Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Short Report
  • Published:

A role for mismatch repair in control of DNA ploidy following DNA damage

Abstract

Many reports have shown a link between mismatch repair (MMR) deficiency and loss of normal cell cycle control, particularly loss of G2 arrest. However almost all of these studies utilized transformed cell lines, and thus the involvement of other genes in this phenotype cannot be excluded. We have examined the effects of cisplatin treatment on primary embryo fibroblasts (MEFs) derived from mice in which the MMR gene Msh2 had been inactivated (Msh2−/−). This analysis determined that both primary Msh2−/− and wild type (WT) fibroblasts exhibited an essentially identical G2 arrest following cisplatin treatment. Similarly, we observed a cisplatin-induced G2 arrest in immortalized MMR deficient (Mlh1−/− and Pms2−/−) and WT MEFs. p53 deficient primary MEFs (p53−/−) exhibited both a clear G2 arrest and an increase in cells with a DNA content of 8N in response to cisplatin. When the Msh2 and p53 defects were combined (p53−/−/Msh2−/−) the G2 arrest was essentially identical to the p53−/− fibroblasts. However, the p53−/−/Msh2−/− fibroblasts demonstrated a further increase in cells with an 8N DNA content, above that seen in the p53−/− fibroblasts. These results suggest that loss of MMR on its own is not enough to overcome G2 arrest following exposure to cisplatin but does play a role in preventing polyploidization, or aberrant DNA reduplication, in the absence of functional p53.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Anthoney DA, McIlwrath AJ, Gallagher WM, Edlin ARM, Brown R . 1996 Cancer Res. 56: 1374–1381

  • Arzimanoglou II, Gilbert F, Barber HRK . 1998 Cancer 82: 1808–1820

  • Bates S, Vousden KH . 1996 Curr. Op. Genet. Dev. 6: 12–19

  • Brown R, Clugston C, Burns P, Edlin A, Vasey P, Vojtesek B, Kaye SB . 1993 Int. J. Cancer 55: 678–684

  • Brown R, Hirst GL, Gallagher WM, McIlwrath AJ, Margison GP, van der Zee AG, Anthoney DA . 1997 Oncogene 15: 45–52

  • Buermeyer AB, Deschenes SM, Baker SM, Liskay RM . 1999 Ann. Rev. Genet. 33: 533–564

  • Cranston A, Bocker T, Reitmair AH, Palazzo J, Wilson T, Mak TW, Fishel R . 1997 Nature Genet. 17: 114–118

  • Cross SM, Sanchez CA, Morgan CA, Schimke MK, Ramel S, Idzerda RL, Raskind WH, Reid BJ . 1995 Science 267: 1353–1356

  • Dasika GK, Lin SCJ, Zhao S, Sung P, Tomkinson A, Lee EYHP . 1999 Oncogene 18: 7883–7899

  • Davis TW, Wilson-Van Patten C, Meyers M, Kunugi KA, Cuthill S, Reznikoff C, Garces C, Boland CR, Kinsella TJ, Fishel R, Boothman DA . 1998 Cancer Res. 58: 767–778

  • Donehower LA, Godley LA, Aldaz CM, Pyle R, Shi YP, Pinkel D, Gray J, Bradley A, Medina D, Varmus HE . 1995 Genes Dev. 9: 882–895

  • Duckett DR, Bronstein SM, Taya Y, Modrich P . 1999 Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 96: 12384–12388

  • Dudenhoffer C, Rohaly G, Will K, Deppert W, Wiesmuller L . 1998 Molec. Cell. Biol. 18: 5332–5342

  • Durant S, Morris M, Illand M, Mackay HJ, McCormick C, Hirst GL, Borts RH, Brown R . 1999 Current Biol. 9: 51–54

  • El-Deiry WS, Tokino T, Velculescu VE, Levy DB, Parsons R, Trent JM, Lin D, Mercer WE, Kinzler KW, Vogelstein B . 1993 Cell 75: 817–825

  • Fink D, Aebi S, Howell SB . 1998 Clin. Cancer Res. 4: 1–6

  • Gong J, Costanzo A, Yang H, Melino G, Kaelin WG, Levrero M, Wang JYJ . 1999 Nature 399: 806–809

  • Hawn MT, Umar A, Carethers JM, Marra G, Kunkel TA, Boland CR, Koi M . 1995 Cancer Res. 55: 3721–3725

  • Hickman MJ, Samson LD . 1999 Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 96: 10764–10769

  • Keurbitz SJ, Plunkett BS, Walsh WV, Kastan MB . 1992 Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 89: 7491–7495

  • Koi M, Umar A, Chauhan DP, Cherian SP, Carethers JM, Kunkel TA, Boland CR . 1994 Cancer Res. 54: 4308–4312

  • Lee S, Elenbaas B, Levine A, Griffith J . 1995 Cell 81: 1013–1020

  • Nehme A, Baskaran R, Aebi S, Fink D, Nebel S, Cenni B, Wang JYJ, Howell SB, Christen RD . 1997 Cancer Res. 57: 3253–3257

  • Notterman D, Young S, Wainger B, Levine AJ . 1998 Oncogene 17: 2743–2751

  • Prolla TA, Baker SM, Harris AC, Tsao J, Yao X, Bronner CE, Zheng B, Gordon M, Reneker J, Arnheim N, Shibata D, Bradley A, Liskay RM . 1998 Nature Genet. 18: 276–279

  • Sugawara N, Paques F, Colaiacovo M, Haber JE . 1997 Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 94: 9214–9219

  • Toft NJ, Winton DJ, Kelly J, Howard LA, Dekker M, te Riele H, Arends MJ, Wyllie AH, Margison GP, Clarke AR . 1999 Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 96: 3911–3914

  • Tomlinson I, Bodmer W . 1999 Nature Med. 5: 11–12

Download references

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank Dr RM Liskay for the immortalized MEF cell lines. We would also like to thank Dr HT Riele for the Msh2 deficient mice. This work was supported by the Cancer Research Campaign (UK). AR Clarke is supported by the Royal Society.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Strathdee, G., Sansom, O., Sim, A. et al. A role for mismatch repair in control of DNA ploidy following DNA damage. Oncogene 20, 1923–1927 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.onc.1204276

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.onc.1204276

Keywords

This article is cited by

Search

Quick links