Review Article | Published:

The control of DNA repair by the cell cycle

Nature Cell Biology volume 19, pages 19 (2017) | Download Citation

Abstract

The correct duplication and transmission of genetic material to daughter cells is the primary objective of the cell division cycle. DNA replication and chromosome segregation present both challenges and opportunities for DNA repair pathways that safeguard genetic information. As a consequence, there is a profound, two-way connection between DNA repair and cell cycle control. Here, we review how DNA repair processes, and DNA double-strand break repair in particular, are regulated during the cell cycle to optimize genomic integrity.

Access optionsAccess options

Rent or Buy article

Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.

from$8.99

All prices are NET prices.

References

  1. 1.

    & The DNA-damage response in human biology and disease. Nature 461, 1071–1078 (2009).

  2. 2.

    & The Cell Cycle: An Introduction (Freeman, 1993).

  3. 3.

    & Microhomology-mediated end joining: a back-up survival mechanism or dedicated pathway? Trends Biochem. Sci. 40, 701–714 (2015).

  4. 4.

    The mechanism of double-strand DNA break repair by the nonhomologous DNA end-joining pathway. Annu. Rev. Biochem. 79, 181–211 (2010).

  5. 5.

    , & Is non-homologous end-joining really an inherently error-prone process? PLoS Genet. 10, e1004086 (2014).

  6. 6.

    et al. Essential roles for polymerase theta-mediated end joining in the repair of chromosome breaks. Mol. Cell 63, 662–673 (2016).

  7. 7.

    et al. Mammalian polymerase theta promotes alternative NHEJ and suppresses recombination. Nature 518, 254–257 (2015).

  8. 8.

    et al. Homologous-recombination-deficient tumours are dependent on Polθ-mediated repair. Nature 518, 258–262 (2015).

  9. 9.

    & Noncanonical views of homology-directed DNA repair. Genes Dev. 30, 1138–1154 (2016).

  10. 10.

    et al. Analysis of mouse Rad54 expression and its implications for homologous recombination. DNA Repair 1, 779–793 (2002).

  11. 11.

    & Double-strand break end resection and repair pathway choice. Annu. Rev. Genet. 45, 247–271 (2011).

  12. 12.

    et al. Human CtIP promotes DNA end resection. Nature 450, 509–514 (2007).

  13. 13.

    & Sae2 promotes dsDNA endonuclease activity within Mre11-Rad50-Xrs2 to resect DNA breaks. Nature 514, 122–125 (2014).

  14. 14.

    , , & Bidirectional resection of DNA double-strand breaks by Mre11 and Exo1. Nature 479, 241–244 (2011).

  15. 15.

    et al. DNA double-strand break repair pathway choice is directed by distinct MRE11 nuclease activities. Mol. Cell 53, 7–18 (2014).

  16. 16.

    et al. BLM-DNA2-RPA-MRN and EXO1-BLM-RPA-MRN constitute two DNA end resection machineries for human DNA break repair. Genes Dev. 25, 350–362 (2011).

  17. 17.

    , & PALB2: the hub of a network of tumor suppressors involved in DNA damage responses. Biochim. Biophys. 1846, 263–275 (2014).

  18. 18.

    , & BRCA1 and BRCA2: different roles in a common pathway of genome protection. Nat. Rev. Cancer 12, 68–78 (2011).

  19. 19.

    , , , & Rmi1 stimulates decatenation of double Holliday junctions during dissolution by Sgs1-Top3. Nat. Struct. Mol. Biol. 17, 1377–1382 (2010).

  20. 20.

    & The Bloom's syndrome helicase suppresses crossing over during homologous recombination. Nature 426, 870–874 (2003).

  21. 21.

    , , , & Srs2 and Sgs1-Top3 suppress crossovers during double-strand break repair in yeast. Cell 115, 401–411 (2003).

  22. 22.

    & Bloom's syndrome and EM9 cells in BrdU-containing medium exhibit similarly elevated frequencies of sister chromatid exchange but dissimilar amounts of cellular proliferation and chromosome disruption. Chromosoma 90, 383–388 (1984).

  23. 23.

    , , & Coordinated actions of SLX1-SLX4 and MUS81-EME1 for Holliday junction resolution in human cells. Mol. Cell 52, 234–247 (2013).

  24. 24.

    , , & Interplay between Ku and replication protein A in the restriction of Exo1-mediated DNA break end resection. J. Biol. Chem. 290, 18806–18816 (2015).

  25. 25.

