Advertisement

Mechanisms of Repair of Interstrand Crosslinks in DNA

  • Randy J. Legerski
  • Christopher Richie
Part of the Cancer Treatment and Research book series (CTAR, volume 112)

Abstract

The chemotherapeutic use of the early forms of DNA interstrand crosslinking agents, such as mustard gas and nitrogen mustard, predates the Second World War, making these agents among the oldest, and yet still most effective, anticancer drugs available in the clinic. The alkylation chemistry of these drugs was elucidated shortly after the War, and their cellular pharmacology was studied extensively during the 1970s and 1980s1. In contemporary chemotherapy treatment, interstrand crosslinking agents such as cyclophosphamide, melphalan, and cisplatin are among the most potent antitumor agents. Despite this lengthy history of clinical usage and pharmacologic investigation, the mechanisms of repair of the lesions produced in DNA by interstrand crosslinking agents have not been extensively studied. This relative neglect of investigation into the biochemical pathways of interstrand crosslink (ICL) repair is to be contrasted with the striking advances that have been accomplished in the past decade in other DNA damage processing pathways, such as nucleotide excision repair (NER), double-strand break (DSB) repair, and mismatch repair2

Keywords

Ionize Radiation Nucleotide Excision Repair Fanconi Anemia Recombinational Repair Nijmegen Breakage Syndrome 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Kohn KW. Beyond DNA cross-linking: history and prospects of DNA-targeted cancer treatment. Fifteenth Bruck F Can Memorial Award Lecture. Cancer Res, 56:5533–5546, 1996.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Friedberg EC, Walker GC, Siede W. DNA Repair and Mutagenesis. ASM Press, Washington, DC, 1995.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Calsou P, Salles B. Role of DNA repair in the mechanisms of cell resistance to alkylating agents and cisplatin. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol, 32:85–95, 1993.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Panasci L, Henderson D, Torres-Garcia SJet al.Transport, metabolism, and DNA interaction of melphalan in lymphocytes from patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia. Cancer Res, 48:1972–1979, 1988.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Batist G, Torres-Garcia S, Demuys J-Met al.Enhanced DNA cross-link removal: the apparent mechanisms of resistance in a clinically relevant melphalan-resistant human breast cancer cell line. Mol Pharmacol, 36:224–230, 1989.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Frankenburg DM, Frankenburg-Schwager M, Blocher D, Harbich R. Evidence for DNA double-strand breaks as the critical lesions in yeast cells irradiated with sparsely or densely ionizing radation under oxic and anoxic conditions. Radiat Res, 88:524–532, 1989.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Magana-Schwencke N, Henriques JA, Chanet R, Moustacchi E. The fate of 8- methoxypsoralen photoinduced crosslinks in nuclear and mitochondrial yeast DNA: comparison of wild-type and repair-deficient strains. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA, 79:1722–1726, 1982.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Cole RS. Repair of DNA containing interstrand crosslinks in Escherichia coli: sequential excision and recombination. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA, 70:1064–1068, 1973.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Cole RS, Levitan D, Sinden RR. Removal of psoralen interstrand cross-links from DNA of Escherichia coli: mechanism and genetic control. J Mol Biol, 103:39–59, 1976.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Van Houten B, Gamper H, Holbrook SRet al.Action mechanism of ABC excision nuclease on a DNA substrate containing a psoralen crosslink at a defined position. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA, 83:8077–8081, 1986.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Cheng S, van Houten B, Gamper HBet al.Use of psoralen-modified oligonucleotides to trap three-stranded RecA-DNA complexes and repair of these cross-linked complexes by ABC exinuclease. J Biol Chem, 263:15110–15117, 1988.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Cheng S, Sancar A, Hearst JE. RecA-dependent incision of psoralen-crosslinked DNA by (A)BC exinuclease. Nucleic Acids Res, 19:657–663, 1989.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Sladek FM, Munn MM, Rupp WD, Howard-Flanders P. In vitro repair of psoralen-DNA cross-links by RecA, UvrABC, and the 5’-exonuclease of DNA polymerase I. J Biol Chem, 264:6755–6765, 1989.