Involvement of nucleic acid synthesis in cell killing mechanisms of topoisomerase poisons

Peter D'Arpa, Christopher Beardmore, Leroy-Fong Liu

研究成果: 雜誌貢獻文章

411 引文 (Scopus)

摘要

The primary cytotoxic mechanism of camptothecin has been proposed to involve an interaction between the replication machinery and the camptothecin-mediated topoisomerase I-DNA cleavable complex (Y. H. Hsiang, M. G. Lihou, and L. F. Liu, Cancer Res., 49: 5077-5082, 1989). In the present study, we show that killing of V79 cells by the topoisomerase II poisons 4′-(9-acridinylamino)methanesulfon-m-anisidide (m-AMSA) and etoposide may involve ongoing RNA synthesis in addition to ongoing DNA synthesis. V79 cells synchronized by mitotic shake-off were treated with topoisomerase poisons in the presence of inhibitors of nucleic acid synthesis. S-Phase V79 cells were more sensitive to the topoisomerase I poison camptothecin and the topoisomerase II poison m-AMSA than G1-phase cells. The greater sensitivity of S-phase cells to killing by m-AMSA and camptothecin was abolished during cotreatment, but not posttreatment, with aphidicolin, suggesting that ongoing DNA synthesis is involved in cell killing by both topoisomerase I and II poisons. Cotreatment with transcription inhibitors, such as 5,6-dichloro-1-β-D-ribofuranosyl benzimidazole or cordycepin, partially protected cells from the cytotoxic effects of m-AMSA but had no effect on camptothecin-mediated cytotoxicity. These results suggest that ongoing RNA transcription may be involved in cell killing by topoisomerase II poisons but not topoisomerase I poisons. Cotreatment with camptothecin reduced m-AMSA-mediated cytotoxicity in G1-phase V79 cells, suggesting a possible antagonism between topoisomerase I and II poisons. This antagonistic effect between topoisomerase I and II poisons could be explained by the strong inhibitory effect of camptothecin on RNA transcription.

原文英語
頁(從 - 到)6919-6924
頁數6
期刊Cancer Research
50
發行號21
出版狀態已發佈 - 十一月 1 1990
對外發佈Yes

指紋

Poisons
Camptothecin
Nucleic Acids
Type II DNA Topoisomerase
Type I DNA Topoisomerase
Amsacrine
G1 Phase
RNA
S Phase
Aphidicolin
Nucleic Acid Synthesis Inhibitors
DNA
Etoposide

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Cancer Research
  • Oncology

引用此文

Involvement of nucleic acid synthesis in cell killing mechanisms of topoisomerase poisons. / D'Arpa, Peter; Beardmore, Christopher; Liu, Leroy-Fong.

於: Cancer Research, 卷 50, 編號 21, 01.11.1990, p. 6919-6924.

研究成果: 雜誌貢獻文章

D'Arpa, Peter ; Beardmore, Christopher ; Liu, Leroy-Fong. / Involvement of nucleic acid synthesis in cell killing mechanisms of topoisomerase poisons. 於: Cancer Research. 1990 ; 卷 50, 編號 21. 頁 6919-6924.
@article{72857bcd90c24bbcbe0b182c06608f75,
title = "Involvement of nucleic acid synthesis in cell killing mechanisms of topoisomerase poisons",
abstract = "The primary cytotoxic mechanism of camptothecin has been proposed to involve an interaction between the replication machinery and the camptothecin-mediated topoisomerase I-DNA cleavable complex (Y. H. Hsiang, M. G. Lihou, and L. F. Liu, Cancer Res., 49: 5077-5082, 1989). In the present study, we show that killing of V79 cells by the topoisomerase II poisons 4′-(9-acridinylamino)methanesulfon-m-anisidide (m-AMSA) and etoposide may involve ongoing RNA synthesis in addition to ongoing DNA synthesis. V79 cells synchronized by mitotic shake-off were treated with topoisomerase poisons in the presence of inhibitors of nucleic acid synthesis. S-Phase V79 cells were more sensitive to the topoisomerase I poison camptothecin and the topoisomerase II poison m-AMSA than G1-phase cells. The greater sensitivity of S-phase cells to killing by m-AMSA and camptothecin was abolished during cotreatment, but not posttreatment, with aphidicolin, suggesting that ongoing DNA synthesis is involved in cell killing by both topoisomerase I and II poisons. Cotreatment with transcription inhibitors, such as 5,6-dichloro-1-β-D-ribofuranosyl benzimidazole or cordycepin, partially protected cells from the cytotoxic effects of m-AMSA but had no effect on camptothecin-mediated cytotoxicity. These results suggest that ongoing RNA transcription may be involved in cell killing by topoisomerase II poisons but not topoisomerase I poisons. Cotreatment with camptothecin reduced m-AMSA-mediated cytotoxicity in G1-phase V79 cells, suggesting a possible antagonism between topoisomerase I and II poisons. This antagonistic effect between topoisomerase I and II poisons could be explained by the strong inhibitory effect of camptothecin on RNA transcription.",
author = "Peter D'Arpa and Christopher Beardmore and Leroy-Fong Liu",
year = "1990",
month = "11",
day = "1",
language = "English",
volume = "50",
pages = "6919--6924",
journal = "Cancer Research",
issn = "0008-5472",
publisher = "American Association for Cancer Research Inc.",
number = "21",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Involvement of nucleic acid synthesis in cell killing mechanisms of topoisomerase poisons