    & Double-strand break end resection and repair pathway choice. Annu. Rev. Genet. 45, 247–271 (2011).

  26. 26.

    et al. Homologous recombination and non-homologous end-joining pathways of DNA double-strand break repair have overlapping roles in the maintenance of chromosomal integrity in vertebrate cells. EMBO J. 17, 5497–5508 (1998).

  27. 27.

    , , , & The Saccharomyces cerevisiae Ku autoantigen homologue affects radiosensitivity only in the absence of homologous recombination. Genetics 142, 91–102 (1996).

  28. 28.

    , , , & Ku DNA end-binding protein modulates homologous repair of double-strand breaks in mammalian cells. Genes Dev. 15, 3237–3242 (2001).

  29. 29.

    et al. Characterization of homologous recombination induced by replication inhibition in mammalian cells. EMBO J. 20, 3861–3870 (2001).

  30. 30.

    & Transient stability of DNA ends allows nonhomologous end joining to precede homologous recombination. Mol. Cell 10, 1189–1199 (2002).

  31. 31.

    et al. DNA end resection, homologous recombination and DNA damage checkpoint activation require CDK1. Nature 431, 1011–1017 (2004).

  32. 32.

    , & The CDK regulates repair of double-strand breaks by homologous recombination during the cell cycle. EMBO J. 23, 4868–4875 (2004).

  33. 33.

    et al. ATM- and cell cycle-dependent regulation of ATR in response to DNA double-strand breaks. Nat. Cell Biol. 8, 37–45 (2006).

  34. 34.

    , , , & CDK targets Sae2 to control DNA-end resection and homologous recombination. Nature 455, 689–692 (2008).

  35. 35.

    et al. Enrichment of Cdk1-cyclins at DNA double-strand breaks stimulates Fun30 phosphorylation and DNA end resection. Nucleic Acids Res. 44, 2742–2753 (2016).

  36. 36.

    et al. Functional interplay between the 53BP1-ortholog Rad9 and the Mre11 complex regulates resection, end-tethering and repair of a double-strand break. PLoS Genet. 11, e1004928 (2015).

  37. 37.

    & Human CtIP mediates cell cycle control of DNA end resection and double strand break repair. J. Biol. Chem. 284, 9558–9565 (2009).

  38. 38.

    & CtIP: a DNA damage response protein at the intersection of DNA metabolism. DNA Repair 32, 75–81 (2015).

  39. 39.

    et al. The interaction of CtIP and Nbs1 connects CDK and ATM to regulate HR-mediated double-strand break repair. PLoS Genet. 9, e1003277 (2013).

  40. 40.

    , , , & The C-terminal (BRCT) domains of BRCA1 interact in vivo with CtIP, a protein implicated in the CtBP pathway of transcriptional repression. J. Biol. Chem. 273, 25388–25392 (1998).

  41. 41.

    & DNA damage-induced cell cycle checkpoint control requires CtIP, a phosphorylation-dependent binding partner of BRCA1 C-terminal domains. Mol. Cell Biol. 24, 9478–9486 (2004).

  42. 42.

    , , , & Genetic steps of mammalian homologous repair with distinct mutagenic consequences. Mol. Cell Biol. 24, 9305–9316 (2004).

  43. 43.

    , & BRCA1 promotes induction of ssDNA by ionizing radiation. Cancer Res. 66, 5181–5189 (2006).

  44. 44.

    , & BRCA1 accelerates CtIP-mediated DNA-end resection. Cell Rep. 9, 451–459 (2014).

  45. 45.

    et al. Prolyl isomerase PIN1 regulates DNA double-strand break repair by counteracting DNA end resection. Mol. Cell 50, 333–343 (2013).

  46. 46.

    et al. A mechanism for the suppression of homologous recombination in G1 cells. Nature 528, 422–426 (2015).

  47. 47.

    et al. Polo-like kinase 3 regulates CtIP during DNA double-strand break repair in G1. J. Cell Biol. 206, 877–894 (2014).

  48. 48.

    et al. Phosphorylation of EXO1 by CDKs 1 and 2 regulates DNA end resection and repair pathway choice. Nat. Commun. 5, 3561 (2014).

  49. 49.

    et al. Chemical genetics reveals a specific requirement for Cdk2 activity in the DNA damage response and identifies Nbs1 as a Cdk2 substrate in human cells. PLoS Genet. 8, e1002935 (2012).

  50. 50.

    et al. CDK targeting of NBS1 promotes DNA-end resection, replication restart and homologous recombination. EMBO Rep. 13, 561–568 (2012).

