Digital Comprehensive Summaries of Uppsala Dissertations
from the Faculty of Medicine 1157
Radiation response in human cells
DNA damage formation, repair and signaling
ANN-SOFIE GUSTAFSSON
ACTA
UNIVERSITATIS
UPSALIENSIS
UPPSALA
2015
ISSN 1651-6206
ISBN 978-91-554-9397-4
urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-265137
Dissertation presented at Uppsala University to be publicly examined in Rudbecksalen,
Rudbecklaboratoriet, Dag Hammarskjölds v 20, Uppsala, Wednesday, 16 December 2015 at
14:00 for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy (Faculty of Medicine). The examination will be
conducted in English. Faculty examiner: Professor Andrzej Wojcik (Stockholms Universitet).
Abstract
Gustafsson, A.-S. 2015. Radiation response in human cells. DNA damage formation, repair
and signaling. Digital Comprehensive Summaries of Uppsala Dissertations from the Faculty
of Medicine 1157. 52 pp. Uppsala: Acta Universitatis Upsaliensis. ISBN 978-91-554-9397-4.
Ionizing radiation induces a range of different DNA lesions. In terms of mutation frequency
and mammalian cell survival, the most critical of these lesions is the DNA double-strand break
(DSB). DSB left unrepaired or mis-repaired may result in chromosomal aberrations that can
lead to permanent genetic changes or cell death. The complexity of the DNA damage and the
capacity to repair the DSB will determine the fate of the cell. This thesis focuses on the DNA
damage formation, repair and signaling after irradiation of human cells.
Radiation with high linear energy transfer (LET) produces clustered damaged sites in the
DNA that are difficult for the cell to repair. Within these clustered sites, non-DSB lesions
are formed that can be converted into a DSB and add to the damage complexity and affect
DSB repair and the measurement. Heat-labile sites in DNA are converted into DSB at elevated
temperatures. We show that heat-released DSB are formed post-irradiation with high-LET ions
and increase the initial yield of DSB by 30%-40%, which is similar to yields induced by lowLET radiation.
DNA-PKcs, a central player in non-homologous end-joining (NHEJ), the major mammalian
DSB repair pathway, has been found to be both up- and downregulated in different tumor
types. In Paper II we show that low levels of DNA-PKcs lead to extreme radiosensitivity but,
surprisingly, had no effect on the DSB repair. However, the fraction of cells in G2/M phase
increased two-fold in cells with low levels of DNA-PKcs. The study continued in Paper IV,
where cells were synchronized to unmask potential roles of DNA-PKcs in specific cell cycle
phases. Irradiation of DNA-PKcs suppressed cells in the G1/S phase caused a delay in cell cycle
progression and an increase in accumulation of G2 cells. Further, these cells showed defects
in DNA repair, where a significant amount of 53BP1 foci remained after 72 h. This further
strengthens the hypothesis that DNA-PKcs has a role in regulation of mitotic progression.
Several cellular signaling pathways are initiated in response to radiation. One of these
downstream signaling proteins is AKT. We identified an interaction between DNA-PKcs and
AKT. Knockouts of both AKT1 and AKT2 impaired DSB rejoining after radiation and low
levels of DNA-PKcs increased radiosensitivity and decreased DNA repair further.
Keywords: DNA damage, DNA repair, DSB, NHEJ, DNA-PK, ionizing radiation, heat-labile
sites
Ann-Sofie Gustafsson, Department of Immunology, Genetics and Pathology, Medical
Radiation Science, Rudbecklaboratoriet, Uppsala University, SE-751 85 Uppsala, Sweden.
© Ann-Sofie Gustafsson 2015
ISSN 1651-6206
ISBN 978-91-554-9397-4
urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-265137 (http://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-265137)
Nothing in life is to be feared, it is
only to be understood. Now is the
time to understand more, so that we
may fear less
Marie Curie
.
Till Ville och lilla Sigrid
List of Papers
This thesis is based on the following papers, which are referred to in the text
by their Roman numerals.
I
Gustafsson, A-S., Hartman, T., Stenerlöw, B. Formation and repair of clustered damaged DNA sites in high LET irradiated cells.
International Journal of Radiation Biology, 2015. Early online:
1-7
II
Gustafsson, A-S., Abramenkovs, A., Stenerlöw, B. Suppression
of DNA-dependent protein kinase sensitize cells to radiation
without affecting DSB repair. Mutation Research, 2014. 769:110
III
Häggblad Sahlberg, S., Gustafsson, A-S., Pendekanti, P., Glimelius, B., Stenerlöw, B. The influence of AKT isoforms on radiation sensitivity and DNA repair in colon cancer cell lines. Tumor
Biology, 2014. 35:3525-34
IV
Gustafsson, A-S., Abramenkovs, A., Stenerlöw, B. Role of
DNA-PKcs in DNA damage response and cell cycle regulation.
Manuscript 2015
Reprints were made with permission from the respective publishers.
Contents
Introduction ................................................................................................... 11 DNA damage by ionizing radiation.......................................................... 11 Radiotherapy ............................................................................................ 11 DNA repair ............................................................................................... 12 DNA double-strand break repair .............................................................. 13 Non-homologous end-joining .............................................................. 13 Homologous recombination and alternative end-joining..................... 15 Defects in repair proteins ..................................................................... 16 Non-DSB lesions: Heat-labile sites ..................................................... 17 Radiation-induced cell signaling .............................................................. 17 EGFR ................................................................................................... 18 AKT ..................................................................................................... 18 Cell cycle .................................................................................................. 19 Cell cycle check points ........................................................................ 20 DNA repair in the cell cycle ................................................................ 21 Limitation in cell cycle checkpoints .................................................... 22 Cell death by radiation ......................................................................... 23 Linear energy transfer of ionizing radiation ............................................. 23 Aim ............................................................................................................... 25 Results ........................................................................................................... 26 Paper I ...................................................................................................... 26 Formation and repair of clustered damaged DNA sites in high LET
irradiated cells .......................................................................................... 26 Aim and background............................................................................ 26 Methods ............................................................................................... 26 Results ................................................................................................. 26 Conclusion and discussion ................................................................... 28 Paper II Suppression of DNA-dependent protein kinase sensitize cells
to radiation without affecting DSB repair ................................................ 29 Aim and background............................................................................ 29 Methods ............................................................................................... 29 Results ................................................................................................. 29 Conclusion and discussion ................................................................... 32 Paper III The influence of AKT isoforms on radiation sensitivity and
DNA repair in colon cancer cell lines ...................................................... 32 Aim and background............................................................................ 32 Methods ............................................................................................... 33 Results ................................................................................................. 33 Conclusion and discussion ................................................................... 35 Paper IV Role of DNA-PKcs in DNA damage response and cell cycle
regulation.................................................................................................. 36 Aim and background............................................................................ 36 Methods ............................................................................................... 36 Results ................................................................................................. 36 Conclusion and discussion ................................................................... 38 Concluding remarks ...................................................................................... 39 Future perspectives ....................................................................................... 41 Acknowledgements ....................................................................................... 42 References ..................................................................................................... 45 Abbreviations
AKT
Alt-EJ
ATM
ATP
ATR
ATRIP
BER
BRAC2
Cdc25
Chk
Cdk
CtIP
DNA
DNA-PK
DNA-PKcs
DSB
Edu
EGF
EGFR
Exo1
FAR
FBS
Gy
HER
HLS
HR
IGFR
ILK-1
KO
LET
MAPK
MMR
MRE11
NER
NSB1
NHEJ
v-akt murine thymoma viral oncogene homolog
alternative end-joining
ataxia telangiectasia-mutated
adenosine triphosphate
ataxia telangiectasia and rad3-related (protein)
ATR interacting protein
base excision repair
breast cancer 2, early onset
cell division cycle 25
checkpoint kinase
cyclin-dependent kinase
CtBP-interacting protein
deoxyribonucleic acid
DNA-dependent protein kinase
DNA-dependent protein kinase, catalytic subunit
double-strand break
5-ethynyl-2´-deoxyuridine
epidermal growth factor
epidermal growth factor receptor
exonuclease 1
fraction of activity released
fetal bovine serum
gray
human epidermal growth factor receptor
heat-labile sites
homologous recombination
insulin growth factor receptor
integrin-linked kinase 1
knockout
linear energy transfer
mitogen-activated protein kinase
mismatch repair
meiotic recombination 11
nucleotide excision repair
Nijmegen breakage syndrome 1/Nibrin
non-homologous end-joining
PARP1
PDK1
PFGE
PIKK
PI3K
PIP2
PIP3
p-H3
PKB
PLA
Plk1
RPA
SCID
siRNA
SSB
ssDNA
STAT
TGF
XRCC4
XLF
poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase 1
phosphoinositide-dependent kinase-1
pulsed-field gel electrophoresis
phosphoinositide 3-kinase-like protein kinase
phosphoinositide 3-kinase
phosphatidylinositol-4,5-diphosphate
phosphatidylinositol-3,4,5-triphosphate
phosphorylated histone 3
protein kinase B
proximity ligation assay
polo-like kinase 1
replication protein A
severe combined immunodeficiency
small interfering RNA
single-strand break
single-stranded DNA
signal transducer and activator of transcription protein
transforming growth factor
X-ray cross complementing protein 4
XRCC4-like factor
Introduction
We are constantly exposed to ionizing radiation: cosmic rays, radioactive material present naturally in soil and rock, and medical imaging techniques all
contribute to radiation exposure. As the name suggests, ionizing radiation has
the ability to ionize atoms and molecules which may lead to breakage of chemical bonds. From a biological point of view, this ionizing event can be very
dangerous in living cells, where the most critical target is the DNA (1).
DNA damage by ionizing radiation
DNA encodes for the genetic information used in the development and functioning of all living organism (2-4). Ionizing radiation can cause base damage,
sugar damage, single strand breaks (SSBs), double-strand breaks (DSBs) and
cross-links either between two DNA strands or between a DNA molecule and
a protein (5). However, the DSB is considered the most critical DNA damage
since it can be lethal or lead to genomic instability creating cancer. Protecting
the DNA or keeping radiation exposure to a minimum in living organisms is
therefore very important.
Radiotherapy
Ionizing radiation is used in cancer therapy to eradicate tumor cells and induce
deleterious DNA lesions (6). It is one of the most successful treatments for
solid tumors (7). It is also used in combination with surgery and chemotherapy, as adjuvant, neoadjuvant or palliative therapy in nearly all types of tumors
(7). The radiation response in a tumor depends on a large number of factors
and the radiation response, also termed radiosensitivity, varies between different cancer types. However, whereas tumor often develop resistance to chemotherapy, radiation-induced resistance is rare (8, 9). One challenge in radiotherapy is to maximize tumor cell killing and, at the same time, minimize the
normal tissue complications. The goal is to disrupt the DNA to such an extent
that the tumor cells are forced into cell death, without too much damage to
normal cells in the close vicinity of the tumor. To some extent, this is accomplished by moving and focusing the beam around the tumor, limiting beam
exposure to healthy cells. Normal cells also have the ability to repair DNA
11
damage by means of functional checkpoint proteins that halt the cell in the cell
cycle until damage is repaired. In addition to proliferating rapidly, most cancer
cells are also deficient in repair proteins and cell cycle checkpoints making
them more sensitive to radiation. Broken DNA when cells enter the cell cycle
could lead to cell death (10). Basic understanding of the interplay between
radiation damage and cellular response is therefore very important to optimize
the treatment of cancer with radiotherapy (11, 12). (Figure 1)
Figure 1. Ionizing radiation is naturally present in the environment and used in radiotherapy to kill tumor cells. DNA damage from environmental and background radiation, i.e. cosmic radiation, soil and rock, causes DNA damage that may lead to genomic instability which may ultimately develop into cancer. Ideally in radiotherapy
tumor cells are killed and healthy cells are left unexposed, curing the patient from
cancer.