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Berardini M, Mackay W, Loechler EL. Evidence for a recombination-independent pathway for the repair of DNA interstrand cross-links based on a site-specific study with nitrogen mustard. Biochem, 36:3506–3513, 1997.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Berardini M, Foster PL, Loechler EL. DNA polymerase II (polB) is involved in a new DNA repair pathway for DNA interstrand cross-links inEscherichia coli.J Bacteriol, 181:2878–2882, 1999.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Game JC. DNA double-strand breaks and the RAD5O-RAD57 genes in Saccharomyces. Semin Cancer Biol, 4:73–83, 1993.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Paques F, Haber JE. Multiple pathways of recombination induced by double-strand breaks in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Microbiol Mol Biol Rev, 63:349–404, 1999.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Contopoulou CR, Cook VE, Mortimer RK. Analysis of DNA double-strand breakage and repair using orthogonal field alternation gel electrophoresis. Yeast, 3:71–76, 1987.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Petes TD, Malone RE, Symington LS. Recombination in yeast. In: The Molecular and Cellular Biology of the Yeast Saccharomyces: Genome Dynamics, Protein Synthesis, and Energetics, JR Broach, JR Pringle, EW Jones (eds.), Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press, Cold Spring Harbor, NY, 1991.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Aboussekhra A, Chanet R, Adjiri A, Fabre F. Semi-dominant suppressors of Srs2 helicase mutations of Saccharomyces cerevisiae map in the RAD51 gene, whose sequence predicts a protein with similarities to procaryotic RecA proteins. Mol Cell Biol, 12:3224–3234, 1992.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Basile G, Aker M, Mortimer RK. Nucleotide sequence and transcriptional regulation of the yeast recombinational repair gene RAD51. Mol Cell Biol, 12:3235–3246, 1992.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Shinohara A, Ogawa H, Ogawa T. RADS! protein involved in repair and recombination in S. cerevisiae is a RecA-like protein. Cell, 69:457–470, 1992.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Ogawa T, Yu X, Shinohara A, Egelman EH. Similarity of the yeast RADS] filament to the bacterial RecA filament. Science, 259:1896–1899, 1993.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Sung P. Catalysis of ATP-dependent homologous DNA pairing and strand exchange by yeast RAD51 protein. Science, 265:1241–1243, 1994.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Sung P, Robberson DL. DNA strand exchange mediated by a RAD51-ssDNA nucleoprotein filament with polarity opposite to that of RecA. Cell, 82:453–461, 1995.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Kans JA, Mortimer RK. Nucleotide sequence of the RAD57 gene of Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Gene, 105:139–140, 1991.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Lovett ST. Sequence of the RAD55 gene of Saccharomyces cerevisiae: similarity of RAD55 to prokaryotic RecA and other RecA-like proteins. Gene, 142:103–106, 1994.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Johnson RD, Symington LS. Functional differences and interactions among the putative RecA homologs Rad51, Rad55, and Rad57. Mol Cell Biol, 15:4843–4850, 1995.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Hays SL, Firmenich AA, Berg P. Complex formation in yeast double-stranded break repair: participation of Rad51, Rad52, Rad55, and Rad57. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA, 92:6925–6929, 1995.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Sung P. Yeast Rad55 and Rad57 proteins form a heterodimer that functions with replication protein A to promote DNA strand exchange by Rad51 recombinase. Genes Dev, 11:1111–1121, 1997.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Milne GT, Weaver DT. Dominant negative alleles of RAD52 reveal a DNA repair/recombination complex including Rad51 and Rad52. Genes Dev, 7:1755–1765, 1993.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Baumann P, Benson FE, West SC. Human Rad51 protein promotes ATP-dependent homologous pairing and strand transfer reactions in vitro. Cell, 87:757–766, 1996.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Tsuzuki T, Fujii Y, Sakumi Ket atTargeted disruption of the Rad51 gene leads to lethality in embryonic mice. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA, 93:6236–6240, 1996.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Lim DS, Hasty P. A mutation in mouse rad51 results in an early embryonic lethal that is suppressed by a mutation in p53. Mol Cell Biol, 16:7133–7143, 1996.