  51. 51.

    , & Controlling DNA-end resection: a new task for CDKs. Front. Genet. 4, 99 (2013).

  52. 52.

    et al. Cell cycle regulation of DNA double-strand break end resection by Cdk1-dependent Dna2 phosphorylation. Nat. Struct. Mol. Biol. 18, 1015–1019 (2011).

  53. 53.

    et al. HELB is a feedback inhibitor of DNA end resection. Mol. Cell 61, 405–418 (2016).

  54. 54.

    et al. Human DNA helicase B (HDHB) binds to replication protein A and facilitates cellular recovery from replication stress. J. Biol. Chem. 287, 6469–6481 (2012).

  55. 55.

    et al. Cell cycle-dependent regulation of a human DNA helicase that localizes in DNA damage foci. Mol. Biol. Cell 15, 3320–3332 (2004).

  56. 56.

    et al. The proliferation-quiescence decision is controlled by a bifurcation in CDK2 activity at mitotic exit. Cell 155, 369–383 (2013).

  57. 57.

    et al. A function for cyclin D1 in DNA repair uncovered by protein interactome analyses in human cancers. Nature 474, 230–234 (2011).

  58. 58.

    et al. Cyclin A2 is an RNA binding protein that controls Mre11 mRNA translation. Science 353, 1549–1552 (2016).

  59. 59.

    , , & Loss of S-phase-dependent radioresistance in irs-1 cells exposed to X-rays. Mutat. Res. 314, 77–85 (1994).

  60. 60.

    , , & Pathways of DNA double-strand break repair during the mammalian cell cycle. Mol. Cell Biol. 23, 5706–5715 (2003).

  61. 61.

    , , & Quantitative live cell imaging reveals a gradual shift between DNA repair mechanisms and a maximal use of HR in mid S phase. Mol. Cell 47, 320–329 (2012).

  62. 62.

    et al. H4K20me0 marks post-replicative chromatin and recruits the TONSL-MMS22L DNA repair complex. Nature 534, 714–718 (2016).

  63. 63.

    et al. RNAi-based screening identifies the Mms22L-Nfkbil2 complex as a novel regulator of DNA replication in human cells. EMBO J. 29, 4210–4222 (2010).

  64. 64.

    et al. Identification of the MMS22L-TONSL complex that promotes homologous recombination. Mol. Cell 40, 632–644 (2010).

  65. 65.

    et al. The MMS22L-TONSL complex mediates recovery from replication stress and homologous recombination. Mol. Cell 40, 619–631 (2010).

  66. 66.

    et al. Structural basis for the methylation state-specific recognition of histone H4-K20 by 53BP1 and Crb2 in DNA repair. Cell 127, 1361–1373 (2006).

  67. 67.

    et al. 53BP1 is a reader of the DNA-damage-induced H2A Lys 15 ubiquitin mark. Nature 499, 50–54 (2013).

  68. 68.

    & Sister chromatid cohesion is required for postreplicative double-strand break repair in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Curr. Biol. 11, 991–995 (2001).

  69. 69.

    et al. Scc1/Rad21/Mcd1 is required for sister chromatid cohesion and kinetochore function in vertebrate cells. Dev. Cell 1, 759–770 (2001).

  70. 70.

    et al. Cohesin promotes the repair of ionizing radiation-induced DNA double-strand breaks in replicated chromatin. Nucleic Acids Res. 38, 477–487 (2010).

  71. 71.

    , , & Postreplicative recruitment of cohesin to double-strand breaks is required for DNA repair. Mol. Cell 16, 1003–1015 (2004).

  72. 72.

    et al. DNA damage response pathway uses histone modification to assemble a double-strand break-specific cohesin domain. Mol. Cell 16, 991–1002 (2004).

  73. 73.

    , , , & Specific recruitment of human cohesin to laser-induced DNA damage. J. Biol. Chem. 277, 45149–45153 (2002).

  74. 74.

    et al. The structural basis of modified nucleosome recognition by 53BP1. Nature 536, 100–103 (2016).

  75. 75.

    , , , & 53BP1 regulates DSB repair using Rif1 to control 5′ end resection. Science 339, 700–704 (2013).

  76. 76.

    et al. Rif1 prevents resection of DNA breaks and promotes immunoglobulin class switching. Science 339, 711–715 (2013).

  77. 77.

    et al. A cell cycle-dependent regulatory circuit composed of 53BP1-RIF1 and BRCA1-CtIP controls DNA repair pathway choice. Mol. Cell 49, 872–883 (2013).