DNA repair
If one DNA strand of the DNA double helix is damaged, the opposite strand
is used as a template for repair. The cell has evolved different mechanisms,
depending on type of damage, to excise the damaged DNA and replace it with
a new/right nucleotide. Base excision repair (BER) (13), nucleotide excision
repair (NER) (14) and mismatch repair (MMR) (15) are commonly used to
repair single-stranded lesions (16-18). If both strands are damaged on the opposite side of the DNA double helix, or in close proximity (less than 14 bases
apart), the helix breaks, creating a DSB. DSB is the most deleterious damage
for a cell to encounter since, if left unrepaired or mis-repaired, it can result in
12
senescence, induced apoptosis and mitotic cell death, or chromosomal aberrations, including translocation and deletions, which can result in loss of heterozygosity (19-22).
DNA double-strand break repair
There are two major DSB repair pathways known in mammalian cells, nonhomologous end-joining (NHEJ) and homologous recombination (HR) (23).
HR needs a homologous DNA template, a sister chromatid, as a template for
rejoining, making it in order to be predominantly used in late S phase and G2
(24). NHEJ does not need a long DNA template and is therefore available
throughout the cell cycle, making it the major pathway for DSB repair after
ionizing radiation (21, 25). In recent years the notion of an alternative pathway
has evolved. However, much remains unclear regarding mechanistic details
(26). Alternative end-joining (alt-EJ, also called alternative NHEJ or backup
NHEJ) was first seen in cells deficient in NHEJ, where cells were still able to
repair DSB via end-joining (27). In the beginning it was believed that alt-EJ
might be a backup for NHEJ, but it has recently been demonstrated that alt-EJ
might have a more primary role in repairing DSBs (26). Alt-EJ is active during
the S and G2 phases and recent data also indicate activation in G1 (28).
Non-homologous end-joining
NHEJ mediates the direct re-ligation of the broken strands. The first step in
NHEJ is the binding of Ku heterodimer to a broken DNA end (29-31). The Ku
heterodimer is composed of Ku70 and Ku80 (also called Ku86). Ku70/80 encircles the DNA with its ring-like structure and initiates the start of repair (32).
Ku70/80 interacts with the DNA-dependent protein kinase catalytic subunit
(DNA-PKcs) forming a complex, DNA-dependent protein (DNA-PK). The
interaction with Ku enhances DNA-PKcs kinase activity, continuing the repair
process, and starts the end processing of DNA ends. The damaged ends are
processed by different nucleases, like exonuclease 1 (Exo1), MRE11 and Artemis, to reveal regions of DNA sequence microhomology that help position
ends for ligation. The nucleotide gaps or deletions are filled by DNA polymerases µ and λ and the ends are religated by DNA ligase IV in combination
with X-ray cross complementing protein 4 (XRCC4) and XRCC4-like factor
(XLF) (33-35). The processing of DNA ends is fast but it is not error free and
may lead to loss or modification of nucleotides (33, 36). There is limited information about the dissolution of NHEJ after repair of broken ends. Phosphorylation events on DNA-PKcs induce conformational changes that likely
release it from DNA (37). (Figure 2)
13
Figure 2. Schematic view of NHEJ. DSB is induced by radiation and recognized by
the Ku70/80 heterodimer, which recruits DNA-PKcs. The interaction between Ku
and DNA-PKcs enhances the kinase activation of DNA-PKcs. The DNA ends are
processed by different nucleases and DNA polymerases, and then the ends are ligated by DNA ligase IV in combination with XRCC4 and XLF.
DNA-dependent protein kinase
The catalytic subunit of DNA-dependent protein kinase (DNA-PKcs) is a serine theronine protein kinase of the phosphatidyl inositol 3-kinase-like protein
kinase (PIKK) family that includes ATM (ataxia-telangiectasia mutated) and
ATR (ATM-Rad3-related) (38). Besides functioning in NHEJ, DNA-PKcs is
also required for V(D)J recombination of immune-globulin genes and T-cell
receptor genes, and telomere length maintenance (39). DNA-PKcs is rapidly
activated after irradiation. It is phosphorylated at several serine and threonine
residues that are organized into distinct cluster sites (40). Two major clusters
found are the ABCDE cluster (41-43) and the PQR cluster (44). The ABCDE
cluster consists of six well conserved sites, from Thr2609 to Thr2647 and the
PQR cluster is defined by five conserved sites between residues Ser2023 and
Ser2056. The clusters are activated in different ways, which may reflect their
different roles in the NHEJ pathway, DSB signaling and other functions.
ATM, which plays a key role in general damage signaling and cell cycle regulation, seems to be required for IR-induced DNA-PKcs phosphorylation at
both ABCDE and PQR clusters and this activation is critical for radioresistance and DSB repair activity (45).
14
Homologous recombination and alternative end-joining
The first step in HR is DNA end resection, where nucleolytic degradation of the
5`strand leaves a long 3`single-stranded DNA overhang (46, 47). The central
player in this process is the MRN protein complex, comprised of MRE11,
Rad50 and Xrs2/NBS1 (48). The complex is then replaced and coated by replication protein A (RPA) and then, to mediate homologous DNA pairing, Rad51
or Dmc1 is recruited. Rad52 and BRAC2 are involved as mediator proteins in
this process. A synaptic complex is formed once the homology is found and a
D-loop is formed by Rad54 and Rdh54 in the next step. From here either the Dloop is dissociated and the DNA strand is annealed by non-crossover repair, or
a double Holliday junction is formed that can be resolved into a crossover or a
non-crossover recombinant (49). The remaining ssDNA gaps and nicks are repaired by DNA polymerase and DNA ligase. Recent data have shown that the
alt-EJ and HR pathways compete for the repair in S-phase (50). They share the
initial resection mechanism using the MRN complex (51). However, in alt-EJ
poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP1) detects the breaks, and MRN complex
works together with CtBP-interacting protein (CtIP) in end processing and
XRCC1/Ligase III in DNA end ligation (27, 50-52). (Figure 3)
Figure 3. Schematic view over homologous recombination and alt end-joining repair
of DSBs formed after ionizing radiation. They share the initial resection mechanism
using the MRN complex, but differ in repair mechanism following end resection.
15
MRE11
MRE11, part of the MRN complex, plays a critical role in many different cellular processes like NHEJ, HR and alt-EJ repair, DNA recognition and DNA
replication, cell cycle checkpoint activation and telomere maintenance (50,
53, 54). MRE11 binds DNA DSBs directly after they are formed and is able
to bridge broken DNA ends or sister chromatids (55). Mutation in MRE11
results in radiosensitivity in cells (56).
Defects in repair proteins
Patients deficient in NHEJ proteins display radiosensitivity and severe combined immunodeficiency (SCID). So far, mutations in four genes encoding
components of NHEJ, LIG4 (encoding DNA ligase IV), XLF (encoding XLF),
PRKDC (encoding DNA-PKcs) and DCLRE1C/SNM3/Artemis (encoding Artemis) have been identified in patients. These are described further in the review by Woodbine et al. (57). Human disorders defective or deficient in ATM
result in ataxia telangiectasia (A-T), and defects in MRE11 result in AT-like
disorder, both of which display radiosensitivity and variable levels of immunodeficiency (58, 59).
The development of cancer is a multi-step process, where modifications in
multiple cancer susceptibility genes may, in the end, lead to cancer development. Many cancers characterized by genomic instability are caused by mutations in DSB-responsive genes, and there is a direct association between DNA
DSBs and genomic instability and cancer development (60).
Deficiency of DNA-PKcs
Human cells maintain a high reservoir of DNA-PKcs: there are around a hundred thousand molecules per cell present in a normal cell (61). Differences in
DNA-PKcs expression have been found in various tumor types. Overexpression is often seen in colorectal cancer, esophageal cancer, and non-small cell
lung cancer, and loss of expression in gastric lung cancer, breast cancer, head
and neck cancer and lymphoma (62). Both high and low levels of DNA-PKcs
may result in poor patient survival after therapy. Furthermore, overexpression
often leads to radioresistance while low expression can lead to increased chromosomal instability and aggressive metastasis (62). Cell lines with total deficiency DNA-PKcs (like M059J) show hypersensitivity to ionizing radiation,
illustrating the important role of DNA-PKcs in repair capacity and chromosome stability (63-65). Recent data have suggested a second critical role of
DNA-PKcs in the cell cycle controlling human cells (66). It has been implicated in mitosis, microtubule dynamics and proper chromosome segregation
16
(67, 68). Furthermore, inhibition of DNA-PKcs activity results in mitosis delay, abnormal spindle formation and chromosome misalignment (69). However, how this is related to its repair capacity is not known.
Inhibition of DNA-PKcs
Different inhibitors have been developed to target and inhibit DNA-PKcs activity in the hope of enhancing radiotherapy by radiosensitizing cells without causing cellular toxicity. Vanillin, SU11752, IC87361, NU7026 and NU7441 are
small-molecule ATP-competitive inhibitors that have been developed to target
DNA-PKcs (62). The most promising drug among these is NU7441 (70). They
induce cell killing after irradiation by inhibiting DSB repair, followed by cell
death through mitotic catastrophe, apoptosis and senescence. Inhibitors for
DNA-PKcs hold promising results for improving cancer therapy, but the molecules known so far are limited by poor pharmacokinetics (71, 72).
Non-DSB lesions: Heat-labile sites
Ionizing radiation induces prompt SSB and DSB in DNA. In addition, labile
sites are induced that can be converted into a DSB if they are in close vicinity
to another lesion on the opposite strand. Heat-labile sites (HLS) represent oxidative damage in the sugar-phosphate backbone of the DNA that can be converted to a DSB upon heat treatment (73). It has been suggested that HLS are
formed during the warm lysis step in DSB assays as pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE), misguiding the DSB measurement, although it has been proposed that they may also transfer into DSB in living cells (74).This led to the
development of a new cold DNA extraction protocol (75), that in comparison
to warm lysis resulted in the release of a smaller number of DNA fragments
from irradiated cells, indicating the elimination of HLS in the analysis. HLS
are repaired rapidly after formation. Measuring HLS after irradiation can,
when using warm lysis, misguide the DSB repair capacity by 40%, and the
removal of these artefactual DSBs decreases the fast rejoining to less than 50%
in gamma-irradiated human cells. HLS repair is also independent of DNAPKcs, XRCC1 and PARP1 (76), indicating that neither NHEJ nor SSB repair
is important for removal of HLS. Importantly, and in contrast to previous findings, removal of HLS from the analysis has shown that in cells without functional DNA-PK activity, there is no fast repair of DSBs.
Radiation-induced cell signaling
Ionizing radiation activates multiple signaling pathways in cells, particularly the
activation of signal transduction pathways and regulation of survival (77). These
are specific growth factor receptors in the plasma membrane, such as epidermal
growth factor receptor (EGFR) and insulin-like growth factor receptor 1 (IGFR17
1) (78), and signaling proteins like ATM and p53 (79). The receptor activation
activates downstream pathways involved in the promotion of cell survival and
gene transcriptional changes or programmed cell death (77).
