely reflected the formation of frank DSBs rather than TopII cleavage complexes, since a cleavage complex reversing procedure (incubation in fresh medium without VP-16) was applied prior to the comet assay.

View larger version (33K): [in this window] [in a new window]   FIGURE 1. VP-16 induces proteasome-dependent degradation of TopII and DNA damage signals. A, transformed MEFs were treated with 250 µM VP-16 for 2 h (2h) or 4 h (4h) in the presence or absence of MG132 (2 µM). Cells were washed three times with drug-free medium and then incubated for another 30 min. Cells were lysed by addition of 2x SDS sample buffer, followed by analysis with SDS-PAGE. Western blotting was performed using antibody against TopII, -H2AX or -tubulin. For the control (-), Me2SO (0.25%) was added instead of VP-16. B, transformed MEFs were treated with VP-16 in the presence and absence of MG132 and then analyzed by neutral comet assay as described under "Experimental Procedures." C, the results shown in (B) were quantified as described under "Experimental Procedures" and presented as histograms (mean ± S.E.). **, p < 0.001 (compare VP and Me2SO (DMSO) treatments); *, p < 0.001 (compare VP+MG132 and VP treatments). VP, VP-16.

View larger version (28K): [in this window] [in a new window]   FIGURE 2. MG132 blocks TopII cleavage complex-mediated induction of -H2AX. A, VP-16-induced-H2AX in TopII knockdown PC12 cells. Wild type PC12 (PC12-C4) and TopII knockdown PC12 (PC12-I4) cells were treated with VP-16 (1, 10, and 100 µM) or camptothecin (10 µM) for 1 h. Cells were lysed with 2x SDS gel sample buffer, followed by Western blotting using either anti--H2AX or anti--tubulin antibody. The relative amount of TopII protein in wild type (C4) and TopII knockdown (I4) PC12 cells was shown in the right panel. B, VP-16-induced -H2AX in TopII knock-out MEFs. T-antigen-transformed MEFs (top2+/- or top2-/-) were treated with VP-16 (10 and 100 µM) for 1 h, in the presence or absence of MG132 (2 µM). Western blotting was performed as described in A. The amount of TopII protein in top2+/- and top2-/- MEFs was shown in the right panel. CPT, camptothecin.

Involvement of Proteasome in the Processing of TopII-DNA Covalent Complex into DNA Damage—VP-16 is known to induce both TopII-DNA and TopII-DNA covalent complexes indiscriminately (1). The DSBs induced by VP-16 could be due to the processing of either or both covalent complexes in transformed MEFs. To determine the role of the two TopII isozymes in the induction of DSBs by VP-16, -H2AX was measured in TopII knockdown PC12 cells (PC12-I4) and the control PC12 cells (PC12-C4) treated with VP-16. As shown in Fig. 2A, VP-16 induced a similar level of -H2AX in PC12-C4 as compared with that in PC12-I4 cells, suggesting that the -H2AX signal is primarily due to the presence of TopII-DNA covalent complexes. This conclusion was further supported by studies in top2 knock-out MEFs. As shown in Fig. 2B, VP-16 induced a similar level of -H2AX in top2^-/- MEFs as compared with that in top2^+/- MEFs. Furthermore, the proteasome inhibitor, MG132, reduced the VP-induced -H2AX signal by about 40% (in both top2^+/- and top2^-/- MEFs treated with 100 µM VP-16), suggesting that the proteasome is involved in the processing of TopII-DNA covalent complexes into DSBs.