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Shu Z, Smith S, Wang Let al.Disruption of muREC2/RAD51L1 in mice results in early embryonic lethality which can be partially rescued in a p53(-/-) background. Mol Cell Biol, 19:8686–8693, 1999.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Pittman, DL, Schimenti JC. Midgestation lethality in mice deficient for the RecA-related gene, Rad51d/Rad5113. Genesis, 26:167–173, 2000.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Thacker J. American Society for Microbiology. DNA Repair and Mutagenesis. Hilton Head, SC, 1999.Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Sonoda E, Sasaki MS, Buerstedde JMet al.Rad51-deficient vertebrate cells accumulate chromosomal breaks prior to cell death. EMBO J, 17:598–608, 1998.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Takata M, Sasaki MS, Sonoda Eet al.The Rad51 paralog Rad51B promotes homologous recombinational repair. Mol Cell Biol, 20:6476–6482, 2000.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Haaf T, Golub El, Reddy G, et al. Nuclear foci of mammalian Rad51 recombination protein in somatic cells after DNA damage and its localization in synaptonemal complexes. Proc Natl Acad. Sci USA, 92:2298–2302, 1998.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Tashiro S, Kotomura N, Shinohara Aet al.S phase specific formation of the human Rad51 protein nuclear foci in lymphocytes. Oncogene, 12:2165–2170, 1996.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Schild D, Lio Y, Collins DWet al.Evidence for simultaneous protein interactions between human Rad51 paralogs. J Biol Chem, 275:16443–16449, 2000.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Scully R, Chen J, Plug Aet al.Association of BRCA1 with Rad51 in mitotic and meiotic cells. Cell, 88:265–275, 1997.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Sharan SK, Morimatsu M, Albrecht Uet al.Embryonic lethality and radiation hypersensitivity mediated by Rad51 in mice lacking Brca2. Nature, 386:804–810, 1997.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Mizuta R, LaSalle JM, Cheng HLet al.RAB22 and RAB163/mouse BRCA2: proteins that specifically interact with the RAD51 protein. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA, 94:6927–6932, 1997.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Game JC, Zamb TJ, Braun RJet al.The role of radiation (rad) genes in meiotic recombination in yeast. Genetics, 94:51–68, 1980.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Van Dyck E, Stasiak AZ, Stasiak A, West SC. Binding of double-strand breaks in DNA by human Rad52 protein. Nature, 398:728–731, 1999.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Stasiak AZ, Larquet E, Stasiak Aet al.The human Rad52 protein exists as a heptameric ring. Current Biol, 10:337–340, 2000.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Rijkers T, Van Den Ouweland J, Morolli Bet al.Targeted inactivation of mouse RAD52 reduces homologous recombination but not resistance to ionizing radiation. Mol Cell Biol, 18:6423–6429, 1998.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Bai Y, Symington, LS. ARAD52homologue is required for RAD5J-independent mitotic recombination in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Genes Dev, 10:2025–2037, 1996.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Game JC. DNA double-strand breaks and the RAD5O-RAD57 genes in Saccharomyces. Semin Cancer Biol, 4:73–83, 1993.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Emery HS, Schild D, Kellogg DEet al.Sequence of RAD54, a Saccharomyces cerevisiae gene involved in recombination and repair. Gene, 104:103–106, 1991.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Petukhova G, Stratton S, Sung P. Catalysis of homologous DNA pairing by yeast Rad51 and Rad54 proteins. Nature, 393:91–94, 1998.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Essers J, Hendriks RW, Swagemakers SMet al.Disruption of mouse RAD54 reduces ionizing radiation resistance and homologous recombination. Cell, 89:195–204, 1997.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Alani E, Padmore R, Kleckner N. Analysis of wild-type and rad50 mutants of yeast suggests an intimate relationship between meiotic chromosome synapsis and recombination. Cell, 61:419–436, 1990.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Game JC, Mortimer RK. A genetic study of X-ray sensitive mutants in yeast. Mutat Res, 24:281–292, 1974.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Alani E, Subbiah S, Kleckner N. The yeast RAD50 gene encodes a predicted 153-Kd protein containing a purine-nucleotide binding domain and two large heptad-repeat regions. Genetics, 122:47–57, 1989.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Usui T, Ohta T, Oshumi Het al.Complex formation and functional versatility of Mrel 1 of budding yeast in recombination. Cell, 95:705–716, 1998.