EGFR
EGFR is a member of the human EGFR (HER/ErbB) family consisting of four
members: EGFR/HER1/ErbB1, HER2/neu/ErbB2, HER3/ErbB3, and
HER4/ErbB4 (78). EGFR is a transmembrane tyrosine kinase receptor with
an extracellular ligand binding site and an internal tyrosine kinase domain.
EGFR has several ligands, such as epidermal growth factor (EGF), transforming growth factor (TGF), transforming growth factor alpha (TGFα) and neurogulins (77). After ligand binding and activation of EGFR, three major pathways can be initiated, the phosphoinositide 3-kinase (PI3K) cascade, the rat
sarcoma (RAS)/v-raf murine sarcoma viral oncogene (RAF) pathway and signal transducer and activator of transcription protein (STAT) (80, 81). Activation of these pathways starts a cascade of events leading to cell proliferation,
survival, migration, differentiation, inhibition of apoptosis, angiogenesis, adhesion, or metastatic invasion. Alterations in EGFR occur in multiple cancers,
and include receptor amplification, gain-of-function mutations and autocrine
stimulation. These alterations make the EGFR a suitable target for therapy (48,
82). Cancer with overexpressed EGFR can be inhibited using specific receptor
antibodies and inhibitors. The overall outcome after treatment is slowed-down
proliferation and increased sensitivity to DNA damaging drugs or ionizing radiation. EGFR has been linked to interaction with DNA-PKcs, and the connection has been linked to cancer development (62, 83). Furthermore, the interaction has been shown to be required for radiation-induced AKT phosphorylation and cell survival (84). (Figure 4)
AKT
AKT (also known as PKB) is an important kinase in the cell signaling downstream of several growth factors and cytokines. AKT is also involved in survival, growth, proliferation, glucose uptake, metabolism and angiogenesis
(85). It is a serine/threonine kinase and there are three isoforms, AKT1, AKT2
and AKT3. These genes are located on separate chromosomes and are believed to have different physiological functions, properties and expression patterns (86, 87). AKT1 is involved in cellular survival pathways, by inhibiting
apoptosis. AKT1 and AKT2 may function as an oncogene, promoting cell survival by blocking apoptosis. AKT3, however, may function as a tumor suppressor. AKT is also hyperactivated in several cancer forms and is associated
with resistance to radiotherapy and chemotherapy (88). Recently it has been
shown that AKT interacts with MRE11, and that activation of AKT is dependent on MRE11 (89). On the contrary, the expression of MRE11 is believed to
18
be dependent on AKT (90). AKT is mainly activated via the PI3K pathway
where PI3K converts phosphateidylinositol-4,5-diphosphat (PIP2) to phosphatidylinositol-3,4,5-triphosphate (PIP3). PIP3 then bind to AKT, inducing
conformation changes on AKT allowing for phosphorylation on Thr308 and
Ser473. Phosphorylation on Thr308 is carried out by phosphoinositide-dependent kinase-1 (PDK1) however phosphorylation on Ser473 is not known.
Ser473 is suggested to be phosphorylated by PDK1, but also by an unknown
protein called PDK2. PDK2 has been linked to integrin-linked kinase 1 (ILK1), mTOR (91), ATM (92), DNA-PKcs (93, 94) and MRE11 (89). AKT has
also been shown to be involved in DNA repair, were AKT activates DNAPKcs after exposure to ionizing radiation (88, 95). (Figure 4)
Figure 4. A simplified schematic illustrating the interaction between activation of
AKT, and DNA-PKcs. AKT is activated by EGFR- PI3K pathway, PI3K phosphorylates PIP2 to PIP3. Binding of PIP3 to AKT further enhances the phosphorylation of
AKT by PDK1 and perhaps PDK2. AKT is involved in cell proliferation and signaling for cell death. AKT is also involved in the activation of DNA-PK after radiation.
Cell cycle
The cell cycle is the process in which one cell is divided into two new daughter
cells with identical DNA. When a cell receives signals to divide, the interphase
is initiated. The first part is called G1 (G for gap). In this step the cell increases
19
its supply of proteins, increases the number of organelles (such as mitochondria, ribosomes), and grows in size. This is followed by the S-phase (S for
synthesis), where the DNA is copied and the chromosomes double, creating
two sister chromatids. The last step of the interphase is called G2. In G2 the
cell continues to grow, making sure everything is ready for the next phase.
Following interphase, mitosis is initiated (M-phase). In the M-phase, the cell
condenses its chromosomes and divides into to two daughter cells. This phase
is sub-divided in to five phases: prophase, prometaphase, metaphase, anaphase and telophase. The phase when the cell is in a resting non-dividing stage
before interphase takes place is called G0. (Figure 5)
Figure 5. Schematic view of the cell cycle, regulation steps and DSB repair pathways.
Cell cycle check points
The regulation of cell cycle progression is tightly controlled and there are
many checkpoints during the progression (96). After DNA damage or abnormally structured DNA, the cell responds by initiating a response, such as DNA
repair, chromatin remodeling, transcriptional programs and other metabolic
adjustment or cell death. The cycle is arrested or delayed until the damaged is
repaired, or, if the damage is too great, initiation and signaling for cellular
senescence is started. The most important check points are at the end of G1
20
and G2 and during the M-phase. The different check point pathways are reviewed by Lukas et al. (97). Radiosensitivity varies between the different cell
cycle phases: the M-phase followed by G2 are the most sensitive phases, and
late S-phase is believed to be more radioresistant (1).
DNA repair in the cell cycle
Upon DNA damage the cell has the ability to reversibly arrest cell cycle progression to allow time for DNA repair. Cell cycle transitions are driven by
regulatory cyclins and cyclin-dependent kinases (Cdks). Cdks require cyclin
binding for their activity and substrate selectivity, and are regulated by activating and inhibitory phosphorylation (98). In response to DNA damage, the
activity of cyclin-Cdk complexes can initiate a cell cycle arrest in the G1 or
G2 phase, or slow downregulation in the S-phase. Mitotic spindle checkpoints
are activated indirectly by sensing the consequences of the damage. There are
different damage response pathways that are activated in different cell cycle
phases, and inactivation of a pathway has a different outcome in the different
phases.
In response to damage in G1, ATM and Chk2 are activated around the damage
area and contribute to the response (99). ATM and Chk2 stabilize p53, which
results in stimulation of transcriptional targets, such as Cdk inhibitor protein
p21 (100, 101). Accumulation of p21 binds to and blocks cyclin-Cdk complexes and hinders cell cycle progression. Loss of p53 or p21 will result in
complete loss of the G1 checkpoint (102). To prevent S-phase entry, ATM
activates the p38 MAPK family to degrade cyclin D and hinder the activity of
Cdk2. DNA damage in the early S-phase is particularly harmful because damage can interfere with replication fork progression and simple base damages
can result in mutational changes. During this phase, another response to damage is triggered, namely ATR and Chk1 (103). Cdk2 activity in the S-phase
and G2 enables extensive resection of DSB ends (through phosphorylation of
CtIP and Exo1) to promote HR, causing the additional activation of ATR kinase. Cdk2-dependent phosphorylation of ATR interacting protein (ATRIP)
and Chk1 further restrict full activation of ATR and Chk1 to the S and G2
phases. G2/M arrests function via Chk1 and Chk2, which are primarily phosphorylated by ATM and ATR. During S-phase, downstream p21 accumulation
is prevented by the PCNA-associated CRL4 ubiquitin ligase. Instead the pathway relies on Wee1 kinase, which becomes expressed in S-phase, to target
Cdc25A for degradation to impose an immediate break on further Cdk activation. ATR and Chk1 signaling are essential for checkpoint maintenance in G2,
and ATM and Chk2 are needed to control the arrest. However, the G2 arrest
does not depend on ATM, p53 and p21, instead also in G2 Wee1 remains
crucial for checkpoint control. During mitosis, DNA repair and checkpoint
signaling are inhibited. However, DSBs formed during mitosis still activates
21
ATM but further downstream signaling does not occur. NHEJ is suppressed
by phosphorylation of XRCC4 by mitotic kinase polo-like kinase 1 (Plk1) and
Cdk1 (98). (Figure 6)
Figure 6. A schematic representation of molecular pathways involved in transmitting the signal from sites of DNA damage to delay or halt of the cell cycle in the different phases.
Limitation in cell cycle checkpoints
Cell cycle checkpoints have significant limitations (96). It is believed that a
difference in sensitivity between early and late-G1-phase affects the cell´s
ability to undergo checkpoint arrest. The late G1, close to S-phase checkpoint
seems to be less sensitive and not always completely respond to DNA damage.
All breaks are not repaired before moving on to the next step and the fraction
of damaged cells undergoing arrest at this stage seems to decrease compared
to damage in early G1. The limitation in the G2 checkpoint seems to allow a
certain number of DSBs to bypass regulation and cells are released from G2
arrest when the level of DSBs has fallen below a certain threshold (10-20
DSBs) (104). The cell then undergoes mitosis with unrepaired DSBs, and elevates the risk for chromosomal misalignments leading to cell death or persistent DNA damage in the following G1 (105). When the cell in the following
G1 phase enters the cell cycle with unrepaired damage, it is believed to be
arrested in a p53-dependent manner. This suggests that p53 plays a prominent
role in the regulation of DNA damage response over multiple cell cycles.
22
Cell death by radiation
The most common cell death pathway after radiation is mitotic cell death
(106). This is mainly because mitotic catastrophe is promoted in cells with
impaired p53 (107). This is a delayed type of cell death, executed days after
irradiation. Mitotic catastrophe occurs during mitosis as a consequence of abnormal mitosis. The process is characterized by the formation of giant cells
and abnormal nuclear morphology, multiple nuclei and several micronuclei
following cell division. It is believed that mitotic catastrophe is a consequence
of DNA damage and deficient cell cycle check points. An alternative cell
death mechanism is apoptosis (108). Apoptosis is a fast process, where initiation and execution are completed within hours of radiation (10, 109). The process is characterized by, and known to include, pyknosis, cell shrinkage and
internucleosomal breakage of chromatin (10). Unfortunately, many tumors
have mutations in the signaling pathway for apoptosis, so that apoptosis cannot be performed. One of these signaling proteins is p53 which is mutated in
more than half of all human malignancies (110). Radiation-induced senescence is a form of cell death where the cell enters permanent cell cycle arrest.
In normal cells, cellular senescence is the term used to describe cells that have
reached their proliferation limit as a consequence of telomere shortening.
Characteristically, cells that have entered senescence are enlarged and flattened cells with an increased granularity. Senescence is promoted by p53,
which eliminates radiation-induced senescence in cells with impaired p53
(10).
Linear energy transfer of ionizing radiation
The damage created by ionizing radiation depends on the amount of local energy deposited and where that energy is deposited. The term linear energy
transfer (LET) is defined as the energy transferred to the target per unit length
of the particle’s track, and is expressed in the unit keV/µm or eV/nm (1). LowLET radiation (e.g. gamma radiation and X-rays) delivers an ionization density in the range of 1 keV/µm and high-LET radiation (e.g. alpha particles and
accelerated heavy ions) in the range of 100-200 keV/µm. The more energy
deposited per length unit, the higher the density of ionization and the probability of creating a DSB increases. High-LET produces clustered, damaged
DNA sites which are difficult to repair. In addition to damage clustering on
the bp-level, high-LET radiation has been shown to induce clustered DSB in
relation to chromatin loops, resulting in the release of DNA fragments in the
range of 100 bp to 1 Mbp (111-113). Figure 7.