View larger version (39K): [in this window] [in a new window]   FIGURE 3. Proteasome-mediated degradation of TopII cleavage complexes in postmitotic CGNs. A, expression levels of TopII isozymes in rat CGNs. Rat CGNs were isolated as described under "Experimental Procedures." Immunoblotting using anti-TopII or anti-TopII antibody was performed on isolated CGNs that were cultured for 0, 1, 2, or 5 DIV. B, VP-16 induces proteasome-mediated degradation of TopII in CGNs. To monitor II degradation, cultured CGNs (2 DIV) were treated with VP-16 (250 µM) for 1, 2, 3, and 5 h. The effect of various inhibitors (2 µM MG132, 150 µM DRB, or 10 µg/ml CHX) on VP-16 (250 µM)-induced II degradation was monitored in CGNs following co-incubation for 5 h. Me2SO (0.25%) was used as the solvent control. Following treatment, cells were lysed with the alkaline lysis method followed by Staphylococcal S7 nuclease digestion. Digested lysates were analyzed by immunoblotting using anti-TopII or anti-TopI antibody.

DRB (150 µM), but not CHX (10 µg/ml), was shown to block TopII degradation, suggesting the involvement of transcription but not new protein synthesis in TopII degradation, consistent with previous findings in HeLa cells (12).

VP-16 also induced DNA damage signals such as ATM autophosphorylation (at Ser-1981, ATM-S1981-P) and -H2AX in postmitotic CGNs (2 DIV) as revealed by immunoblotting using their respective phospho-specific antibodies (Fig. 4). ATM-S1981-P autophosphorylation was abolished by co-treatment with MG132 or DRB but not with CHX (or aphidicolin), suggesting that VP-16-induced DNA damage signals requires the proteasome and transcription but not protein synthesis. Similar results were obtained on the VP-16-induced -H2AX signal in postmitotic CGNs. As shown in Fig. 4B, VP-16-induced -H2AX in postmitotic CGNs was abolished by co-treatment with ICRF-193 (a TopII catalytic inhibitor known to block the formation of TopII-DNA covalent complexes), DRB and MG132. These results are consistent with the notion that TopII-DNA covalent complexes are degraded by the proteasome in a transcription-dependent manner. In addition, the formation of ATM-S1981-P and -H2AX DNA damage foci was also monitored by immunocytochemistry in VP-16-treated postmitotic CGNs (2 DIV) using their respective phospho-specific antibodies. As shown in Fig. 5 (A and B), VP-16 induced both ATM-S1981-P and -H2AX foci in CGNs. The merged images of ATM-pS1981 and -H2AX foci (Fig. 5C) showed co-localization of both foci. Consistent with our immunoblotting results, the formation of both ATM-S1981-P and -H2AX foci was abolished by ICRF-193 and MG132. In addition to MG132, lactacystin (a specific proteasome inhibitor) was also shown to block ATM-S1981-P foci induced by VP16 (Fig. 5A), confirming the involvement of proteasome in the activation of DNA damage signals.

View larger version (29K): [in this window] [in a new window]   FIGURE 4. VP-16 induces proteasome-dependent activation of DNA damage signals in postmitotic CGNs. A, VP-16-induced ATM autophosphorylation (ATM-S1981-P) in postmitotic CGNs. Cultured rat CGNs (2 DIV) were treated with 1 µM VP-16 (lanes 2-6) in the absence (lane 2) or presence of 2 µM MG132 (lane 3), 150 µM DRB (lane 4), 10 µM aphidicolin (lane 5), or 10 µg/ml CHX (lane 6) for 1 h. Lane 1 is the solvent control (0.1% Me2SO). Cells were lysed with 2X SDS gel sample buffer, followed by immunoblotting using anti-ATM-S1981-P antibody. B, VP-16 induces proteasome-dependent phosphorylation (Ser-139) of H2AX (-H2AX) in postmitotic CGNs. Rat postmitotic CGNs (2 DIV) were treated with VP-16 (50 µM) for 1 h in the presence of MG132 (2 µM), DRB (150 µM), or ICRF-193 (50 µM). Cells were lysed with 2x SDS gel sample buffer and immunobotted using anti--H2AX antibody.

