Cortés F, Piñero J, Ortiz T
Department of Cell Biology, Faculty of Biology, Seville, Spain.
Mutat Res. 1993 Oct;303(2):71-6. doi: 10.1016/0165-7992(93)90097-f.
Previous studies have shown the importance of DNA replication fork progression for the cytotoxicity of topoisomerase inhibitors. Nevertheless, while it was concluded that an interference of moving forks with drug-stabilized topo I-DNA complexes is critical for cell death, in the case of topo II only a partial contribution to cell killing was proposed. We have studied the influence of inhibition of DNA replication by aphidicolin on the production of chromosomal aberrations and SCE by topoisomerase inhibitors. Our results seem to indicate that fork progression is necessary for both cytogenetic endpoints. Pulsed field gel electrophoresis also confirmed this conclusion at the level of DNA breakage (double-strand breaks) efficiently induced by m-AMSA treatment alone, but not when aphidicolin was present. Differences found between topo I and topo II inhibitors (camptothecin and m-AMSA, respectively) could be explained as due to differences in their persistence in trapping the 'cleavable complex'.
先前的研究已表明DNA复制叉进展对于拓扑异构酶抑制剂的细胞毒性的重要性。然而,虽然得出结论认为移动的复制叉与药物稳定的拓扑异构酶I-DNA复合物之间的干扰对细胞死亡至关重要,但就拓扑异构酶II而言,仅提出了其对细胞杀伤的部分作用。我们研究了阿非迪霉素抑制DNA复制对拓扑异构酶抑制剂产生染色体畸变和姐妹染色单体交换的影响。我们的结果似乎表明,复制叉进展对于这两个细胞遗传学终点都是必需的。脉冲场凝胶电泳也在单独用m-AMSA处理有效诱导的DNA断裂(双链断裂)水平上证实了这一结论,但当存在阿非迪霉素时则不然。拓扑异构酶I和拓扑异构酶II抑制剂(分别为喜树碱和m-AMSA)之间发现的差异可以解释为它们在捕获“可切割复合物”方面的持久性不同。