23
Figure 7. Illustration of the difference in ionization density between low and high
LET when hitting the DNA. Low-LET radiation gives a random scattered ionization
that is separated on the DNA by a larger distance than high-LET. High-LET hits the
cell with a few particle tracks, but everything that passes through is destroyed.
24
Aim
The overall aim of this thesis was to study DSB formation and repair in cells
after exposure to ionizing radiation. Ionizing radiation is used within cancer
therapy to induce damage to the DNA. The cell’s ability to repair the damage
determines the survival of the cell. It is therefore important to understand the
basic mechanisms of DNA repair to improve cancer therapy.
The specific goals were as follows:

To evaluate the formation of cluster damage on the DNA after
high-LET radiation, and the conversion of non-DSB lesions to
DSBs post-irradiation

To investigate how low levels of DNA-PKcs affect repair, cell cycle regulation and cell survival after ionizing radiation

To examine the role of the signaling molecule AKT in relation to
DNA repair after ionizing radiation
25
Results
Paper I
Formation and repair of clustered damaged DNA sites
in high LET irradiated cells
Aim and background
Ionizing radiation with high-LET produces clustered damaged sites within the
DNA. These clustered damages are more severe and more difficult to restore
by the DNA repair mechanism than damage induced by low-LET (114). The
clustered sites are composed of a variety of DNA lesions, not only DSBs
(115). When these non-DSB lesions are close to another lesion or a DSB, they
may interfere with DSB repair and/or analysis of DSB. Non-DSB lesions may
also be transformed to a DSB, thus adding to the complexity of DSB repair
and affecting analysis (116). One example of a non-DSB lesion is the heatlabile site (HLS) (73). With low-LET, it has been shown that during
preparation of DNA for DSB analysis using electrophoretic assays, HLS are
transformed into DSB during warm lysis, which will have a significant effect
on the estimated DSB yield (73, 75, 76). Importantly, the presence of HLS in
the analysis may largely affect the estimates of cellular repair capacity. There
is limited information about the contribution of HLS to DSB measurements
after high-LET irradiation. The aim of this study was to determine the distribution of DNA HLS in cells irradiated with high-LET ions using DNA fragmentation analysis.
Methods
Normal human skin fibroblast (GM5758) was used to study the repair process
after irradiation with accelerated carbon and nitrogen ions (LET of 125
eV/nm). DNA fragmentation was analyzed by pulsed-field gel electrophoresis
(PFGE) (111-113).
Results
We studied the initial formation and repair of clustered damaged sites in cells
irradiated with accelerated carbon and nitrogen ions. We could differentiate
26
between prompt DSB and heat-released DSB by varying lysis protocols (two
temperatures: cold 0°C and warm 50°C). For both carbon ions (Figure 8.A)
and nitrogen ions (Figure 8.B), the warm lysis resulted in a larger fraction of
released DNA.
Figure 8. A and B: initial DNA fragmentation (t=0) as a function of DNA fragment
size after irradiation of human fibroblast cells with carbon ions 80 Gy (A) or nitrogen ions 100 Gy (B) both with a LET of 125 eV/nm. Cells were irradiated and naked
DNA was prepared by lysis with two different protocols (0°C and 50°C). C: fraction
of DNA as a function of nitrogen ion dose 100 Gy (125 eV/nm) for human fibroblast
cells. Data are plotted for exclusion size of the double-stranded DNA fragments
<375 kbp.
We plotted the fraction of DNA as a function of dose for four different cut-off
sizes. For the fraction of DNA <5.7 Mbp there was no significant difference
between the two protocols but as the exclusion size decreased (Figure 8.C),
the warm lysis was more effective in releasing DNA. This shows that heatreleased DSBs are mainly clustered on small DNA fragments, less than 1 Mbp
in size.
We also compared DNA fragment distribution over time to study how the additional heat-released DNA fragments (<1 Mbp) changed. The DNA fragments analyzed showed fast rejoining after both protocols. For carbon ions
there was a 2- to 5-fold decrease in the fractions of small DNA fragments after
27
0.4 hour, but the rejoining appeared faster in the heat-treated samples. This
was even more evident in cells irradiated with nitrogen ions where a large
fraction of the small DNA fragments were rejoined within 0.1 hour (Figure
9).
Figure 9. A and B: DNA fragment size of distribution-released DNA fragments (<1
Mbp) changed over time after irradiation of human fibroblast cells with nitrogen
ions (100 Gy). Cells were irradiated and naked DNA was prepared by lysis with two
different protocols, 50°C (A) and 0°C (B).
When the total number of DSBs over all fragment-sizes (0-5700 kbp) was
calculated, the initial yield at t=0 was 35%-40% higher in heat-treated DNA,
compared to DNA extracted with the cold lysis protocol.
Conclusion and discussion
In this study, we show for the first time that clustered non-DSB lesions formed
by high-LET can be converted into DSB upon heat treatment. Heat-released
DSBs, created by warm lysis, increased the initial yield of DSBs by 30%-40%.
These damages appeared clustered on DNA fragments less than 1 Mbp in size,
making them hard to detect in standard PFGE assay where mainly large DNA
fragments are studied. This highlights the importance of using DNA fragment
analysis to evaluate DNA DSB induction and rejoining after high-LET irradiation.
28
Paper II
Suppression of DNA-dependent protein kinase sensitize
cells to radiation without affecting DSB repair
Aim and background
Deficiency of both DNA-PKcs and Ku70/80 has been found and characterized
in different tumor types (117-119), indicating that deficiency of proteins involved in DSB repair may contribute to an increased risk of developing cancer
(62, 120). Increased levels of DNA-PKcs have also been found in various tumor types and linked to poor survival (121). DNA repair proteins are expressed in large amounts in the cell at all times. It is believed that the reason
for this expression is to protect the DNA with fast signaling and repair to minimize damage in the cell. There are nearly half a million Ku molecules and
around one hundred thousand DNA-PKcs molecules per cell (61). The aim of
the study was to investigate the repair of DSB after ionizing radiation in cells
with low levels of DNA-PKcs.
Methods
Cell types used in this study were: human epithelial cancer cell line A431,
human oral squamous carcinoma cell line H314, human colorectal carcinoma
cell line HCT116, human glioma cell line M059J and normal human skin fibroblast GM5758. SiRNA transfection was used to downregulate DNA-PKcs.
Western blot (WB) was used to detect protein expression. Cell survival was
studied by clonogenic survival assay. Mitotic analysis was analyzed by scoring positive p-H3 cells. Cells were synchronized with nocodazole treatment.
DNA repair was studied in single cells by the formation and clearance of γH2AX and 53BP1 foci using immunofluorescence staining and detection with
confocal microscopy. DSB rejoining was studied with PFGE.
Results
Cells were transfected with siRNA against DNA-PKcs (siDNA-PKcs) and experiments were performed at DNA-PKcs levels around 10%-20% of normal
levels. Low levels of DNA-PKcs led to radiosensitivity shown by largely reduced survival and proliferation after irradiation (Figure 10).
29
Figure 10. Reduction of DNA-PKcs leads to extreme radiosensitivity. Clonogenic
survival in three cell lines, A431 (A), HCT116 (B) and H314 (C), transfected with
siRNA against DNA-PKcs (siDNA-PKcs) for 3 days or treated with non-specific
siRNA (mock). In comparison, survival for M059J cells (lacking DNA-PKcs) and
M059K (with DNA-PKcs) are shown (D). Colonies with >50 cells were scored 1015 days after irradiation. SF= surviving fraction. Data represent mean ±SD of at
least three independent experiments for each cell line.
We also strengthen the hypothesis that DNA-PKcs is involved in mitotic progression, by showing an accumulation of deficient cells in G2 (Figure 11A,
B), indicating that DNA-PKcs plays a role in mitotic progression.
Figure 11. Cells with low levels of DNA-PKcs are delayed in the mitotic progression. A: accumulation of mitotic cells in asynchronous A431 cells with low levels of
DNA-PKcs. Cells were irradiated with 5 Gy and scored for p-H3-positive cells 24
hours after irradiation. Data represent mean ±SD of two independent experiments.
At least 250 cells/time point were scored per experiment. B: representative image of
G2/M positive cell nuclei (p-H3, red) stained with DAPI (blue).
30
Since cells with defective DNA-PKcs have a reduced repair capacity, it is reasonable to assume that the extreme radiosensitivity and the mitotic failure seen
in DNA-PKcs depleted cells above, can be explained by inability to repair
DSB. However, depleted cells demonstrated normal repair of DSBs as well as
rejoining of broken ends (Figure 12A-D). Inhibition of DNA-PKcs activity,
on the other hand, showed a large impact on cell survival and DSB repair after
ionizing radiation. This strongly suggests that there are different mechanisms
for DNA-PKcs in the cell, where loss of activity impairs DSB repair and decreased levels affect mitotic progression.
Figure 12. Cells with low residual levels of DNA-PKcs have apparently normal
DSB repair. A: representative images of GM5758 cells mock treated or siDNAPKcs transfected, irradiated with 1 Gy, and allowed to recover for the indicated
times. Cells were fixed and immunostained with 53BP1 (red) and nuclei were
stained with DAPI (blue). B: kinetics of 53BP1 foci in cells treated as in A. At least
100 cells/time point were scored for foci. Data represent mean ±SD of three independent experiments. C: dose response for residual number of 53BP1 foci per cell
24 hours after irradiation. Cells were either mock transfected or siDNA-PKcs transfected and then irradiated at indicated doses and allowed to recover for 24 hours before fixation and immunostaining. Counting and statistics performed as in B. D: rejoining of DSBs in GM5758 cells mock-transfected or siDNA-PKcs transfected before irradiation. Cells were allowed to recover for the indicated times prior to PFGE
analysis. M059K and M059J cells (completely lacking DNA-PKcs) are shown for
comparison. Data were normalized to the DSB level at t=0h and each data point represents mean ±SD of three independent experiments.
31
Next we looked at phosphorylation of DNA-PKcs (Thr2609 and Ser2056).
Decreased levels of DNA-PKcs did not affect the formation of Thr2609 and
Ser2056 foci around the DSB breaks and the foci also follow the pattern of
normal gathering and clearance of DSB foci. Cells inhibited with NU7441
showed normal formation of foci but with slow clearance, further strengthening the hypothesis of a multifunctional DNA-PKcs.
Conclusion and discussion
We show that downregulation of DNA-PKcs, a critical DSB repair protein,
leads to extreme radiosensitivity without any apparent effect on the repair in
asynchronous cells. The high levels of DNA-PKcs in normal cells may indicate important roles in other cellular functions and that an excess of molecules
must be present in the stress response to severe DNA damage. We also show
that low levels of DNA-PKcs halts cell mitosis, by a two-fold increase in the
fraction of cells arresting in G2/M. These observations are consistent with recent studies showing that inactivation of DNA-PKcs causes multipolar spindles and mitotic catastrophe after DNA damage (69). This study suggests that
DNA DSB repair capacity is not the limiting factor in cells with low DNAPKcs levels. This is important for the understanding of the complexity of the
DNA damage stress response and, specifically, the multifunctional roles of
DNA-PKcs. Further studies on DNA-PKcs function are important for deeper
understanding of the regulation of genomic stability, which will be important
to keep in mind for the development of new therapeutic approaches targeting
the DNA damage signaling and repair pathways.