View larger version (63K): [in this window] [in a new window]   FIGURE 5. VP-16 induces DNA damage foci in postmitotic neurons. Cultured rat CGNs (2 DIV) were treated with VP-16 (3 µM) in the presence or absence of various inhibitors (75 µM ICRF-193, 2 µM MG132, 10 µM lactacystin). Immunocytochemistry using anti-ATM-S1981-P antibody (A) and anti-H2AX antibody (B) was performed as described under "Experimental Procedures." C, co-localization of ATM-S1981-P and -H2AX foci in postmitotic CGNs. CGNs (2 DIV) cultured on glass coverslips were treated with VP-16 (3µM) for 1 h. CGNs were then fixed and co-stained with anti-ATM-S1981-P (red) and anti--H2AX (green) antibodies. D, mouse E17.5 cortical neurons (2 DIV) were cultured on glass coverslips and treated with 0.1% Me2SO (DMSO) or VP-16 (5 µM) for 1 h. Immunocytochemistry was performed using the anti--H2AX antibody. E, mouse E17.5 cortical neurons (2 DIV) were treated with 20 µM VP-16 for 1 h and then analyzed by immunoblotting using anti--H2AX or -tubulin antibody.

	DISCUSSION

TOP ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES RESULTS DISCUSSION REFERENCES

 
To date, little is known about the molecular mechanism for the repair of covalent protein-DNA adducts. Studies of topoisomerases and Spo11 (a TopII-like protein involved in initiation of meiotic recombination (19-22)) have suggested that nucleases as well as TDP1, a phosphodiesterase, are involved in their removal from the covalent protein-DNA adducts (23-26).

Previous studies have suggested that a protease mechanism may be involved in the repair/processing of TopII-DNA covalent adducts. It has been proposed that proteasomal degradation of TopII-DNA covalent complexes represents a novel repair mechanism that transforms TopII-concealed DSBs into protein-free DSBs (12). To test this possibility, we have evaluated the role of proteasome in the induction of DNA damage in VP-16-treated cells. Using neutral comet assay, we have monitored the formation of DSBs in VP-16-treated MEFs in the presence and absence of MG132. In the presence of MG132, VP-16-induced DSBs was largely abolished, suggesting the involvement of proteasome in the induction of DSBs in VP-16-treated cells. Additionally, we have monitored the induction of the DNA damage signal -H2AX which is widely used as a signal for DSBs (18). Indeed, the VP-16-induced -H2AX signal in MEFs is reduced in the presence of MG-132, suggesting the involvement of proteasome in induction of DNA damage by VP-16.

The two TopII isozymes are known to be regulated very differently (27-30) and their covalent DNA adducts could be repaired by different pathways. TopII, which is only expressed in proliferating and tumor cells, has been located in replication foci in S phase possibly through its interaction with proliferating cell nuclear antigen (PCNA) (31). In addition, TopII (identified as the major chromosome scaffold protein Sc1), together with condensin, form the structural scaffold for mitotic chromosomes (32). It appears that TopII plays an important role in cell cycle events such as DNA replication, chromosome condensation/decondensation, and sister-chromatid segregation (33-39). By contrast, TopII is present in all cells including terminally differentiated cells and has been shown to be involved in transcription (15, 27, 29, 40-43). We have evaluated the role of proteasome in the processing of TopII isozyme-DNA covalent complexes into DNA damage. The TopII isozyme responsible for the VP-16-induced -H2AX signal in MEFs is primarily TopII, since the similar level of VP-16-induced -H2AX signal was observed in top2^-/- and top2^+/- MEFs. Consequently, we conclude that proteasome is involved in the processing of TopII-DNA covalent complexes into DSBs. However, inhibition of proteasome with MG132 only led to a 40% reduction of the VP-16-induced -H2AX signal, suggesting the possible existence of a proteasome-independent pathway(s) for processing TopII cleavage complexes into DNA damage. TopII-DNA covalent complexes may be processed by another mechanism due to its predominant role in cell cycle events such as DNA replication. TopII-DNA covalent complexes could undergo collisions with replication forks (44) and trigger a proteasome-independent mechanism for repair. Clearly, further studies are necessary to establish the mode of repair of TopII-DNA covalent complexes.

