- Research article
- Open Access
Sodium butyrate enhances the cytotoxic effect of cisplatin by abrogating the cisplatin imposed cell cycle arrest
© Koprinarova et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2010
- Received: 16 November 2009
- Accepted: 24 June 2010
- Published: 24 June 2010
Histone deacetylase inhibitors have been proposed as potential enhancers of the cytotoxic effect of cisplatin and other anticancer drugs. Their application would permit the use of lower therapeutic doses and reduction of the adverse side effects of the drugs. However, the molecular mechanisms by which they sensitize the cells towards anticancer drugs are not known in details, which is an obstacle in developing effective therapeutic protocols.
In the present work, we studied the molecular mechanisms by which sodium butyrate sensitizes cancer cells towards cisplatin. HeLa cells were treated with 5 mM butyrate, with 8 μM cis-diaminedichloroplatinum II (cisplatin), or with both. Cells treated with both agents showed approximately two-fold increase of the mortality rate in comparison with cells treated with cisplatin only. Accordingly, the life span of albino mice transfected with Ehrlich ascites tumor was prolonged almost two-fold by treatment with cisplatin and butyrate in comparison with cisplatin alone. This showed that the observed synergism of cisplatin and butyrate was not limited to specific cell lines or in vitro protocols, but was also expressed in vivo during the process of tumor development. DNA labeling and fluorescence activated cell sorting experiments showed that cisplatin treatment inhibited DNA synthesis and arrested HeLa cells at the G1/S transition and early S phase of the cell cycle. Western blotting and chromatin immunoprecipitation revealed that this effect was accompanied with a decrease of histone H4 acetylation levels. Butyrate treatment initially reversed the effect of cisplatin by increasing the levels of histone H4 acetylation in euchromatin regions responsible for the G1/S phase transition and initiation of DNA synthesis. This abrogated the cisplatin imposed cell cycle arrest and the cells traversed S phase with damaged DNA. However, this effect was transient and continued only a few hours. The long-term effect of butyrate was a massive histone acetylation in both eu- and heterochromatin, inhibition of DNA replication and apoptosis.
The study presents evidence that cell sensitization towards cisplatin by sodium butyrate is due to hyperacetylation of histone H4 in specific chromatin regions, which temporarily abrogates the cisplatin imposed cell cycle arrest.
- HeLa Cell
- Histone Acetylation
- Sodium Butyrate
- Core Histone
Numerous reports in the recent years have described the anticancer effect of histone deacetylase inhibitors [1–3]. For the time being, it does not seem probable that they could be used in cancer therapy alone, but increasing body of evidence suggests that at least some could have a future in combination with different anticancer agents [4–6]. Sodium butyrate is the sodium salt of the butyric acid, which is a four carbon normal fatty acid and is a natural metabolite in many organisms including bacteria populating the gastrointestinal tract. Roles for butyrate have been established in a number of epigenetically controlled activities such as cell differentiation, proliferation, motility, induction of cell cycle arrest, apoptosis , and even in memory formation . However, the mechanisms by which butyrate suppresses growth and induces cellular differentiation or apoptosis are not known in details . Microarray assays of global gene expression profiles have shown that over 450 genes were significantly regulated by butyrate in bovine kidney epithelial cells. Most of them were down-regulated, but over 30 genes were up-regulated . Among the down-regulated genes were genes crucial for initiation of DNA synthesis such as MCM and Orc proteins, which are essential for the assembly of the prereplication complex. CDC2/Cdk1 and related cyclins were also down-regulated. On the other hand, genes related to apoptosis were up-regulated. In another assay over 10,000 genes were found responsive to butyrate regulation in human epithelial cells . Butyrate exerts several modulatory effects on nuclear proteins and DNA such as induction of histone acetylation and phosphorylation, and hypermethylation of cytosine residues in DNA . The steady state of histone acetylation is controlled by the equilibrium of two distinct families of enzymes, histone acetyltransferases (HATs) and histone deacetylases (HDACs). Since the early discovery of histone acetylation by Allfrey and colleagues , this posttranslational modification has been correlated with the processes of chromatin assembly and transcription . At present, it is well established that actively expressed genes are associated with hyperacetylated core histones, while repressed genes are associated with hypoacetylated histones . Activation and repression of different genes is achieved by changes of chromatin structure. Acetylation of core histones at specific lysine residues in the NH 2 -terminal tails leads to relaxation of the compact chromatin structure allowing transcriptional activators to access DNA . In addition, core histones associated with DNA replication origins are hypoacetylated when the origins are inactive but undergo hyperacetylation before their firing [17, 18]. Core histone acetylation and deacetylation are also associated with checkpoint activation and repression . However, recent reports have suggested that the relationship of chromatin function and histone acetylation could be more complex than the simple scheme in which acetylation means activity and deacetylation means inactivity. It has been shown that not the acetylation status, but rather acetylation turnover, which could be very rapid, is important [16, 20]. This might explain the results of microarray assays in which butyrate treatment, which caused global and permanent histone acetylation actually brought about repression of most of the genes assayed.