AU - D'Arpa, Peter

AU - Beardmore, Christopher

AU - Liu, Leroy-Fong

PY - 1990/11/1

Y1 - 1990/11/1

N2 - The primary cytotoxic mechanism of camptothecin has been proposed to involve an interaction between the replication machinery and the camptothecin-mediated topoisomerase I-DNA cleavable complex (Y. H. Hsiang, M. G. Lihou, and L. F. Liu, Cancer Res., 49: 5077-5082, 1989). In the present study, we show that killing of V79 cells by the topoisomerase II poisons 4′-(9-acridinylamino)methanesulfon-m-anisidide (m-AMSA) and etoposide may involve ongoing RNA synthesis in addition to ongoing DNA synthesis. V79 cells synchronized by mitotic shake-off were treated with topoisomerase poisons in the presence of inhibitors of nucleic acid synthesis. S-Phase V79 cells were more sensitive to the topoisomerase I poison camptothecin and the topoisomerase II poison m-AMSA than G1-phase cells. The greater sensitivity of S-phase cells to killing by m-AMSA and camptothecin was abolished during cotreatment, but not posttreatment, with aphidicolin, suggesting that ongoing DNA synthesis is involved in cell killing by both topoisomerase I and II poisons. Cotreatment with transcription inhibitors, such as 5,6-dichloro-1-β-D-ribofuranosyl benzimidazole or cordycepin, partially protected cells from the cytotoxic effects of m-AMSA but had no effect on camptothecin-mediated cytotoxicity. These results suggest that ongoing RNA transcription may be involved in cell killing by topoisomerase II poisons but not topoisomerase I poisons. Cotreatment with camptothecin reduced m-AMSA-mediated cytotoxicity in G1-phase V79 cells, suggesting a possible antagonism between topoisomerase I and II poisons. This antagonistic effect between topoisomerase I and II poisons could be explained by the strong inhibitory effect of camptothecin on RNA transcription.

AB - The primary cytotoxic mechanism of camptothecin has been proposed to involve an interaction between the replication machinery and the camptothecin-mediated topoisomerase I-DNA cleavable complex (Y. H. Hsiang, M. G. Lihou, and L. F. Liu, Cancer Res., 49: 5077-5082, 1989). In the present study, we show that killing of V79 cells by the topoisomerase II poisons 4′-(9-acridinylamino)methanesulfon-m-anisidide (m-AMSA) and etoposide may involve ongoing RNA synthesis in addition to ongoing DNA synthesis. V79 cells synchronized by mitotic shake-off were treated with topoisomerase poisons in the presence of inhibitors of nucleic acid synthesis. S-Phase V79 cells were more sensitive to the topoisomerase I poison camptothecin and the topoisomerase II poison m-AMSA than G1-phase cells. The greater sensitivity of S-phase cells to killing by m-AMSA and camptothecin was abolished during cotreatment, but not posttreatment, with aphidicolin, suggesting that ongoing DNA synthesis is involved in cell killing by both topoisomerase I and II poisons. Cotreatment with transcription inhibitors, such as 5,6-dichloro-1-β-D-ribofuranosyl benzimidazole or cordycepin, partially protected cells from the cytotoxic effects of m-AMSA but had no effect on camptothecin-mediated cytotoxicity. These results suggest that ongoing RNA transcription may be involved in cell killing by topoisomerase II poisons but not topoisomerase I poisons. Cotreatment with camptothecin reduced m-AMSA-mediated cytotoxicity in G1-phase V79 cells, suggesting a possible antagonism between topoisomerase I and II poisons. This antagonistic effect between topoisomerase I and II poisons could be explained by the strong inhibitory effect of camptothecin on RNA transcription.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0025133118&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0025133118&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

C2 - 1698546

AN - SCOPUS:0025133118

VL - 50

SP - 6919

EP - 6924

JO - Cancer Research

JF - Cancer Research

SN - 0008-5472

IS - 21

ER -