  78. 78.

    , , , & RIF1 counteracts BRCA1-mediated end resection during DNA repair. J. Biol. Chem. 288, 11135–11143 (2013).

  79. 79.

    et al. 53BP1 Mediates productive and mutagenic DNA repair through distinct phosphoprotein interactions. Cell 153, 1266–1280 (2013).

  80. 80.

    , , & Phospho-epitope binding by the BRCT domains of hPTIP controls multiple aspects of the cellular response to DNA damage. Nucleic Acids Res. 35, 5312–5322 (2007).

  81. 81.

    et al. REV7 counteracts DNA double-strand break resection and affects PARP inhibition. Nature 521, 541–544 (2015).

  82. 82.

    et al. MAD2L2 controls DNA repair at telomeres and DNA breaks by inhibiting 5′ end resection. Nature 521, 537–540 (2015).

  83. 83.

    et al. 53BP1 loss rescues BRCA1 deficiency and is associated with triple-negative and BRCA-mutated breast cancers. Nat. Struct. Mol. Biol. 17, 688–695 (2010).

  84. 84.

    et al. 53BP1 inhibits homologous recombination in Brca1-deficient cells by blocking resection of DNA breaks. Cell 141, 243–254 (2010).

  85. 85.

    et al. A selective requirement for 53BP1 in the biological response to genomic instability induced by Brca1 deficiency. Mol. Cell 35, 534–541 (2009).

  86. 86.

    , , & BRCA1-associated exclusion of 53BP1 from DNA damage sites underlies temporal control of DNA repair. J. Cell Sci. 125, 3529–3534 (2012).

  87. 87.

    et al. Human BRCA1-BARD1 ubiquitin ligase activity counteracts chromatin barriers to DNA resection. Nat. Struct. Mol. Biol. 23, 647–655 (2016).

  88. 88.

    et al. RIF1 is essential for 53BP1-dependent nonhomologous end joining and suppression of DNA double-strand break resection. Mol. Cell 49, 858–871 (2013).

  89. 89.

    et al. The TIP60 complex regulates bivalent chromatin recognition by 53BP1 through direct H4K20me binding and H2AK15 acetylation. Mol. Cell 62, 409–421 (2016).

  90. 90.

    et al. Acetylation limits 53BP1 association with damaged chromatin to promote homologous recombination. Nat. Struct. Mol. Biol. 20, 317–325 (2013).

  91. 91.

    et al. 53BP1 fosters fidelity of homology-directed DNA repair. Nat. Struct. Mol. Biol. 23, 714–721 (2016).

  92. 92.

    & Causes and consequences of replication stress. Nat. Cell Biol. 16, 2–9 (2014).

  93. 93.

    , , , & Replication-dependent unhooking of DNA interstrand cross-links by the NEIL3 glycosylase. Cell 167, 498–511 (2016).

  94. 94.

    & Fanconi anaemia and the repair of Watson and Crick DNA crosslinks. Nature 493, 356–363 (2013).

  95. 95.

    , & The differences between ICL repair during and outside of S phase. Trends Biochem. Sci. 38, 386–393 (2013).

  96. 96.

    , , & Understanding nucleotide excision repair and its roles in cancer and ageing. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 15, 465–481 (2014).

  97. 97.

    , & Replication-independent repair of DNA interstrand crosslinks. Mol. Cell 47, 140–147 (2012).

  98. 98.

    , & Functions of ubiquitin and SUMO in DNA replication and replication Stress. Front. Genet. 7, 87 (2016).

  99. 99.

    & The RAD6 DNA damage tolerance pathway operates uncoupled from the replication fork and is functional beyond S phase. Cell 141, 255–267 (2010).

  100. 100.

    , & Ubiquitin-dependent DNA damage bypass is separable from genome replication. Nature 465, 951–955 (2010).

  101. 101.

    , & Topoisomerase II inhibition prevents anaphase chromatid segregation in mammalian cells independently of the generation of DNA strand breaks. J. Cell Sci. 105, 563–569 (1993).

  102. 102.

    , , , & Cohesin cleavage and Cdk inhibition trigger formation of daughter nuclei. Nat. Cell Biol. 12, 185–192 (2010).

  103. 103.

    , & Aberrant chromosome morphology in human cells defective for Holliday junction resolution. Nature 471, 642–646 (2011).

  104. 104.

    , , , & Regulatory control of the resolution of DNA recombination intermediates during meiosis and mitosis. Cell 147, 158–172 (2011).

  105. 105.