In the present paper, we have studied the sensitizing effect of the HDAC inhibitor sodium butyrate on HeLa cells towards cisplatin treatment. We have found that cisplatin arrested HeLa cells at the G1/S phase boundary and early S phase of the cell cycle and that this arrest was accompanied with reduction of histone H4 acetylation in chromatin. Butyrate treatment initially reversed the cisplatin-induced deacetylation of histone H4 in chromatin regions responsible for DNA synthesis, which led to abrogation of the cell cycle arrest. Thus by forcing the cells to traverse the S phase of the cell cycle with damaged DNA, butyrate enhanced the lethal effect of cisplatin. At later times butyrate treatment brought about massive hyperacetylation of total chromatin histone H4 and probably of all core histones and cessation of DNA synthesis.
Synergistic effect of butyrate and cisplatin on HeLa cells death rates
Synergistic effect of butyrate and cisplatin in vivo
Survival of mice tranfected with EAT and treated with butyrate, cisplatin and both.
10.8 ± 2.0
14.0 ± 4.5
12.0 ± 3.5
Cisplatin + Butyrate
19.0 ± 3.4
Effect of cisplatin and butyrate on the cell cycle
Effect of cisplatin and butyrate on DNA synthesis
Effect of cisplatin and butyrate on total histone H4 acetylation
Effect of cisplatin and butyrate on acetylation of histone H4 at specific chromatin regions
Cisplatin is an effective chemotherapeutic agent against a number of cancers such as head and neck cancer. Nevertheless, it exhibits two major drawbacks that limit its application in cancer therapy. These are its severe side effects and the rapid development of drug resistance . They are mutually connected because the adverse side effects do not permit the application of high enough doses and on the other hand, under-dosing leads to development of resistance of the cancer cells. For this reason, drugs that sensitize cancer cells towards cisplatin could increase its therapeutic efficacy. Butyrate and other HDAC inhibitors have shown such potential, but we still do not know the molecular mechanisms of this sensitization, which is an obstacle in designing effective therapeutic procedures. Here we have analyzed the mechanism by which butyrate sensitizes HeLa cells towards the action of cisplatin. We examined the effects of butyrate and cisplatin on DNA replication and on the acetylation of histone H4 in eu- and heterochromatin. Our results showed that cisplatin treatment inhibited DNA synthesis and arrested HeLa cells at the G1/S transition and early S phase of the cell cycle. This effect was accompanied with hypoacetylation of the core histone H4 in both eu- and heterochromatin. On the other hand, butyrate exhibited two different effects on HeLa cells, which could be arbitrarily designated as short-term and long-term effects. The short-term effect, which occurred during the first 4-6 hours, was characterized by hyperacetylation of histone H4 and probably of other core histones in euchromatin regions associated with specific DNA sequences responsible for the G1/S phase transition and DNA replication. This effect overruled the cisplatin imposed block on DNA replication and the cells traversed the S phase with damaged DNA. Due to this effect in the early hours of its application, butyrate enhanced the cisplatin cytotoxic effect. During the second phase, butyrate caused indiscriminate hyperacetylation of core histones including those in heterochromatin, and probably other proteins, which led to inhibition of DNA synthesis, down-regulation of genes connected with cell cycle progression and triggered apoptosis. These results are in agreement with other reports showing that the effect of butyrate is time dependent. It has been shown that in the first hours after butyrate treatment cellular histone deacetylases are inhibited, core histones are hyperacetylated and many genes that have been repressed are activated. Later on irreversible changes connected with the expression of p21, Rb, Id1 and other regulatory genes take place leading to cell cycle arrest in G1 and G0, to terminal differentiation and finally to apoptosis [4, 21].