Paper III
The influence of AKT isoforms on radiation sensitivity
and DNA repair in colon cancer cell lines
Aim and background
The aim of this study was to investigate the role of the AKT isoforms AKT1
and AKT2 in cellular response to radiation exposure and their effects on DNA
repair proteins (DNA-PKcs and MRE11) in colorectal cancer cell lines. Colorectal cancer is the third most common type of cancer in the world (122). The
only curative treatment for colorectal cancer is surgery. However, metastatic
spread interferes with the treatment outcome (123). Radiotherapy in combination with chemotherapy is sometimes used preoperatively or postoperatively
to reduce tumor burden or to diminish recurrence risk (124-126). There is a
great need for new drugs with better radiosensitizing properties if patients are
to benefit most from radiotherapy. It is therefore important to understand the
32
molecular mechanism underlying a radiosensitive outcome. AKT is a central
player in the signaling downstream of many growth factors and cytokines (85).
AKT also seems to interact with proteins with distinct function in DNA recognition and repair, and it has been shown to interact with both MRE11 and
DNA-PKcs (88, 89, 127). The isoforms of AKT have different functions,
properties and expression patterns (86, 87). This makes AKT a potential target
for therapy in combination with a DNA repair inhibitor during radiotherapy
in colorectal cancer patients.
Methods
We used colon cancer cell lines DLD-1 and HCT116 with different AKT
isoforms genetically knocked out (parental, AKT1 KO, AKT2 KO, AKT1/2
KO). AKT3 is not expressed in these cells. SiRNA was used to decrease the
levels of DNA-PKcs (siDNA-PKcs) and MRE11 (siMRE11) to approximately
10%-20%. Western blot analysis was used to study protein expression. Immunohistochemistry with proximity ligation assay (PLA) was used to study
protein-protein interaction. Cell survival was studied using clonogenic survival assay. Cell cycle analysis was performed with flow cytometry. PFGE
was used to analyze rejoining of DNA after induced damage.
Results
We investigated the interaction between DNA-PKcs and activation of AKT
after ionizing radiation. This indicated a complex interaction between the proteins. In DLD-1, knockout of all AKT isoforms increased the protein and
mRNA level of DNA-PKcs (Figure 13A), and decreased levels of DNA-PKcs
by siRNA reduced AKT phosphorylation (Figure 13C). In HCT116 cells,
MRE11 levels increased when all AKT isoforms were knocked out, which
was not shown in DLD-1 cells (Figure 13B). However, AKT phosphorylation
was independent of MRE11 in both cell lines (Figure 13C, D).
33
Figure 13. Expression of DNA-PKcs and MRE11 in the colorectal cancer cell lines
DLD-1 (A) and HCT116 (B) and their corresponding AKT isogenic knock-out. Cell
lysates were prepared before and after irradiation (1 hour post IR 6 Gy). C and D:
western blots were performed to study the protein expression of AKT, DNA-PKcs
and MRE11. DNA-PKcs and MRE11 expression was suppressed with siRNA
against either DNA-PKcs or MRE11 in DLD-1 (C) and HCT116 (D). Lysates were
prepared 1 hour after irradiation with 2 Gy.
Radiation sensitivity increased in all AKT isoforms, and decreased levels of
DNA-PKcs increased the radiosensitivity further. Low amounts of serum
(0.5%), to simulate the tumor microenvironment, increased the sensitivity
even more, acting independently of AKT (Figure 14A, B).
Figure 14. Cell survival analyzed with clonogenic assay (4 Gy). A: survival assay of
DLD-1 AKT isoforms in 10% and 0.5% FBS. B: survival assay in DLD-1 AKT
isoforms treated with siRNA against DNA-PKcs.
34
Further, we investigated the rejoining capacity of DNA ends after radiation.
The result showed that deficiency of AKT1 or/and AKT2 results in decreased
DNA DSB rejoining after irradiation. Decreased levels of DNA-PKcs increased radiation sensitivity and decreased DNA repair further. This decrease
is independent of the AKT isoforms. Furthermore, treatment with low serum
level media (0.5% FBS) further impairs the rejoining of DNA (Figure 15A,
B).
Figure 15. DSB rejoining rate, evaluated with PFGE after irradiation (40 Gy), in
DLD-1 AKT 1/2 knock-out cell line in 10% FBS (A) and 0.5% FBS (B), and either
treated with siRNA against DNA-PKcs or mock treated.
Conclusion and discussion
Our results indicate an interaction between the different AKT isoforms and
DNA-PKcs and MRE11. However, the interactions between AKT and DNAPKcs and MRE11 are complicated, and are probably dependent on a number
of factors, such as cell-type, genotype and microenvironment. We investigated
isogenic knock-outs of AKT and showed that both AKT1 and AKT2 are involved in the response to radiation and that elimination of either AKT1 or
AKT2 isoforms alone or together increases the radiation sensitivity. We have
also shown that deleting both AKT1 and AKT2 isotypes simultaneously impairs the DNA rejoining of DSBs.
Further, we show that reducing MRE11 with siRNA did not affect the DSB
rejoining in either DLD-1 or HCT116, and had no effect on the phosphorylation of AKT in either cell line.
35
Paper IV
Role of DNA-PKcs in DNA damage response and cell
cycle regulation
Aim and background
The aim of this study was to further characterize the role of DNA-PKcs in
DSB repair and cell-cycle regulation in response to ionizing radiation. Paper
II demonstrated that downregulation of DNA-PKcs in asynchronous cells
leads to extreme radiosensitivity without any apparent effect on repair. To further unmask the potential roles of DNA-PKcs in specific cell cycle phases, we
here used synchronized cells to try to distinguish the role of DNA-PKcs in
DSB repair and cell cycle regulation.
Methods
Cell lines used in this study were human epithelial cancer cell line A431 and
normal human skin fibroblast GM5758. Downregulation of DNA-PKcs was
performed with siRNA (siDNA-PKcs). Cell synchronization was carried out
by the thymidine double-blocking method (128, 129). Protein expression was
analyzed by western blot. Cell cycle analysis was performed with flow cytometry and immunostaining for positive p-H3 and Edu. DSB repair was studied
by analyzing 53BP1 foci in single cells.
Results
Cells were synchronized with thymidine, irradiated at the G1/S boundary and
analyzed at various time points. Using both single cell analysis and flow cytometry we found an accumulation of cells in the G2/M phase when treated
with siDNA-PKcs compared to mock treated 72 hours after irradiation (Figure
16.).
36
Figure 16. Low levels of DNA-PKcs lead to accumulation of mitotic cells after
irradition at the G1/S boundary. A: A431 cells were synchronized with thymidine
and released. Cells were irradiated with 5 Gy directly after release (in G1/S) and
scored for p-H3-positive cells 72 hours after release. For comparison, unirradiated
cells are shown. Data represent mean ±SD of three independent experiments. At
least 250 cells/time-point were scored in each experiment. B: reduction of DNAPKcs leads to accumulation in the G2/M phase. A431 cells, siDNA-PKcs treated or
mock treated, were synchronized with thymidine, irradiated with 5 Gy and collected
(fixated) 72 hours later. Cell cycle distribution was analyzed by flow cytometry.
In Paper II we showed that DSB repair was not affected by low levels of DNAPKcs. In this study, by using synchronized cells irradiated in G1/S phase, we
could identify an increase in DSB foci after time in siDNA-PKcs treated cells
compared to mock treated (Figure 16). This increase was sustained 72 hours
after irradiation, and the foci were homogenously distributed in all cells.
37
Figure 17. Irradiation of G1/S cells leads to persistent 53BP1 foci in DNA-PKcs
depleted cells. A: A431 cells were synchronized by thymidine, released and irradiated (2 Gy) in G1/S phase, and then fixated at different time points (4, 24 and 72 h).
Cells were immunostained and 53BP1 foci were scored. B: GM5758 cells were synchronized with thymidine, released and irradiated (5 Gy) in G1/S phase, and then
fixated at different time points (12, 24 and 72 h). Cells were immunostained and
53BP1 foci were scored. A and B: at least 100 cells/time-point were scored for foci
and data represent mean ±SD of three independent experiments.
Conclusion and discussion
We revealed that suppression of DNA-PKcs causes delayed cell cycle progression and increases the accumulation of G2 cells significantly, after irradiation,
compared to cells with normal DNA-PKcs levels. In contrast, this was not seen
in cells irradiated in G2 phase. Furthermore, the results demonstrate that irradiation in G1/S phase initially caused the same amount of DSB in the cells, but,
over time, deficient cells changed their pattern and DSB foci persisted at high
levels in cells with low levels of DNA-PKcs. We suggest that this accumulation
is due to checkpoint failure, were the cell may undergo mitosis with unrepaired
DSBs, leading to cell death or persistent DNA damage in the following G1
phase (105). This could be an indication that DNA-PKcs plays a role in the cell
cycle regulation checkpoints as do other DNA repair proteins (104).
The question of whether regulation of DNA-PKcs in mitosis contributes to inactivation of DSB repair in mitosis or whether DNA-PKcs has additional, DSB
repair independent roles in mitosis and other phases of the cell cycle, is challenging and complex. Our data indicate that DNA-PKcs play an important role
when DNA damage occurs in G1/S phase. We conclude that DNA-PKcs deficiency causes a delay in mitotic progression as well as persistent DSB in the
following G1, indicating that DNA-PKcs plays an important part in mitotic progression and regulation.
38
Concluding remarks
This work has focused on DNA damage formation, and the role of repair and
signaling after ionizing radiation. Clustered damage sites formed after highLET irradiation are difficult for the cell to repair. To gain more knowledge
about clustered damage it is important to have the right analysis method. By
using DNA fragmentation analysis we were able to distinguish these clustered
sites and also by varying lysis temperatures we could distinguish, for the first
time, heat-released DSB from prompt DSB after high-LET irradiation. This is
important for a proper understanding of pathways involved in the repair of
clustered damage sites and for estimates of rejoining capacity, which could be
overestimated if heat-released DSBs are included in the analysis. A specific
focus in this thesis has been to gain more knowledge about DNA-PKcs, a central player in NHEJ, the major DSB repair pathway in mammalian cells. There
is a heterogeneous expression pattern between different cancer types, where
DNA-PKcs is over- or under-expressed. Most importantly, we showed that
proliferating cells with suppressed DNA-PKcs expression, accumulate in
G2/M after irradiation and this process was uncoupled from the DSB repair
capacity. However, the function of DNA-PKcs seems highly complex and our
results indicate that the radiation response in cells with low DNA-PKcs levels
is closely related to cell cycle regulation. We have only just begun to reveal
the full potential of this large and multifunctional protein kinase. We also
identified an interaction between DNA-PKcs and AKT. AKT is a downstream
signaling protein that is activated after irradiation, and play a role in survival,
growth, proliferation, glucose uptake, metabolism and angiogenesis. Targeting both AKT and DNA-PKcs in combination could have therapeutic implications in radiotherapy.
The main findings of the thesis are as follows:



Clustered non-DSB lesions in high-LET irradiated cells can be converted
into DSB upon heat treatment.
Non-DSB lesions that are converted to a DSB after heat treatment appear
clustered on DNA fragments with sizes of 1 Mbp or less.