    & Spatial control of the GEN1 Holliday junction resolvase ensures genome stability. Nat. Commun. 5, 4844 (2014).

  106. 106.

    , & Dual control of Yen1 nuclease activity and cellular localization by Cdk and Cdc14 prevents genome instability. Mol. Cell 54, 94–106 (2014).

  107. 107.

    et al. The Cdk/cDc14 module controls activation of the Yen1 holliday junction resolvase to promote genome stability. Mol. Cell 54, 80–93 (2014).

  108. 108.

    & Holliday junction resolution: regulation in space and time. DNA Repair 19, 176–181 (2014).

  109. 109.

    et al. Replication of a common fragile site, FRA3B, occurs late in S phase and is delayed further upon induction: implications for the mechanism of fragile site induction. Hum. Mol. Genet. 7, 755–761 (1998).

  110. 110.

    , , & DNA polymerase alpha inhibition by aphidicolin induces gaps and breaks at common fragile sites in human chromosomes. Hum. Genet. 67, 136–142 (1984).

  111. 111.

    & Chromosome fragile sites. Annu. Rev. Genet. 41, 169–192 (2007).

  112. 112.

    et al. MUS81 promotes common fragile site expression. Nat. Cell Biol. 15, 1001–1007 (2013).

  113. 113.

    , , & ERCC1 and MUS81-EME1 promote sister chromatid separation by processing late replication intermediates at common fragile sites during mitosis. Nat. Cell Biol. 15, 1008–1015 (2013).

  114. 114.

    & Saccharomyces cerevisiae Mus81-Mms4 is a catalytic, DNA structure-selective endonuclease. Nucleic Acids Res. 36, 2182–2195 (2008).

  115. 115.

    , & Substrate specificity of the Saccharomyces cerevisiae Mus81-Mms4 endonuclease. DNA Repair 4, 243–251 (2005).

  116. 116.

    et al. Replication stress activates DNA repair synthesis in mitosis. Nature 528, 286–290 (2015).

  117. 117.

    , & BLM is required for faithful chromosome segregation and its localization defines a class of ultrafine anaphase bridges. EMBO J. 26, 3397–3409 (2007).

  118. 118.

    et al. PICH: a DNA translocase specially adapted for processing anaphase bridge DNA. Mol. Cell 51, 691–701 (2013).

  119. 119.

    et al. Rif1 is required for resolution of ultrafine DNA bridges in anaphase to ensure genomic stability. Dev. Cell 34, 466–474 (2015).

  120. 120.

    & Irradiation of parts of individual cells. Science 117, 487–493 (1953).

  121. 121.

    & Entry into mitosis in vertebrate somatic cells is guarded by a chromosome damage checkpoint that reverses the cell cycle when triggered during early but not late prophase. J. Cell Biol. 142, 1013–1022 (1998).

  122. 122.

    , & Canonical non-homologous end joining in mitosis induces genome instability and is suppressed by M-phase-specific phosphorylation of XRCC4. PLoS Genet. 10, e1004563 (2014).

  123. 123.

    & Kinetics of DNA double-strand break repair throughout the cell cycle as assayed by pulsed field gel electrophoresis in CHO cells. Int. J. Radiat. Biol. 59, 1325–1339 (1991).

  124. 124.

    , & DNA damage during mitosis in human cells delays the metaphase/anaphase transition via the spindle-assembly checkpoint. Curr. Biol. 12, 1797–1806 (2002).

  125. 125.

    Spindle assembly checkpoint: the third decade. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B 366, 3595–3604 (2011).

  126. 126.

    , , & Megabase chromatin domains involved in DNA double-strand breaks in vivo. J. Cell Biol. 146, 905–916 (1999).

  127. 127.

    , & Comparison of the induction and disappearance of DNA double strand breaks and gamma-H2AX foci after irradiation of chromosomes in G1-phase or in condensed metaphase cells. Mutat. Res. 639, 108–112 (2008).

  128. 128.

    , & DNA damage signaling in response to double-strand breaks during mitosis. J. Cell Biol. 190, 197–207 (2010).

  129. 129.

    et al. A mitotic phosphorylation feedback network connects Cdk1, Plk1, 53BP1, and Chk2 to inactivate the G(2)/M DNA damage checkpoint. PLoS Biol. 8, e1000287 (2010).

  130. 130.

    et al. Analysis of DNA double-strand break response and chromatin structure in mitosis using laser microirradiation. Nucleic Acids Res. 38, e202 (2010).