The approach to sensitize cells towards the action of anticancer drugs by abrogation of the cell cycle checkpoints has already been applied - by inhibition or knock down of the checkpoint kinases Chk1, Chk2, or MK2 [34–36]. Other authors have tried to knock out, or knock down key regulatory proteins such as Rb, p53, p21, etc [27, 28]. The knock out of Rb leads to a 2-fold increase of the lethal effect of cisplatin both in vivo and in vitro. Rb is a crucial player in the G1 state maintenance by preventing hyperacetylation of core histones at genes important for DNA replication. Its absence or inactivation permits their acetylation and ensures the G1/S transition. Our results are in agreement with these findings showing that the acetylation status of the core histones is important for cell cycle signaling. Thus, it seems logical to suggest that the mechanism by which butyrate, a potent HDAC inhibitor, sensitized the cells towards cisplatin was associated with hyperacetylation of core histones and abrogation of the cisplatin imposed cell cycle arrest.
The data presented here underlie both the importance of timing and the limitations of the combined application of cisplatin and butyrate in cancer treatment. Our results are in agreement with the finding that when butyrate is applied simultaneously with, or after cisplatin, the synergistic effect is stronger than when butyrate is applied first . They also show that there is a specific a few hours window after butyrate administration during which it could sensitize the cells towards the action of cisplatin and that outside this window, butyrate would have little or no effect as enhancer.
In this paper, we investigated the molecular mechanisms through which butyrate sensitized cells towards cisplatin. We showed that cisplatin arrests HeLa cells at the G1/S transition and early S phase, which is accompanied with reduction of histone H4 acetylation. Initially butyrate reverses this effect and by increasing histone H4 acetylation in euchromatin regions permits the cells to traverse S phase with damaged DNA. This increased the cell mortality thus enhancing the cytotoxic effect of cisplatin. Later, butyrate itself caused a G1 phase arrest and its synergistic effect decreased. This finding indicates both the importance of timing and the limitations of the combined application of cisplatin and butyrate in cancer treatment. A conclusion is drawn that i) butyrate can enhance the cytotoxic effect of cisplatin only if applied simultaneously, or shortly after it, and ii) the period during which butyrate enhances cisplatin cytotoxicity is limited to the first few hours of its application.
Cells and treatment
Human HeLa cells (obtained from the American Type Culture Collection) were cultured in monolayer in D-MEM with 10% foetal bovine serum supplemented with antibiotics in 5% CO2 atmosphere. The cell cycle distribution was determined by fluorescence activated cell sorting (FACS) analysis. The cells were washed with phosphate buffered saline (PBS), pH 7.4, fixed in 70% ethanol overnight and collected by centrifugation at 1000 × g for 10 min. They were resuspended in PBS, treated with 20 μg/mL RNase for 30 min at 37°C and stained with 20 μg/mL propidium iodide at room temperature for 90 min. 2 × 104 cells/sample were analyzed with a Becton Dickinson (Facscalibur) cell sorter, using CellQuest software (Becton Dickinson).
Fresh stock solutions of 1 mg/mL of cis-diaminedichloroplatinum II (cisplatin) (Sopharma, Sofia, Bulgaria) in PBS and 1 M sodium butyrate were added to the cell cultures to the desired final concentrations and the cells were further cultured for the specified periods. For labeling of DNA, 3H-thymidine with specific radioactivity of 37 MBq/mL (GE Healthcare, Amersham) was used. After the labeling period, cells were washed with PBS, precipitated in ice-cold 15% trichloroacetyc acid (TCA), retained on glass fiber filters (GF/C, Millipore), washed with ice-cold 5% TCA and counted with a Beckmann LS 1801 scintillation counter. Death cells were determined after staining with 1% Trypan blue for 10 min.
Three month-old ICR albino mice weighing 20 g were injected intraperitoneally with 0.3 mL (107 cells) undiluted ascites liquid of Ehrlich-Lettre hyperdiploid ascites tumor. 24 hours later groups of 5 animals received intraperitoneally either 5 mg/kg (100 μl of stock solution containing 1 mg/mL cisplatin in PBS) cisplatin, or 166 mg/kg (100 μl of 0.3 M stock solution of sodium butyrate in 0.14 M NaCl) sodium butyrate, or both. Mice were kept on standard laboratory diet. The time of death of each animal was recorded and the mean life spans and the standard deviations were calculated. Differences between control group and the experimental groups were estimated using Student's t test. A probability level of 0.05 was chosen for statistical significance. The experiments were performed in accordance with the guide for Care and Use of Laboratory Animals, a work permission №11130007 of the Institute of Experimental Pathology and Parasitology, Bulgarian Academy of Sciences.