Analysis of rejoining over time showed that small DNA fragments rejoin
faster in heat treated samples, indicating that the fast repair is mainly HLS
repair.
39










40
Low levels of DNA-PKcs markedly reduced survival and proliferation.
Reduced levels of DNA-PKcs lead to accumulation of cells in G2/M phase
after irradiation, which was further enhanced when cells where irradiated
in G1/S phase.
Low levels of DNA-PKcs do not affect DSB repair, in proliferating, asynchronous, cells.
Phosphorylated DNA-PKcs (Thr2609) in mitotic cells was dislocated
from chromatin and concentrated at two distinct foci around the midbody
of the nucleus suggesting a different role than in DSB repair.
Low levels of DNA-PKcs and loss of function by inhibiting activation of
DNA-PKcs, lead to different outcomes. Loss of function by the inhibitor
NU7441 resulted in high radiosensitivity and impaired DSB repair.
Phosphorylation of Ser2056 and Thr2609 in DNA-PKcs was not affected
by low levels of DNA-PKcs, and 53BP1 and γ-H2AX foci were formed
directly after irradiation and almost cleared 24 hours post-irradiation.
In cells irradiated in G1/S phase, low levels of DNA-PKcs affected DNA
repair after irradiation. A high number of 53BP1 foci remained for a long
time after irradiation.
In cells irradiated in G2 phase, low levels of DNA-PKcs did not result in
accumulation of cells in G2/M phase.
Knockout of AKT1 and/or AKT2 effected the radiation sensitivity, and
the lack of both isoforms impaired the rejoining of radiation-induced
DNA DSBs.
Low levels of DNA-PKcs had a radiosensitizing effect, which was further
enhanced in combination with disrupt AKT and low serum levels.
Future perspectives
The observation that many cancer cells are impaired by the DSB repair mechanism emphasizes the connection between DSB repair and carcinogenesis.
This generates opportunities for cancer treatment, and a greater understanding
of DSB repair and its central players can be beneficial in optimizing radiotherapy.
Clustered lesions induced by high-LET radiation are much more difficult to
repair than those from low-LET radiation. Information about the repair process and its potential failure in specific steps, e.g. due to damage clusters in
relation to chromatin, is of great interest for a general understanding of DSB
repair and for optimizing radiotherapy in the future. Identification of the localization and clustering of DNA damage and how that may influence repair
can be analyzed by immunogold electron microscopy, using high resolution
to identify changes in chromatin structure at DSB foci. Also, using a high resolution technique, deeper knowledge could be gained about DNA repair proteins and how they assemble within single DSB foci.
The cellular response to DNA damage caused by radiation is complex, and the
more knowledge we gain, the more complex it appears. Identifying the role of
DNA-PKcs in DNA repair has simultaneously identified a multifunction protein playing a part in many cellular steps. Future studies should continue to
evaluate the role of DNA-PKcs in the repair and regulation of the cell cycle,
including mitosis. Our understanding of the exact activation mechanism of
DNA-PKcs and the kinase targets remains incomplete. By using and studying
DNA-PKcs inhibitors, cells deficient DNA-PKcs and cells with low levels,
we can begin to loosen the knot and the role of DNA-PKcs can be further
clarified. The levels of DNA-PKcs should be further studied using a more stable transfection such as short hairpin RNA (shRNA). Likewise, studies on the
influence of DNA-PKcs regulation through the cell cycle, mitosis and stabilization of the mitotic spindle need to be further evaluated.
Paper III shows an interaction between DNA-PKcs and AKT that should be
further investigated. Using inhibitors in combination could give the tumor cell
an important increase in radiosensitivity. The interaction may be cell type specific and therefore more information is needed about the cell signaling pathways in different cell lines.
41
Acknowledgements
The work in this thesis was performed at the unit of Biomedical Radiation
Sciences, BMS. Funding was provided by the Swedish Cancer Society and
Swedish Radiation Safety Authority.
During the journey that led me to where I am today, I have met and been
inspired, encouraged and helped by so many people. I would especially like
to thank:
My main supervisor, Prof. Bo Stenerlöw, for accepting me first as a Master’s
student, then a PhD-student, for surely without you this thesis would not have
been completed. Thank you for always encouraging me and believing in me.
You have mentored and guided me through these years with an open mind,
open door and open personality. For that I am forever grateful. Thank you for
your patience and for teaching me everything I know about radiobiology.
My co-supervisor, Ola Söderberg, for introducing me to in situ PLA in my
early days as a PhD student. Thank you for your support and input in improving my PLA assay techniques.
My co-supervisor, Lars Gedda, for always being helpful and giving encouragement when needed.
Sara Sahlberg, co-author and a true inspiration. You have followed me every
step of the way; we have shared ups and downs along this path and I cannot
imagine anyone else with whom to have shared this journey. Since we first
met in “ex-jobbarrummet” you have taught me so much about life, with your
desire always to want to learn more and work harder to reach your goals.
My co-author, Andris Abramenkovs, for interesting discussions about science
and life.
My co-author, Torbjörn Hartman, for your help with ion beam measurements
at the Theodore Svedberg Laboratory (TSL) and for your good spirits. My
thanks also go to the TSL cyclotron staff for ion beam delivery.
42
Sara Ahlgren and Erika Nordberg, for always listening and giving advice
about science, but more importantly about life - you are like big sisters to me.
Amelie Fondell, Diana Spiegelberg, Anja Mortenson and Lina Ekerljung - old
and new roommates- for all those joyful talks about life in and outside the lab.
Special thanks to Amelie, for sharing a seat on the emotional roller coaster
with me.
Veronika Asplund for teaching me how the laboratory works; Christina Atterby for all your help keeping the laboratory in order and Helene Lyngå for
all your administrative work.
Everyone I have met during my time at BMS: personnel, seniors, PhD students, Master’s students and others, for wonderful discussions when sharing a
coffee together.
All my friends outside the lab, friends from school, dog friends and horse
friends, for keeping my mind on something besides science.
My family, I would like to thank you all by using the lyrics to one of my
favorite songs: “The Climb”.
I can almost see it
That dream I am dreaming
The struggles I am facing, the chances I´m taking
Sometimes might knock me down - thank you Claes and Henrik, for teaching
me to fight, and for just being my brothers.
But I gotta keep trying - thank you Dad for teaching me to always try.
Gotta keep my head held high - thank you Mum for teaching me to always
keep my head held high.
There's always gonna be another mountain
I'm always gonna wanna make it move - thank you Ville for helping me to
move mountains.
Always gonna be a uphill battle - thank you Anna and Johanna for helping
me face the battles.
Sometimes I'm gonna have to lose - thank you Lollo for always listening and
being there.
Ain't about how fast I get there
Ain't about what's waiting on the other side
It's the climb - thank you all for doing the climb with me.
I may not know it, but these are the moments that I´m going to remember
most.
43
Till slut,
Mamma och pappa, för att ni alltid har ställt upp för mig och låtit mig gå min
egen väg.
Ville, min man och bästa vän, för att du alltid finns där, alltid pressar mig till
att göra mitt yttersta, för att du alltid vill uppfylla mina önskningar, och för att
du alltid ställer upp. Till vår lille Sigrid, som visat oss vad livet går ut på. Jag
älskar er.
44
References
1.Hall EJ, editor. Radiobiology for the Radiologist. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams
& Wilkins; 2000.
2.Olive PL. The role of DNA single- and double-strand breaks in cell killing by ionizing radiation. Radiation research. 1998;150(5 Suppl):S42-51.
3.Mills KD, Ferguson DO, Alt FW. The role of DNA breaks in genomic instability
and tumorigenesis. Immunological reviews. 2003;194:77-95.
4.Jackson SP, Bartek J. The DNA-damage response in human biology and disease.
Nature. 2009;461(7267):1071-8.
5.Ward JF. DNA damage produced by ionizing radiation in mammalian cells: identities, mechanisms of formation, and reparability. Progress in nucleic acid research
and molecular biology. 1988;35:95-125.
6.Ward JF. The yield of DNA double-strand breaks produced intracellularly by ionizing radiation: a review. International journal of radiation biology.
1990;57(6):1141-50.
7.Siegel R, DeSantis C, Virgo K, Stein K, Mariotto A, Smith T, et al. Cancer treatment
and survivorship statistics, 2012. CA: a cancer journal for clinicians.
2012;62(4):220-41.
8.Brabletz T. To differentiate or not--routes towards metastasis. Nature reviews Cancer. 2012;12(6):425-36.
9.Singh A, Settleman J. EMT, cancer stem cells and drug resistance: an emerging axis
of evil in the war on cancer. Oncogene. 2010;29(34):4741-51.
10.Eriksson D, Stigbrand T. Radiation-induced cell death mechanisms. Tumour biology. 2010;31(4):363-72.
11.Yard B, Chie EK, Adams DJ, Peacock C, Abazeed ME. Radiotherapy in the Era
of Precision Medicine. Seminars in radiation oncology. 2015;25(4):227-36.
12.Mladenov E, Magin S, Soni A, Iliakis G. DNA double-strand break repair as determinant of cellular radiosensitivity to killing and target in radiation therapy.
Frontiers in oncology. 2013;3:113.
13.Lindahl T. Instability and decay of the primary structure of DNA. Nature.
1993;362(6422):709-15.
14.Sancar A. DNA excision repair. Annual review of biochemistry. 1996;65:43-81.
15.Lahue RS, Au KG, Modrich P. DNA mismatch correction in a defined system.
Science (New York, NY). 1989;245(4914):160-4.
16.Illuzzi JL, Wilson DM, 3rd. Base excision repair: contribution to tumorigenesis
and target in anticancer treatment paradigms. Current Medicinal Chemistry.
2012;19(23):3922-36.
17.Odell ID, Wallace SS, Pederson DS. Rules of engagement for base excision repair
in chromatin. Journal of cellular physiology. 2012;228(2):258-66.
18.Palomera-Sanchez Z, Zurita M. Open, repair and close again: chromatin dynamics
and the response to UV-induced DNA damage. DNA repair. 2011;10(2):119-25.
19.Khanna KK, Jackson SP. DNA double-strand breaks: signaling, repair and the cancer connection. Nature genetics. 2001;27(3):247-54.
45
20.Vilenchik MM, Knudson AG. Endogenous DNA double-strand breaks: production, fidelity of repair, and induction of cancer. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 2003;100(22):12871-6.
21.Burma S, Chen BP, Chen DJ. Role of non-homologous end joining (NHEJ) in
maintaining genomic integrity. DNA repair. 2006;5(9-10):1042-8.
22.Agarwal S, Tafel AA, Kanaar R. DNA double-strand break repair and chromosome
translocations. DNA repair. 2006;5(9-10):1075-81.
23.Thompson LH. Recognition, signaling, and repair of DNA double-strand breaks
produced by ionizing radiation in mammalian cells: the molecular choreography.
Mutation research. 2012;751(2):158-246.
24.Rothkamm K, Kruger I, Thompson LH, Lobrich M. Pathways of DNA doublestrand break repair during the mammalian cell cycle. Molecular and cellular biology. 2003;23(16):5706-15.
25.Chapman JR, Taylor MR, Boulton SJ. Playing the end game: DNA double-strand
break repair pathway choice. Molecular cell. 2012;47(4):497-510.