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Ivanov EL, Sugawara N, White CIet aLMutations in XRS2 and RAD50 delay but do not prevent mating-type switching in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Mol Cell Biol, 14:3414–3425, 1994.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Bressan DA, Baxter BK, Petrini JH. The Mrel 1-Rad50-Xrs2 protein complex facilitates homologous recombination-based double-strand break repair in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Mol Cell Biol, 19:7681–7687, 1999.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Le Beau M, Yates JR, Hays Let al.The hMrel l/hRad50 protein complex and Nijmegen breakage syndrome: linkage of double-strand break repair to the cellular DNA damage response. Cell, 93:477–486, 1998.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Matsuura S, Tauchi H, Nakamura Aet al.Positional cloning of the gene for Nijmegen breakage syndrome. Nature Genet, 19:179–181, 1998.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Stewart GS, Maser RS, Stankovic Tet al.The DNA double-strand break repair gene hMRE1 1 is mutated in individuals with an ataxia-telangiectasia-like disorder. Cell, 99:577–587,1999.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Luo G, Yao MS Bender CFet al.Disruption of mRad50 causes embryonic stem cell lethality, abnormal embryonic development, and sensitivity to ionizing radiation. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA, 96:7376–7381, 1999.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Xiao Y, Weaver DT. Conditional gene targeted deletion by Cre recombinase demonstrates the requirement for the double-strand break repair Mrel l protein in murine embryonic stem cells. Nucleic Acids Res, 25:2985–2991, 1999.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Paull TT, Gellert M. The 3’ to 5’ exonuclease activity of Mrel 1 facilitates repair of DNA double-strand breaks. Mol Cell, 1:969–980, 1998.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    Paull TT, Gellert M. Nbsl potentiates ATP-driven DNA unwinding and endonuclease cleavage by the Mrell/Rad50 complex. Genes Dev, 13:1276–1288, 1999.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. 68.
    Maser RS, Monsen KJ, Nelms BE, Petrini JH. hMrel 1 and hRad50 nuclear foci are induced during the normal cellular response to DNA double-strand breaks. Mol Cell Biol, 17:6087–6096, 1998.Google Scholar
  69. 69.
    Nelms BE, Maser RS, MacKay JFet al.In situ visualization of DNA double-strand break repair in human fibroblasts. Science, 280:590–592, 1998.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    Goedecke W, Eijpe M, Offenberg HHet al.Mrel I and Ku70 interact in somatic cells, but are differentially expressed in early meiosis. Nature Genet, 23:194–198, 1999.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. 71.
    Gatei M, Young D, Cerosaletti KMet al.ATM-dependent phosphorylation of nibrin in response to radiation exposure. Nature Genet, 25:115–119, 2000.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.
    Dong Z, Zhong Q, Chen PL. The Nijmegen breakage syndrome protein is essential for Mrel I phosphorylation upon DNA damage. J Biol Chem, 274:19513–19516, 1999.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. 73.
    Chen J, Silver DP, Walpita Det al.Stable interaction between the products of the BRCA1 and BRCA2 tumor suppressor genes in mitotic and meiotic cells. Mol Cell, 2:317–328, 1998.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. 74.
    Yu VP, Koehler M, Steinlein Cet al.Gross chromosomal rearrangements and genetic exchange between nonhomologous chromosomes following BRCA2 inactivation. Genes Dev, 14:1400–1406, 2000.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  75. 75.
    Gowen LC, Johnson BL, Latour AMet al.. Nature Genet, 12:191–194, 1996.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. 76.
    Liu CY, Flesken-Nikitin A, Li Set al.Inactivation of the mouse Brcal gene leads to failure in the morphogenesis of the egg cylinder in early postimplantation development. Genes Dev, 10:1835–1843, 1996.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. 77.
    Chen JJ, Silver D, Cantor Set al.BRCAI, BRCA2, and Rad51 operate in a common DNA damage response pathway. Cancer Res, 59:1752s-1756s, 1999.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  78. 78.
    Moynahan ME, Chiu JW, Koller BH, Jasin M. Brcal controls homology-directed DNA repair. Mol Cell, 4:511–518, 1999.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. 79.
    Zhong Q, Chen CF, Li Set al.Association of BRCA1 with the hRad50-hMre 1 1-p95 complex and the DNA damage response. Science, 285:747–750, 1999.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. 80.