HeLa cells were crosslinked with formaldehyde and then sonicated with Branson sonifier cell disrupter, 70% duty cycle, 15 s pulses, 3 pulses with 1 min intervals between pulses, on ice, to obtain DNA fragments with average length of 200-500 bp. Aliquots were withdrawn for input DNA preparations and the rest of the samples were immunoprecipitated with anti-acetylated histone H4 antibody kit (Upstate Biotech) as recommended by the manufacturer. Formaldehyde crosslinks were removed at 65°C for 4 hours and DNA was isolated by phenol/chloroform extraction and ethanol precipitation.
PCR and gel electrophoresis
The DNA sequences were amplified by 33 PCR cycles using the following primers: c-myc-ori (1829-1891) forward: CGCGCCCATTAATACCCTT, reverse: AGGGCCGCGCTTTGA; c-myc gene (4488-4552) forward: TTGTGTGCCCCGCTCC, reverse: TTCCTGTTGGTGAAGCTAA; globin-G gene (33029-133107) forward: TTTAACTTCCAAAGAACAAGTGC, reverse: GCGGCTAAAAGACCAGA; β-globin ori (62073-62147) forward: CAGGAGCAGGGAGGGCAGGA, reverse: GAAGCAAATGTAAGCAATAGATGG. The numbers in the brackets indicate the positions of the corresponding sequence-tagged sites (STS) in GenBank . The PCR products were run on 2.5% agarose gels and stained with ethidium bromide. Gels were scanned and quantified with Gel-Pro Analyzer 3.1 software.
Cells were washed twice with PBS, lysed in 0.5% TritonX-100 in PBS and the crude nuclear fraction recovered by centrifugation. Total histone was isolated by extraction with 0.2 N HCl for 2 hours in the cold. Protein concentrations were determined spectrophotometrically at 280 nm and 20 μg of protein of each sample were fractionated by 15% SDS-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis. Histones were transferred to nitrocellulose Hybond-C membrane (GE Healthcare, Amersham) using Towbin transfer buffer (25 mM Tris-HCl, 192 mM glycine pH 8.6, 20% methanol, 1% SDS). After blocking in Odyssey blocking buffer (LI-COR Biosciences), the membranes were incubated with rabbit antibody to acetylated H4 (Upstate, diluted 1:2000), washed with TBS (50 mM Tris-HCl, 150 mM NaCl, pH 7.4) containing 0.01% Tween 20, incubated with Odyssey goat anti-rabbit secondary antibody (LI-COR Biosciences), washed with TBS with 0.01% Tween 20, and visualized and quantified by the Odyssey scanning system. Membranes were stained with Ponceau S to determine the amount of histone H4.
This work was funded by the Bulgarian NSF, grant Do02-232 to G.R.
- Takai N, Desmond JC, Kumagai T, Gui D, Said JW, Whittaker S, Miyakawa I, Koeffler HP: Histone deacetylase inhibitors have profound antigrowth activity in endometrial cancer cells. Clin Cancer Res 2004, 10: 1141-9. 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-03-0100 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-03-0100View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Taddei A, Roche D, Bickmore WA, Almouzni G: The effect of histone deacetylase inhibitors on heterochromatin: implications for anticancer therapy? EMBO Rep 2005, 6: 520-4. 10.1038/sj.embor.7400441 10.1038/sj.embor.7400441View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
- Smith KT, Workman J: Histone deacetylase inhibitors: Anticancer compounds. Int J Biochem & Cell Biol 2009, 41: 21-25.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Wang D, Wang Z, Tian B, Li X, Li S, Tian Y: Two hour exposure to sodium butyrate sensitizes bladder cancer cells to anticancer drugs. Int J Urol 2008, 15: 435-41. 10.1111/j.1442-2042.2008.02025.x 10.1111/j.1442-2042.2008.02025.xView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Lee SK, Kim SB, Kim SS, Moon CH, Han MS, Lee BS, Chung DK, Min JP, Park JH, Choi DH, Cho HR, Park SK, Park JW: Butyrate response factor 1 enhances cisplatin sensitivity in human head and neck squamous cell carcinoma cell lines. Int J Cancer 2005, 117: 32-40. 10.1002/ijc.21133 10.1002/ijc.21133View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Sato T, Suzuki M, Sato Y, Echigo S, Rikishi H: Sequence dependent interaction between cisplatin and histone deacetylase inhibitors in human oral squamous cell carcinoma cells. Int J Oncol 2006, 28: 1233-41.PubMedGoogle Scholar