26.Deriano L, Roth DB. Modernizing the nonhomologous end-joining repertoire: alternative and classical NHEJ share the stage. Annual review of genetics.
2013;47:433-55.
27.Iliakis G. Backup pathways of NHEJ in cells of higher eukaryotes: cell cycle dependence. Radiotherapy and oncology. 2009;92(3):310-5.
28.Barton O, Naumann SC, Diemer-Biehs R, Kunzel J, Steinlage M, Conrad S, et al.
Polo-like kinase 3 regulates CtIP during DNA double-strand break repair in G1.
The Journal of cell biology. 2014;206(7):877-94.
29.Mari PO, Florea BI, Persengiev SP, Verkaik NS, Bruggenwirth HT, Modesti M, et
al. Dynamic assembly of end-joining complexes requires interaction between
Ku70/80 and XRCC4. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the
United States of America. 2006;103(49):18597-602.
30.Uematsu N, Weterings E, Yano K, Morotomi-Yano K, Jakob B, Taucher-Scholz
G, et al. Autophosphorylation of DNA-PKCS regulates its dynamics at DNA double-strand breaks. The Journal of cell biology. 2007;177(2):219-29.
31.Davis AJ, Chen DJ. DNA double strand break repair via non-homologous endjoining. Translational cancer research. 2013;2(3):130-43.
32.Walker JR, Corpina RA, Goldberg J. Structure of the Ku heterodimer bound to
DNA and its implications for double-strand break repair. Nature.
2001;412(6847):607-14.
33.Wang C, Lees-Miller SP. Detection and repair of ionizing radiation-induced DNA
double strand breaks: New developments in nonhomologous end joining. International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics. 2013.
34.Costantini S, Woodbine L, Andreoli L, Jeggo PA, Vindigni A. Interaction of the
Ku heterodimer with the DNA ligase IV/Xrcc4 complex and its regulation by
DNA-PK. DNA repair. 2007;6(6):712-22.
35.Yano K, Morotomi-Yano K, Wang SY, Uematsu N, Lee KJ, Asaithamby A, et al.
Ku recruits XLF to DNA double-strand breaks. EMBO reports. 2008;9(1):91-6.
36.Weterings E, Chen DJ. The endless tale of non-homologous end-joining. Cell Research. 2008;18(1):114-24.
37.Hammel M, Yu Y, Mahaney BL, Cai B, Ye R, Phipps BM, et al. Ku and DNAdependent protein kinase dynamic conformations and assembly regulate DNA
binding and the initial non-homologous end joining complex. The Journal of biological chemistry. 2010;285(2):1414-23.
38.Abraham RT. PI 3-kinase related kinases: 'big' players in stress-induced signaling
pathways. DNA repair. 2004;3(8-9):883-7.
46
39.Malu S, Malshetty V, Francis D, Cortes P. Role of non-homologous end joining in
V(D)J recombination. Immunologic research. 2012;54(1-3):233-46.
40.Meek K, Douglas P, Cui X, Ding Q, Lees-Miller SP. trans Autophosphorylation at
DNA-dependent protein kinase's two major autophosphorylation site clusters facilitates end processing but not end joining. Molecular and cellular biology.
2007;27(10):3881-90.
41.Chan DW, Chen BP, Prithivirajsingh S, Kurimasa A, Story MD, Qin J, et al. Autophosphorylation of the DNA-dependent protein kinase catalytic subunit is required for rejoining of DNA double-strand breaks. Genes & development.
2002;16(18):2333-8.
42.Ding Q, Reddy YV, Wang W, Woods T, Douglas P, Ramsden DA, et al. Autophosphorylation of the catalytic subunit of the DNA-dependent protein kinase is
required for efficient end processing during DNA double-strand break repair. Molecular and cellular biology. 2003;23(16):5836-48.
43.Chen BP, Uematsu N, Kobayashi J, Lerenthal Y, Krempler A, Yajima H, et al.
Ataxia telangiectasia mutated (ATM) is essential for DNA-PKcs phosphorylations at the Thr-2609 cluster upon DNA double strand break. The Journal of biological chemistry. 2007;282(9):6582-7.
44.Cui X, Yu Y, Gupta S, Cho YM, Lees-Miller SP, Meek K. Autophosphorylation
of DNA-dependent protein kinase regulates DNA end processing and may also
alter double-strand break repair pathway choice. Molecular and cellular biology.
2005;25(24):10842-52.
45.Block WD, Yu Y, Merkle D, Gifford JL, Ding Q, Meek K, et al. Autophosphorylation-dependent remodeling of the DNA-dependent protein kinase catalytic subunit regulates ligation of DNA ends. Nucleic acids research. 2004;32(14):43517.
46.West SC. Molecular views of recombination proteins and their control. Nature reviews Molecular cell biology. 2003;4(6):435-45.
47.Shrivastav M, De Haro LP, Nickoloff JA. Regulation of DNA double-strand break
repair pathway choice. Cell research. 2008;18(1):134-47.
48.Mladenov E, Iliakis G. Induction and repair of DNA double strand breaks: The
increasing spectrum of non-homologous end joining pathways. Mutation research. 2011;711(1-2):61-72.
49.Daley JM, Kwon Y, Niu H, Sung P. Investigations of homologous recombination
pathways and their regulation. The Yale journal of biology and medicine.
2013;86(4):453-61.
50.Ceccaldi R, Rondinelli B, D'Andrea AD. Repair pathway choices and consequences at the double-strand break. Trends in cell biology. 2015.
51.Zhang Y, Jasin M. An essential role for CtIP in chromosomal translocation formation through an alternative end-joining pathway. Nature structural & molecular
biology. 2011;18(1):80-4.
52.Neal JA, Meek K. Choosing the right path: does DNA-PK help make the decision?
Mutation research. 2011;711(1-2):73-86.
53.Stracker TH, Petrini JH. The MRE11 complex: starting from the ends. Nature reviews Molecular cell biology. 2011;12(2):90-103.
54.Grenon M, Gilbert C, Lowndes NF. Checkpoint activation in response to doublestrand breaks requires the Mre11/Rad50/Xrs2 complex. Nature cell biology.
2001;3(9):844-7.
55.van den Bosch M, Bree RT, Lowndes NF. The MRN complex: coordinating and
mediating the response to broken chromosomes. EMBO reports. 2003;4(9):8449.
47
56.Wen Q, Scorah J, Phear G, Rodgers G, Rodgers S, Meuth M. A mutant allele of
MRE11 found in mismatch repair-deficient tumor cells suppresses the cellular
response to DNA replication fork stress in a dominant negative manner. Molecular biology of the cell. 2008;19(4):1693-705.
57.Woodbine L, Gennery AR, Jeggo PA. The clinical impact of deficiency in DNA
non-homologous end-joining. DNA repair. 2014;16:84-96.
58.Taylor AM, Groom A, Byrd PJ. Ataxia-telangiectasia-like disorder (ATLD)-its
clinical presentation and molecular basis. DNA repair. 2004;3(8-9):1219-25.
59.Ambrose M, Gatti RA. Pathogenesis of ataxia-telangiectasia: the next generation
of ATM functions. Blood. 2013;121(20):4036-45.
60.Jeggo PA. Genomic instability in cancer development. Advances in experimental
medicine and biology. 2005;570:175-97.
61.Anderson CW, Carter TH. The DNA-activated protein kinase -- DNA-PK. Current
topics in microbiology and immunology. 1996;217:91-111.
62.Hsu FM, Zhang S, Chen BP. Role of DNA-dependent protein kinase catalytic subunit in cancer development and treatment. Translational cancer research.
2012;1(1):22-34.
63.Karlsson KH, Stenerlow B. Extensive ssDNA end formation at DNA double-strand
breaks in non-homologous end-joining deficient cells during the S phase. BMC
molecular biology. 2007;8:97.
64.Karlsson KH, Stenerlow B. Focus formation of DNA repair proteins in normal and
repair-deficient cells irradiated with high-LET ions. Radiation research.
2004;161(5):517-27.
65.Lieber MR, Ma Y, Pannicke U, Schwarz K. Mechanism and regulation of human
non-homologous DNA end-joining. Nature reviews Molecular cell biology.
2003;4(9):712-20.
66.Arlander SJ, Greene BT, Innes CL, Paules RS. DNA protein kinase-dependent G2
checkpoint revealed following knockdown of ataxia-telangiectasia mutated in human mammary epithelial cells. Cancer research. 2008;68(1):89-97.
67.Lee KJ, Lin YF, Chou HY, Yajima H, Fattah KR, Lee SC, et al. Involvement of
DNA-dependent protein kinase in normal cell cycle progression through mitosis.
The Journal of biological chemistry. 2011;286(14):12796-802.
68.Huang B, Shang ZF, Li B, Wang Y, Liu XD, Zhang SM, et al. DNA-PKcs associates with PLK1 and is involved in proper chromosome segregation and cytokinesis. Journal of cellular biochemistry. 2014;115(6):1077-88.
69.Shang ZF, Huang B, Xu QZ, Zhang SM, Fan R, Liu XD, et al. Inactivation of
DNA-dependent protein kinase leads to spindle disruption and mitotic catastrophe
with attenuated checkpoint protein 2 Phosphorylation in response to DNA damage. Cancer research. 2010;70(9):3657-66.
70.Leahy JJ, Golding BT, Griffin RJ, Hardcastle IR, Richardson C, Rigoreau L, et al.
Identification of a highly potent and selective DNA-dependent protein kinase
(DNA-PK) inhibitor (NU7441) by screening of chromenone libraries. Bioorganic
& medicinal chemistry letters. 2004;14(24):6083-7.
71.Davidson D, Amrein L, Panasci L, Aloyz R. Small olecules, inhibitors of DNAPK, targeting DNA repair, and beyond. Frontiers in pharmacology. 2013;4:5.
72.Furgason JM, Bahassi el M. Targeting DNA repair mechanisms in cancer. Pharmacology & therapeutics. 2013;137(3):298-308.
73.Rydberg B. Radiation-induced heat-labile sites that convert into DNA doublestrand breaks. Radiation research. 2000;153(6):805-12.
74.Singh SK, Wang M, Staudt C, Iliakis G. Post-irradiation chemical processing of
DNA damage generates double-strand breaks in cells already engaged in repair.
Nucleic acids research. 2011;39(19):8416-29.
48
75.Stenerlow B, Karlsson KH, Cooper B, Rydberg B. Measurement of prompt DNA
double-strand breaks in mammalian cells without including heat-labile sites: results for cells deficient in nonhomologous end joining. Radiation research.
2003;159(4):502-10.
76.Karlsson KH, Radulescu I, Rydberg B, Stenerlow B. Repair of radiation-induced
heat-labile sites is independent of DNA-PKcs, XRCC1 and PARP. Radiation research. 2008;169(5):506-12.
77.Valerie K, Yacoub A, Hagan MP, Curiel DT, Fisher PB, Grant S, et al. Radiationinduced cell signaling: inside-out and outside-in. Molecular cancer therapeutics.
2007;6(3):789-801.
78.Szumiel I. Epidermal growth factor receptor and DNA double strand break repair:
the cell's self-defence. Cellular signalling. 2006;18(10):1537-48.
79.Bakkenist CJ, Kastan MB. DNA damage activates ATM through intermolecular
autophosphorylation and dimer dissociation. Nature. 2003;421(6922):499-506.