  131. 131.

    et al. Dynamic assembly of end-joining complexes requires interaction between Ku70/80 and XRCC4. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 103, 18597–18602 (2006).

  132. 132.

    , & A new method for high-resolution imaging of Ku foci to decipher mechanisms of DNA double-strand break repair. J. Cell Biol. 202, 579–595 (2013).

  133. 133.

    , & DNA damage foci in mitosis are devoid of 53BP1. Cell Cycle 8, 3379–3383 (2009).

  134. 134.

    et al. Mitosis inhibits DNA double-strand break repair to guard against telomere fusions. Science 344, 189–193 (2014).

  135. 135.

    , , & Kinetochore localisation of the DNA damage response component 53BP1 during mitosis. J. Cell Sci. 115, 71–79 (2002).

  136. 136.

    , , , & Polo-like kinase 1 inhibits DNA damage response during mitosis. Cell Cycle 14, 219–231 (2015).

  137. 137.

    et al. Dephosphorylation enables the recruitment of 53BP1 to double-strand DNA breaks. Mol. Cell 54, 512–525 (2014).

  138. 138.

    , , , & A telomere-dependent DNA damage checkpoint induced by prolonged mitotic arrest. Nat. Struct. Mol. Biol. 19, 387–394 (2012).

  139. 139.

    et al. PARP1 is a TRF2-associated poly(ADP-ribose)polymerase and protects eroded telomeres. Mol. Biol. Cell 17, 1686–1696 (2006).

  140. 140.

    , , & Cell death during crisis is mediated by mitotic telomere deprotection. Nature 522, 492–496 (2015).

  141. 141.

    et al. Cdk1 uncouples CtIP-dependent resection and Rad51 filament formation during M-phase double-strand break repair. J. Cell Biol. 194, 705–720 (2011).

  142. 142.

    et al. The carboxyl terminus of Brca2 links the disassembly of Rad51 complexes to mitotic entry. Curr. Biol. 19, 1075–1085 (2009).

  143. 143.

    , , & Claspin: timing the cell cycle arrest when the genome is damaged. Cell Cycle 5, 2831–2834 (2006).

  144. 144.

    et al. RPA phosphorylation in mitosis alters DNA binding and protein-protein interactions. Biochemistry 42, 3255–3264 (2003).

  145. 145.

    , & RPA phosphorylation facilitates mitotic exit in response to mitotic DNA damage. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 105, 12903–12908 (2008).

  146. 146.

    et al. CDK-dependent phosphorylation of BRCA2 as a regulatory mechanism for recombinational repair. Nature 434, 598–604 (2005).

  147. 147.

    et al. Forced activation of Cdk1 via wee1 inhibition impairs homologous recombination. Oncogene 32, 3001–3008 (2013).

  148. 148.

    , , & BubR1- and Polo-coated DNA tethers facilitate poleward segregation of acentric chromatids. Cell 140, 235–245 (2010).

  149. 149.

    & Give me a break, but not in mitosis: the mitotic DNA damage response marks DNA double-strand breaks with early signaling events. Cell Cycle 10, 1215–1221 (2011).

  150. 150.

    Targeting the DNA damage response in cancer. Mol. Cell 60, 547–560 (2015).

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank R. Szilard, M. Zimmermann, S. Noordermeer and A. Sartori for critical reading of the manuscript, as well as D. D'Amours and J. Lukas for stimulating discussions and advice. N.H. is a long-term fellow of the Human Science Frontier Program. D.D. is a Canada Research Chair (Tier 1) in the Molecular Mechanisms of Genome Integrity. Funding for work in the laboratory of D.D relating to the regulation of DNA repair by the cell cycle include CIHR grant FDN143343 and a Grant-in-Aid from the Krembil Foundation.

Author information

Affiliations

  1. Nicole Hustedt and Daniel Durocher are at the Lunenfeld-Tanenbaum Research Institute, Mount Sinai Hospital, 600 University Avenue, Toronto, Ontario, M5G 1X5, Canada

    • Nicole Hustedt
    •  & Daniel Durocher
  2. Daniel Durocher is also in the Department of Molecular Genetics, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, M5S 3E1, Canada

    • Daniel Durocher

Authors

  1. Search for Nicole Hustedt in:

  2. Search for Daniel Durocher in:

Competing interests

N.H. declares no competing financial interests. D.D. is a paid advisor and receives funding from CRISPR Therapeutics, and also receives funding from Blueline Bioscience.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Daniel Durocher.

About this article

Publication history

Published

DOI

https://doi.org/10.1038/ncb3452

Further reading