- Mühlethaler-Mottet A, Meier R, Flahaut M, Bourloud KB, Nardou K, Joseph JM, Gross N: Complex molecular mechanisms cooperate to mediate histone deacetylase inhibitors anti-tumor activity in neuroblastoma cells. BMC Mol Cancer 2008, 7: 55. 10.1186/1476-4598-7-55 10.1186/1476-4598-7-55View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Guan JS, Haggarty SJ, Giacometti E, Dannenberg JH, Joseph N, Gao J, Nieland TJF, Zhou Y, Wang X, Mazitschek R, Bradner JE, DePinho RA, Jaenish R, Tsai LH: HDAC2 negatively regulates memory formation and synaptic plasticity. Nature 2009, 7243: 55-60. 10.1038/nature07925 10.1038/nature07925View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Xu WS, Parmigiani RB, Marks PA: Histone deacetylase inhibitors: molecular mechanism of action. Oncogene 2007, 26: 5541-52. 10.1038/sj.onc.1210620 10.1038/sj.onc.1210620View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Li RW, Li C: Butyrate induces profound changes in gene expression related to multiple single pathways in bovine kidney epithelial cells. BMC Genomics 2006, 7: 234. 10.1186/1471-2164-7-234 10.1186/1471-2164-7-234View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
- Daly K, Shirazi-Beechey SP: Microarray analysis of butyrate regulated genes in colonic epithelial cells. DNA Cell Biol 2006, 25: 49-62. 10.1089/dna.2006.25.49 10.1089/dna.2006.25.49View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Dokmanovic M, Clarke K, Marks P: Histone deacetylase inhibitors: Overview and perspectives. Mol Cancer Res 2007, 5: 981-989. 10.1158/1541-7786.MCR-07-0324 10.1158/1541-7786.MCR-07-0324View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Ruiz-Garrillo A, Wangh LJ, Allfrey VG: Processing of newly synthesized histone molecules. Science 1975, 190: 117-28. 10.1126/science.1166303 10.1126/science.1166303View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Benson L, Gu Y, Yakovleva T, Tong K, Barrows C, Stark CL, Cook RG, Mizzen CA, Annunziato A: Modification of H3 and H4 during chromatin replication, nucleosome assembly, and histone exchange. J Biol Chem 2006, 281: 9287-96. 10.1074/jbc.M512956200 10.1074/jbc.M512956200View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Lee KK, Workman JL: Histone acetyltransferase complexes: one size doesn't fit all. Nature/reviews/ 2007, 8: 284-94.Google Scholar
- Waterborg JH: Dynamics of histone acetylation in vivo. A function for acetylation turnover? Biochim Cell Biol 2002, 80: 363-78. 10.1139/o02-080 10.1139/o02-080View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Kemp MG, Ghosh M, Liu G, Leffak M: The histone deacetylase inhibitor trichostatin A alters the pattern of DNA replication origin activity in human cells. Nucl Acid Res 2005, 33: 325-36. 10.1093/nar/gki177 10.1093/nar/gki177View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Koprinarova M, Russev G: Dynamics of histone H4 acetylation during the cell cycle. Cell Cycle 2008, 7: 414-6. 10.4161/cc.7.3.5314 10.4161/cc.7.3.5314View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Koprinarova M, Russev G: Histone H4 acetylation during UV light induced G1 and S phase arrest of cell cycle. Cell Cycle 2008, 7: 1496-8. 10.4161/cc.7.3.5314 10.4161/cc.7.3.5314View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Katan-Khayakovich Y, Struhl K: Dynamics of global histone acetylation and deacetylation in vivo: rapid restoration of normal histone acetylation status upon removal of activators and repressors. Genes Dev 2002, 16: 743-52. 10.1101/gad.967302 10.1101/gad.967302View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Wu JT, Archer SY, Hinnebusch B, Meng S, Hodin RA: Transient vs. prolonged histone hyperacetylation: effects on colon cancer cell growth, differentiation and apoptosis. Am J Physiol Gastrointest Liver Physiol 2001, 280: G482-90.PubMedGoogle Scholar