80.Dent P, Yacoub A, Contessa J, Caron R, Amorino G, Valerie K, et al. Stress and
radiation-induced activation of multiple intracellular signaling pathways. Radiation research. 2003;159(3):283-300.
81.Citri A, Yarden Y. EGF-ERBB signalling: towards the systems level. Nature reviews Molecular cell biology. 2006;7(7):505-16.
82.Normanno N, De Luca A, Bianco C, Strizzi L, Mancino M, Maiello MR, et al.
Epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) signaling in cancer. Gene.
2006;366(1):2-16.
83.Bandyopadhyay D, Mandal M, Adam L, Mendelsohn J, Kumar R. Physical interaction between epidermal growth factor receptor and DNA-dependent protein kinase in mammalian cells. The Journal of biological chemistry. 1998;273(3):156873.
84.Toulany M, Kasten-Pisula U, Brammer I, Wang S, Chen J, Dittmann K, et al.
Blockage of epidermal growth factor receptor-phosphatidylinositol 3-kinaseAKT signaling increases radiosensitivity of K-RAS mutated human tumor cells
in vitro by affecting DNA repair. Clinical cancer research. 2006;12(13):4119-26.
85.Manning BD, Cantley LC. AKT/PKB signaling: navigating downstream. Cell.
2007;129(7):1261-74.
86.Santi SA, Lee H. The Akt isoforms are present at distinct subcellular locations.
American journal of physiology Cell physiology. 2010;298(3):C580-91.
87.Lee RS, House CM, Cristiano BE, Hannan RD, Pearson RB, Hannan KM. Relative
Expression Levels Rather Than Specific Activity Plays the Major Role in Determining In Vivo AKT Isoform Substrate Specificity. Enzyme research.
2011;2011:720985.
88.Bozulic L, Surucu B, Hynx D, Hemmings BA. PKBalpha/Akt1 acts downstream
of DNA-PK in the DNA double-strand break response and promotes survival.
Molecular cell. 2008;30(2):203-13.
89.Fraser M, Harding SM, Zhao H, Coackley C, Durocher D, Bristow RG. MRE11
promotes AKT phosphorylation in direct response to DNA double-strand breaks.
Cell cycle. 2011;10(13):2218-32.
90.Deng R, Tang J, Ma JG, Chen SP, Xia LP, Zhou WJ, et al. PKB/Akt promotes
DSB repair in cancer cells through upregulating Mre11 expression following ionizing radiation. Oncogene. 2011;30(8):944-55.
91.Sarbassov DD, Guertin DA, Ali SM, Sabatini DM. Phosphorylation and regulation
of Akt/PKB by the rictor-mTOR complex. Science (New York, NY).
2005;307(5712):1098-101.
49
92.Viniegra JG, Martinez N, Modirassari P, Hernandez Losa J, Parada Cobo C,
Sanchez-Arevalo Lobo VJ, et al. Full activation of PKB/Akt in response to insulin
or ionizing radiation is mediated through ATM. The Journal of biological chemistry. 2005;280(6):4029-36.
93.Dragoi AM, Fu X, Ivanov S, Zhang P, Sheng L, Wu D, et al. DNA-PKcs, but not
TLR9, is required for activation of Akt by CpG-DNA. The EMBO journal.
2005;24(4):779-89.
94.Feng J, Park J, Cron P, Hess D, Hemmings BA. Identification of a PKB/Akt hydrophobic motif Ser-473 kinase as DNA-dependent protein kinase. The Journal
of biological chemistry. 2004;279(39):41189-96.
95.Toulany M, Kehlbach R, Florczak U, Sak A, Wang S, Chen J, et al. Targeting of
AKT1 enhances radiation toxicity of human tumor cells by inhibiting DNA-PKcsdependent DNA double-strand break repair. Molecular cancer therapeutics.
2008;7(7):1772-81.
96.Deckbar D, Jeggo PA, Lobrich M. Understanding the limitations of radiation-induced cell cycle checkpoints. Critical reviews in biochemistry and molecular biology. 2011;46(4):271-83.
97.Lukas J, Lukas C, Bartek J. Mammalian cell cycle checkpoints: signalling pathways and their organization in space and time. DNA repair. 2004;3(8-9):9971007.
98.Shaltiel IA, Krenning L, Bruinsma W, Medema RH. The same, only different DNA damage checkpoints and their reversal throughout the cell cycle. Journal of
cell science. 2015;128(4):607-20.
99.Matsuoka S, Huang M, Elledge SJ. Linkage of ATM to cell cycle regulation by the
Chk2 protein kinase. Science (New York, NY). 1998;282(5395):1893-7.
100.Harper JW, Adami GR, Wei N, Keyomarsi K, Elledge SJ. The p21 Cdk-interacting protein Cip1 is a potent inhibitor of G1 cyclin-dependent kinases. Cell.
1993;75(4):805-16.
101.Harper JW, Elledge SJ, Keyomarsi K, Dynlacht B, Tsai LH, Zhang P, et al. Inhibition of cyclin-dependent kinases by p21. Molecular biology of the cell.
1995;6(4):387-400.
102.Deng C, Zhang P, Harper JW, Elledge SJ, Leder P. Mice lacking p21CIP1/WAF1
undergo normal development, but are defective in G1 checkpoint control. Cell.
1995;82(4):675-84.
103.Paulsen RD, Cimprich KA. The ATR pathway: fine-tuning the fork. DNA repair.
2007;6(7):953-66.
104.Deckbar D, Birraux J, Krempler A, Tchouandong L, Beucher A, Walker S, et al.
Chromosome breakage after G2 checkpoint release. The Journal of cell biology.
2007;176(6):749-55.
105.Linke SP, Clarkin KC, Wahl GM. p53 mediates permanent arrest over multiple
cell cycles in response to gamma-irradiation. Cancer research. 1997;57(6):11719.
106.Ross GM. Induction of cell death by radiotherapy. Endocrine-related cancer.
1999;6(1):41-4.
107.Ianzini F, Bertoldo A, Kosmacek EA, Phillips SL, Mackey MA. Lack of p53
function promotes radiation-induced mitotic catastrophe in mouse embryonic fibroblast cells. Cancer cell international. 2006;6:11.
108.Gurley LR, Walters RA, Tobey RA. Cell cycle-specific changes in histone phosphorylation associated with cell proliferation and chromosome condensation. The
Journal of cell biology. 1974;60(2):356-64.
109.Jonathan EC, Bernhard EJ, McKenna WG. How does radiation kill cells? Current
opinion in chemical biology. 1999;3(1):77-83.
50
110.Hollstein M, Sidransky D, Vogelstein B, Harris CC. p53 mutations in human cancers. Science (New York, NY). 1991;253(5015):49-53.
111.Rydberg B. Clusters of DNA damage induced by ionizing radiation: formation of
short DNA fragments. II. Experimental detection. Radiation research.
1996;145(2):200-9.
112.Lobrich M, Cooper PK, Rydberg B. Non-random distribution of DNA doublestrand breaks induced by particle irradiation. International journal of radiation biology. 1996;70(5):493-503.
113.Hoglund E, Blomquist E, Carlsson J, Stenerlow B. DNA damage induced by radiation of different linear energy transfer: initial fragmentation. International journal of radiation biology. 2000;76(4):539-47.
114.Goodhead DT. Initial events in the cellular effects of ionizing radiations: clustered damage in DNA. International journal of radiation biology. 1994;65(1):717.
115.Ward JF. Biochemistry of DNA lesions. Radiation research Supplement.
1985;8:S103-11.
116.Georgakilas AG, O'Neill P, Stewart RD. Induction and repair of clustered DNA
lesions: what do we know so far? Radiation research. 2013;180(1):100-9.
117.Auckley DH, Crowell RE, Heaphy ER, Stidley CA, Lechner JF, Gilliland FD, et
al. Reduced DNA-dependent protein kinase activity is associated with lung cancer. Carcinogenesis. 2001;22(5):723-7.
118.Someya M, Sakata K, Matsumoto Y, Yamamoto H, Monobe M, Ikeda H, et al.
The association of DNA-dependent protein kinase activity with chromosomal instability and risk of cancer. Carcinogenesis. 2006;27(1):117-22.
119.Rigas B, Borgo S, Elhosseiny A, Balatsos V, Manika Z, Shinya H, et al. Decreased expression of DNA-dependent protein kinase, a DNA repair protein, during human colon carcinogenesis. Cancer research. 2001;61(23):8381-4.
120.Smilenov LB, Lieberman HB, Mitchell SA, Baker RA, Hopkins KM, Hall EJ.
Combined haploinsufficiency for ATM and RAD9 as a factor in cell transformation, apoptosis, and DNA lesion repair dynamics. Cancer research.
2005;65(3):933-8.
121.Tonotsuka N, Hosoi Y, Miyazaki S, Miyata G, Sugawara K, Mori T, et al. Heterogeneous expression of DNA-dependent protein kinase in esophageal cancer and
normal epithelium. International journal of molecular medicine. 2006;18(3):4417.
122.Parkin DM, Bray F, Ferlay J, Pisani P. Global cancer statistics, 2002. CA: a cancer journal for clinicians. 2005;55(2):74-108.
123.Ohlsson B, Palsson B. Follow-up after colorectal cancer surgery. Acta oncologica. 2003;42(8):816-26.
124.Frykholm GJ, Glimelius B, Pahlman L. Preoperative or postoperative irradiation
in adenocarcinoma of the rectum: final treatment results of a randomized trial and
an evaluation of late secondary effects. Diseases of the colon and rectum.
1993;36(6):564-72.
125.Glimelius B, Holm T, Blomqvist L. Chemotherapy in addition to preoperative
radiotherapy in locally advanced rectal cancer - a systematic overview. Reviews
on recent clinical trials. 2008;3(3):204-11.
126.Ragnhammar P, Hafstrom L, Nygren P, Glimelius B, Care SB-gSCoTAiH. A systematic overview of chemotherapy effects in colorectal cancer. Acta oncologica.
2001;40(2-3):282-308.
51
127.Toulany M, Lee KJ, Fattah KR, Lin YF, Fehrenbacher B, Schaller M, et al. Akt
promotes post-irradiation survival of human tumor cells through initiation, progression, and termination of DNA-PKcs-dependent DNA double-strand break repair. Molecular cancer research : MCR. 2012;10(7):945-57.
128.Tobey RA, Crissman HA. Preparation of large quantities of synchronized mammalian cells in late G1 in the pre-DNA replicative phase of the cell cycle. Experimental cell research. 1972;75(2):460-4.
129.Thomas DB, Lingwood CA. A model of cell cycle control: effects of thymidine
on synchronous cell cultures. Cell. 1975;5(1):37-42.
52
Acta Universitatis Upsaliensis
Digital Comprehensive Summaries of Uppsala Dissertations
from the Faculty of Medicine 1157
Editor: The Dean of the Faculty of Medicine
A doctoral dissertation from the Faculty of Medicine, Uppsala
University, is usually a summary of a number of papers. A few
copies of the complete dissertation are kept at major Swedish
research libraries, while the summary alone is distributed
internationally through the series Digital Comprehensive
Summaries of Uppsala Dissertations from the Faculty of
Medicine. (Prior to January, 2005, the series was published
under the title “Comprehensive Summaries of Uppsala
Dissertations from the Faculty of Medicine”.)
Distribution: publications.uu.se
urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-265137
ACTA
UNIVERSITATIS
UPSALIENSIS
UPPSALA
2015