View larger version (36K): [in this window] [in a new window]   FIGURE 6. A, Proteasome is specifically required for VP-16-induced, but not H2O2-induced, -H2AX. Mouse E17.5 cortical neurons (2 DIV) were treated with VP-16 (20 µM) or H2O2 (100 µM) in the presence or absence of MG132 (4 µM) for 1 h, followed by analysis with immunoblotting using anti--H2AX and -tubulin antibody. B, a model for proteasomal degradation of TopII-DNA covalent complexes. TopII- and TopII-DNA covalent complexes, which are stabilized by TopII poisons, are degraded by the proteasome. Following proteasomal degradation, TopII-concealed DSBs are exposed and subsequently recognized by the DNA damage repair system, resulting in the activation of DNA damage signals.

Our results could best be explained by the model shown in Fig. 6B. In this model, VP-16 stabilizes both TopII- and TopII-DNA covalent complexes in the form of reversible TopII cleavage complexes. Proteasomal degradation of TopII cleavage complexes exposes TopII-concealed DSBs which are then recognized by the DNA damage repair system(s). At the present time, it is unclear whether proteasome is directly or indirectly involved in processing TopII-DNA covalent complexes. However, the specific requirement of proteasome for VP-16-induced, but not hydrogen peroxide-induced, DNA damage in postmitotic neurons suggests a possible direct role of proteasome in processing TopII-DNA adducts.

VP-16-stabilized TopII-DNA covalent complexes are reversible (45). It has been suggested the lethality of these reversible TopII-DNA covalent complexes requires fixation through their interactions (collisions) with DNA helix-tracking processes such as advancing DNA replication forks, transcribing RNA polymerase elongation complexes, and translocating helicases. Previous studies have demonstrated that degradation of TopII is transcription-dependent (12), consistent with its predominant role in transcription. It seems possible that proteasomal degradation of TopII-DNA covalent complexes could be triggered by their collisions with the transcription elongation complexes within the actively transcribed genes (12). However, the triggering event for proteasomal degradation of TopII-DNA covalent complexes remains unclear. Further studies are necessary to establish the molecular mechanism for the repair of these TopII isozyme-specific DNA adducts.

	FOOTNOTES

 
^* This work was supported by National Institutes of Health R01 Grants CA102463 and CA39662 (both to L. F. L.). The costs of publication of this article were defrayed in part by the payment of page charges. This article must therefore be hereby marked "advertisement" in accordance with 18 U.S.C. Section 1734 solely to indicate this fact.

¹ These authors contributed equally to this work.

² To whom correspondence should be addressed: Dept. of Pharmacology, UMDNJ-Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, 675 Hoes Lane, Piscataway, NJ 08854. Tel.: 732-235-4592; Fax: 732-235-4073; E-mail: lliu{at}umdnj.edu.

³ The abbreviations used are: TopII, topoisomerase II; TopI, topoisomerase I; ICRF-193, 4,4-(2,3-butanediyl)-bis(2,6-piperazinedione); etoposide (VP-16), demethylepipodophyllotoxin ethylidene--D-glucoside; MG132, carbobenzoxyl-leucinyl-leucinyl-leucinal; CHX, cycloheximide; DRB, 5,6-dichlorobenzimidazole riboside; MEF, mouse embryonic fibroblast; DSB, DNA double-strand break; DIV, day in vitro; ATM-S1981-P, ATM autophosphorylation (at Ser-1981); CGN, cerebellar granule neuron; PBS, phosphate-buffered saline; CN, cortical neuron.

	ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

 
We are grateful to Dr. J. C. Wang for providing the top2^+/- mouse strain.