    Wang Y, Cortez D, Yazdi Pet al.Basc, a super complex of BRCA1-associated proteins involved in the recognition and repair of aberrant DNA structures. Genes Dev, 14:927–939, 2000.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  81. 81.
    Cortez D, Wang Y, Qin J, Elledge SJ. Requirement of ATM-dependent phosphorylation of BRCA1 in the DNA damage response to double-strand breaks. Science, 286:1162–1166, 1999.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. 82.
    Bochar DA, Wang L, Beniya, Het al.BRCA1 is associated with a human SWI/SNFrelated complex: linking chromatin remodeling to breast cancer. Cell, 102:257–265, 2000.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. 83.
    Gowen LC, Avrutskaya AV, Latour AMet al.BRCA1 required for transcription-coupled repair of oxidative DNA damage. Science, 281:1009–1012, 1998.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. 84.
    Jeggo PA, Taccioli GE, Jackson SP. Menage a trois: double strand break repair, V(D)J recombination and DNA-PK. Bioessays, 17:949–957, 1995.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. 85.
    McElhinny SAN, Snowden CM, McCarville J, Ramsden DA. Ku recruits the XRCC4- Ligase complex to DNA ends. Mol Cell Biol, 20:2996–3003, 2000.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. 86.
    Hanakahi LA, Bartlett-Jones M, Chappell Cet al.Binding of inositol phosphate to DNA-PK and stimulation of double-strand break repair. Cell, 102:721–729, 2000.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. 87.
    Adair GM, Rolig RL, Moore-Faver Det al.Role of ERCC1 in removal of nonhomologous tails during targeted homologous recombination in mammalian cells. EMBO J, 19:5552–5561, 2000.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. 88.
    Kirkpatrick DT, Petes TD. Repair of DNA loops involves DNA-mismatch and nucleotide-excision repair proteins. Nature, 387:929–931, 1997.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. 89.
    Jachymczyk WJ, von Borstel RC, Mowat MRA, Hastings PJ. Repair of interstrand crosslinks in DNA of Saccharomyces cerevisiae requires two systems for DNA repair: the RAD3 system and the RAD51 system. Mol General Genet, 182:196–205, 1991.Google Scholar
  90. 90.
    McHugh PJ, Gill RD, Waters R, Hartley JA. Excision repair of nitrogen mustard-DNA adducts in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Nucleic Acids Res, 27: 3259–3266, 1999.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. 91.
    Andersson BS, Sadeghi T, Sicilano MJet al.Nucleotide excision repair genes as determinants of cellular sensitivity to cyclophosphamide analogs. Cancer Chemother and Pharmacol, 38:406–416, 1996.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. 92.
    Bessho T, Mu D, Sancar A. Initiation of DNA interstrand crosslink repair in humans: the nucleotide excision repair system makes dual incisions 5’ to the crosslinked base and removes a 22- to 28 nucleotide-long damage-free strand. Mol Cell Biol, 17:6822–6830, 1997.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  93. 93.
    Mu D, Bessho T, Nechev LVet al.DNA interstrand cross-links induce futile repair synthesis in mammalian cell extracts. Mol Cell Biol, 20:2446–2454, 2000.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  94. 94.
    Wang X, Peterson CA, Zheng Het al.Involvement of nucleotide excision repair in a recombination-independent and error-prone pathway of DNA interstrand cross-link repair. Mol Cell Biol, 21:713–20, 2001.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  95. 95.
    Li L, Peterson CA, Lu Xet al.Interstrand crosslinks induce DNA synthesis in damaged and undamaged plasmids in mammalian cell-free extracts. Mol Cell Biol, 19:5619–5630, 1999.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  96. 96.
    Zhang N, Zhang X, Peterson Cet al.Differential processing of UV mimetic and interstrand crosslink damage by XPF cell extracts. Nucleic Acids Res, 28:4800–4804, 2000.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  97. 97.
    Kobertz WR, Ariza RR, Biggerstaff Met al.Repair of an interstrand DNA cross-link initiated by ERCC1-XPF repair/recombination nuclease. J Biol Chem, 275:26632–26636, 2000.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  98. 98.
    Strathdee CA, Gavish H, Shannon WR, Buchwald M. Cloning of cDNAs for Fanconi’s anaemia by functional complementation. Nature, 358:434–436, 1992.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  99. 99.