- Marzano C, Bettio F, Baccichetti F, Trevisan A, Giovagnini L, Fregona D: Antitumor activity of a new platinum(II) complex with low nephrotoxicity and genotoxicity. Chem Biol Ineract 2004, 148: 37-48. 10.1016/j.cbi.2004.04.002 10.1016/j.cbi.2004.04.002View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Belakavadi M, Prabhakar BT, Salimath BP: Butyrate-induced proapoptotic and antiangiogenic pathways in EAT cells require activation of CAD and downregulation of VEGF. Biochem Biophys Res Commun 2005, 335: 993-1001. 10.1016/j.bbrc.2005.07.172 10.1016/j.bbrc.2005.07.172View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Pal S, Sadhu AS, Patra S, Mukherjea KK: Histological vis-à-vis biochemical assessment on the toxic level and antineoplastic efficacy of a synthetic drug Pt-ATP on experimental animal models. J Exp Clin Cancer Res 2008, 12: 27-68.Google Scholar
- Ishibashi T, Lippard SJ: Telomere loss in cells treated with cisplatin. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 1998, 95: 4219-23. 10.1073/pnas.95.8.4219 10.1073/pnas.95.8.4219View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
- Un F: G1 arrest induction represents a critical determinant for cisplatin cytotoxicity in G1 checkpoint-retaining human cancers. Anticancer Drugs 2007, 18: 411-7. 10.1097/CAD.0b013e32801429ed 10.1097/CAD.0b013e32801429edView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Bosco EE, Wang Y, Xu H, Zilfou JT, Knudsen KE, Arnow BJ, Lowe SW, Knudsen ES: The retinoblastoma tumor suppressor modifies the therapeutic response to breast cancer. J Clin Invest 2007, 117: 218-28. 10.1172/JCI28803 10.1172/JCI28803View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
- Zagorski WA, Knudsen ES, Reed MF: Retinoblastoma deficiency increases chemosensitivity in lung cancer. Cancer Res 2007, 67: 8264-73. 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-06-4753 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-06-4753View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Abramova MV, Pospelova TV, Nikulenkov FP, Hollander CM, Fornace AJ Jr, Pospelov VA: G1/S arrest induced by histone deacetylase inhibitor sodium butyrate in E1A+Ras transformed cells is mediated through down-regulation of E2F activity and stabilization of β-catenin. J Biol Chem 2006, 281: 0-51. 10.1074/jbc.M511059200 10.1074/jbc.M511059200View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Li CJ, Elsasser TH: Butyrate induced apoptosis and cell cycle arrest in bovine kidney epithelial cells: Involvement of caspase and proteasome pathways. J Animal Sci 2005, 83: 89-97.Google Scholar
- Tsvetkov L, Russev G: Decreased rates of replicon initiation in mammalian cells. Eur J Biochem 1996, 237: 489-495. 10.1111/j.1432-1033.1996.0489k.x 10.1111/j.1432-1033.1996.0489k.xView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Fathallah H, Portonoy G, Atweh GF: Epigenetic analysis of human alpha- and beta-globin gene clusters. Blood Cells Mol Dis 2008, 40: 166-73. 10.1016/j.bcmd.2007.08.001 10.1016/j.bcmd.2007.08.001View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
- Kartalou M, Essigmann JM: Mechanisms of resistance to cisplatin. Mutat Res 2001, 478: 23-43.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Jack MT, Woo RA, Hirao A, Cheung A, Mark TW, Lee PW: Chk2 is dispensable for p53-mediated G1 arrest but is required for a latent p53-mediated apoptotic response. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2002, 99: 9825-9. 10.1073/pnas.152053599 10.1073/pnas.152053599View ArticlePubMedPubMed CentralGoogle Scholar
- Carrassa L, Broggini M, Erba E, Damis G: Chk1, but not Chk2, is involved in the cellular response to DNA damaging agents: differential activity in cells expressing or not p53. Cell Cycle 2004, 3: 1177-81.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
- Xiao Z, Xue J, Sowin TJ, Zhang H: Differential role of checkpoint kinase 1 checkpoint kinase 2 and mitogen-activated protein kinase-activated protein kinase 2 in mediating DNA damage-induced cell cycle arrest: implication for cancer therapy. Mol Cancer Ther 2006, 5: 1935-43. 10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-06-0077 10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-06-0077View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.