	REFERENCES

TOP ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES RESULTS DISCUSSION REFERENCES

 

1. Willmore, E., Frank, A. J., Padget, K., Tilby, M. J., and Austin, C. A. (1998) Mol. Pharmacol. 54, 78-85[Abstract/Free Full Text]
2. Baldwin, E. L., and Osheroff, N. (2005) Curr. Med. Chem. Anticancer Agents 5, 363-372[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
3. Chen, G. L., Yang, L., Rowe, T. C., Halligan, B. D., Tewey, K. M., and Liu, L. F. (1984) J. Biol. Chem. 259, 13560-13566[Abstract/Free Full Text]
4. Clifford, B., Beljin, M., Stark, G. R., and Taylor, W. R. (2003) Cancer Res. 63, 4074-4081[Abstract/Free Full Text]
5. Pommier, Y., Kerrigan, D., Covey, J. M., Kao-Shan, C. S., and Whang-Peng, J. (1988) Cancer Res. 48, 512-516[Abstract/Free Full Text]
6. Noviello, E., Aluigi, M. G., Cimoli, G., Rovini, E., Mazzoni, A., Parodi, S., De Sessa, F., and Russo, P. (1994) Mutat. Res. 311, 21-29[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
7. Degrassi, F., Fiore, M., and Palitti, F. (2004) Curr. Med. Chem. Anticancer Agents 4, 317-325[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
8. Kurose, A., Tanaka, T., Huang, X., Halicka, H. D., Traganos, F., Dai, W., and Darzynkiewicz, Z. (2005) Cytometry A 68, 1-9[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
9. Boland, M. P., Fitzgerald, K. A., and O'Neill, L. A. (2000) J. Biol. Chem. 275, 25231-25238[Abstract/Free Full Text]
10. Andriollo, M., Favier, A., and Guiraud, P. (2003) Arch. Biochem. Biophys. 413, 75-82[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
11. Karpinich, N. O., Tafani, M., Rothman, R. J., Russo, M. A., and Farber, J. L. (2002) J. Biol. Chem. 277, 16547-16552[Abstract/Free Full Text]
12. Mao, Y., Desai, S. D., Ting, C. Y., Hwang, J., and Liu, L. F. (2001) J. Biol. Chem. 276, 40652-40658[Abstract/Free Full Text]
13. Desai, S. D., Li, T. K., Rodriguez-Bauman, A., Rubin, E. H., and Liu, L. F. (2001) Cancer Res. 61, 5926-5932[Abstract/Free Full Text]
14. Desai, S. D., Zhang, H., Rodriguez-Bauman, A., Yang, J. M., Wu, X., Gounder, M. K., Rubin, E. H., and Liu, L. F. (2003) Mol. Cell. Biol. 23, 2341-2350[Abstract/Free Full Text]
15. Lyu, Y. L., and Wang, J. C. (2003) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 100, 7123-7128[Abstract/Free Full Text]
16. Levi, G., Aloisi, F., Ciotti, M. T., and Gallo, V. (1984) Brain Res. 290, 77-86[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
17. Zhou, N., Xiao, H., Li, T. K., Nur, E. K. A., and Liu, L. F. (2003) J. Biol. Chem. 278, 29532-29537[Abstract/Free Full Text]
18. Thiriet, C., and Hayes, J. J. (2005) Mol. Cell 18, 617-622[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
19. Keeney, S., and Kleckner, N. (1995) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 92, 11274-11278[Abstract/Free Full Text]
20. Liu, J., Wu, T. C., and Lichten, M. (1995) EMBO J. 14, 4599-4608[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
21. Keeney, S., Giroux, C. N., and Kleckner, N. (1997) Cell 88, 375-384[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
22. Bergerat, A., de Massy, B., Gadelle, D., Varoutas, P. C., Nicolas, A., and Forterre, P. (1997) Nature 386, 414-417[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
23. Pouliot, J. J., Yao, K. C., Robertson, C. A., and Nash, H. A. (1999) Science 286, 552-555[Abstract/Free Full Text]
24. Nitiss, K. C., Malik, M., He, X., White, S. W., and Nitiss, J. L. (2006) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 103, 8953-8958[Abstract/Free Full Text]
25. Nairz, K., and Klein, F. (1997) Genes Dev. 11, 2272-2290[Abstract/Free Full Text]