    Lo Ten Foe JR, Rooimans MA, Bosnoyan-Collins Let al.Expression cloning of a cDNA for the major Fanconi anaemia gene, FAA. Nature Genet, 14:320–323, 1996.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  100. 100.
    Consortium TFABC. Positional cloning of the Fanconi anaemia group A gene. Nature Genet, 14:324–328, 1996.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  101. 101.
    de Winter JP, Waisfisz Q, Rooimans MAet al.The Fanconi anaemia group G gene FANCG is identical with XRCC9. Nature Genet, 20:281–283, 1998.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  102. 102.
    de Winter JP, Rooimans MA, van Der Weel Let al.The Fanconi anaemia gene FANCF encodes a novel protein with homology to ROM. Nature Genet, 24:15–16, 2000.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  103. 103.
    de Winter JP, Leveille F, van Berke! CGMet al.Isolation of a cDNA representing the Fanconi Anemia complementation group E gene. Am J Hum Genet, 67:1306–1308, 2000.Google Scholar
  104. 104.
    Yamashita T, Barber DL, Zhu Yet al.The Fanconi anaemia polypeptide FACC is localized to the cytoplasm. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA, 91:6712–6716, 1994.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  105. 105.
    Youssoufian H. Localization of Fanconi anaemia C protein to the cytoplasm of mammalian cells. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA, 91:7975–7979, 1994.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  106. 106.
    Youssoufian H. Cytoplasmic localization of FAC is essential for the correction of a prerepair defect in Fanconi anaemia group C cells. J Clin Invest, 97:2003–2010, 1996.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  107. 107.
    Pagano G. Mitomycin C and diepoxybutane action mechanisms and FANCC protein functions: further insights into the role for oxidative stress in Fanconi’s anaemia phenotype. Carcinogenesis, 21:1067–1068, 2000.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  108. 108.
    Kupfer GM, Naf D, Suliman Aet al.The Fanconi anaemia proteins, FAA and FAC, interact to form a nuclear complex. Nature Genet. 17:487–490, 1997.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  109. 109.
    Garcia-Higuera I, Kuang Y, Naf Det al.Fanconi anemia proteins FANCA, FANCC, and FANCG/XRCC9 interact in a functional nuclear complex. Mol Cell Biol, 19:4866–4873, 1999.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  110. 110.
    Buchwald M, Moustacchi E. Is Fanconi anaemia caused by a defect in the processing of DNA damage? Mutat Res, 408:75–90, 1998.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  111. 111.
    Henriques JAP, Brozmanova J, Brendel M. Role of PSO genes in the repair of photoinduced interstrand crosslinks and photooxidative damage in the DNA of the yeastSaccharomyces cerevisiae.J Photochem Photobiol B Biol, 39:185–196, 1999.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  112. 112.
    Dronkert MLG, de Wit J, Boeve Met al.Disruption of mouse SNM1 causes increased sensitivity to the DNA interstrand cross-linking agent mitomycin C. Mol Cell Biol, 20:4553–4560, 2000.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  113. 113.
    Collins AR. Mutant rodent cell lines sensitive to ultraviolet light, ionizing radiation and cross-linking agents: a comprehensive survey of genetic and biochemical characteristics. Mutat Res, 293:99–118, 1993.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  114. 114.
    Liu N, Lamerdin JE, Tebbs RSet al.XRCC2 and XRCC3, new human Rad51-family members, promote chromosome stability and protect against DNA cross-links and other damages. Mol Cell 1, 783–793, 1998.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  115. 115.
    Johnson RD, Liu N, Jasin M. Mammalian XRCC2 promotes the repair of DNA double-strand breaks by homologous recombination. Nature, 401:397–399, 1999.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  116. 116.
    Pierce AJ, Johnson RD, Thompson LH, Jasin M. XRCC3 promotes homology-directed repair of DNA damage in mammalian cells. Genes Dev, 13:2633–2638, 1999.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  117. 117.
    Zdzienicka MZ, Simons JWI. Mutagen-sensitive lines are obtained with a high frequency in V79 Chinese hamster cells. Mutat Res, 178:235–244, 1987.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  • Randy J. Legerski
    • 1
  • Christopher Richie
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Molecular GeneticsThe University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer CenterTexasUSA

Personalised recommendations