26. Neale, M. J., Pan, J., and Keeney, S. (2005) Nature 436, 1053-1057[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
27. Capranico, G., Tinelli, S., Austin, C. A., Fisher, M. L., and Zunino, F. (1992) Biochim. Biophys. Acta 1132, 43-48[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
28. Tsutsui, K., Okada, S., Watanabe, M., Shohmori, T., Seki, S., and Inoue, Y. (1993) J. Biol. Chem. 268, 19076-19083[Abstract/Free Full Text]
29. Watanabe, M., Tsutsui, K., and Inoue, Y. (1994) Neurosci. Res. 19, 51-57[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
30. Turley, H., Comley, M., Houlbrook, S., Nozaki, N., Kikuchi, A., Hickson, I. D., Gatter, K., and Harris, A. L. (1997) Br. J. Cancer 75, 1340-1346[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
31. Niimi, A., Suka, N., Harata, M., Kikuchi, A., and Mizuno, S. (2001) Chromosoma. 110, 102-114[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
32. Saitoh, N., Goldberg, I., and Earnshaw, W. C. (1995) BioEssays 17, 759-766[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
33. DiNardo, S., Voelkel, K., and Sternglanz, R. (1984) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 81, 2616-2620[Abstract/Free Full Text]
34. Holm, C., Goto, T., Wang, J. C., and Botstein, D. (1985) Cell 41, 553-563[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
35. Uemura, T., Ohkura, H., Adachi, Y., Morino, K., Shiozaki, K., and Yanagida, M. (1987) Cell 50, 917-925[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
36. Holm, C., Stearns, T., and Botstein, D. (1989) Mol. Cell. Biol. 9, 159-168[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
37. Wood, E. R., and Earnshaw, W. C. (1990) J. Cell Biol. 111, 2839-2850[Abstract/Free Full Text]
38. Cuvier, O., and Hirano, T. (2003) J. Cell Biol. 160, 645-655[Abstract/Free Full Text]
39. Downes, C. S., Clarke, D. J., Mullinger, A. M., Gimenez-Abian, J. F., Creighton, A. M., and Johnson, R. T. (1994) Nature 372, 467-470[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
40. Tsutsui, K., Hosoya, O., Sano, K., and Tokunaga, A. (2001) J. Comp. Neurol. 431, 228-239[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
41. Tsutsui, K., Sano, K., Kikuchi, A., and Tokunaga, A. (2001) J. Biol. Chem. 276, 5769-5778[Abstract/Free Full Text]
42. Ju, B. G., Lunyak, V. V., Perissi, V., Garcia-Bassets, I., Rose, D. W., Glass, C. K., and Rosenfeld, M. G. (2006) Science 312, 1798-1802[Abstract/Free Full Text]
43. Lyu, Y. L., Lin, C.-P., Azarova, A. M., Cai, L., Wang, J. C., and Liu, L. F. (2006) Mol. Cell. Biol. 26, 7929-7941[Abstract/Free Full Text]
44. D'Arpa, P., Beardmore, C., and Liu, L. F. (1990) Cancer Res. 50, 6919-6924[Abstract/Free Full Text]
45. Hsiang, Y. H., and Liu, L. F. (1989) J. Biol. Chem. 264, 9713-9715[Abstract/Free Full Text]

CiteULike

Complore

Connotea

Del.icio.us

Digg

Reddit

Technorati

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]

				Y. L. Lyu, J. E. Kerrigan, C.-P. Lin, A. M. Azarova, Y.-C. Tsai, Y. Ban, and L. F. Liu Topoisomerase II{beta} Mediated DNA Double-Strand Breaks: Implications in Doxorubicin Cardiotoxicity and Prevention by Dexrazoxane Cancer Res., September 15, 2007; 67(18): 8839 - 8846. [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]

This Article Abstract Full Text (PDF) All Versions of this Article: 281/47/35997    most recent M604149200v1 Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Zhang, A. Articles by Liu, L. F. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Zhang, A. Articles by Liu, L. F. Social Bookmarking                      What's this?