Activation of DNA damage response signaling in mammalian cells by ionizing radiation

References

• Blackford AN, Jackson SP. ATM, ATR, and DNA-PK: the trinity at the heart of the DNA damage response. Mol Cell. 2017;66(6):801–817.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baretic D, Maia de Oliveira T, Niess M, et al. Structural insights into the critical DNA damage sensors DNA-PKcs, ATM and ATR. Prog Biophys Mol Biol. 2019;147:4–16.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Elías-Villalobos A, Fort P, Helmlinger D. New insights into the evolutionary conservation of the sole PIKK pseudokinase Tra1/TRRAP. Biochem Soc Trans. 2019;47(6):1597–1608.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bakkenist CJ, Kastan MB. DNA damage activates ATM through intermolecular autophosphorylation and dimer dissociation. Nature. 2003;421(6922):499–506.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Imseng S, Aylett CH, Maier T. Architecture and activation of phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase related kinases. Curr Opin Struct Biol. 2018;49:177–189.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Perry J, Kleckner N. The ATRs, ATMs, and TORs are giant HEAT repeat proteins. Cell. 2003;112(2):151–155.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jansma M, Hopfner KP. Structural basis of the (in)activity of the apical DNA damage response kinases ATM, ATR and DNA-PKcs. Prog Biophys Mol Biol. 2020; Nov 7.DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pbiomolbio.2020.10.009. Online ahead of print.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Caspari T. How to activate p53. Curr Biol. 2000;10(8):R315–7.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Matt S, Hofmann TG. The DNA damage-induced cell death response: a roadmap to kill cancer cells. Cell Mol Life Sci. 2016;73(15):2829–2850.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Smith GC, Jackson SP. The DNA-dependent protein kinase. Genes Dev. 1999;13(8):916–934.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dvir A, Stein LY, Calore BL, et al. Purification and characterization of a template-associated protein kinase that phosphorylates RNA polymerase II. J Biol Chem. 1993;268(14):10440–10447.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yin X, Liu M, Tian Y, et al. Cryo-EM structure of human DNA-PK holoenzyme. Cell Res. 2017;27(11):1341–1350.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wu Q, Liang S, Ochi T, et al. Understanding the structure and role of DNA-PK in NHEJ: How X-ray diffraction and cryo-EM contribute in complementary ways. Prog Biophys Mol Biol. 2019;147:26–32.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gottlieb TM, Jackson SP. The DNA-dependent protein kinase: requirement for DNA ends and association with Ku antigen. Cell. 1993;72(1):131–142.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang Y, Sun H, Wang J, et al. DNA-PK-mediated phosphorylation of EZH2 regulates the DNA damage-induced apoptosis to maintain T-cell genomic integrity. Cell Death Dis. 2016;7(7):e2316.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Crowe JL, Wang XS, Shao Z, et al. DNA-PKcs phosphorylation at the T2609 cluster alters the repair pathway choice during immunoglobulin class switch recombination. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2020;117(37):22953–22961.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jiang W, Estes VM, Wang XS, et al. Phosphorylation at S2053 in murine (S2056 in Human) DNA-PKcs is dispensable for lymphocyte development and class switch recombination. J Immunol. 2019;203(1):178–187.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Teneng I, Picchi MA, Leng S, et al. DNA-PKc deficiency drives pre-malignant transformation by reducing DNA repair capacity in concert with reprogramming the epigenome in human bronchial epithelial cells. DNA Repair (Amst). 2019;79:1–9.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fok JHL, Ramos-Montoya A, Vazquez-Chantada M, et al. AZD7648 is a potent and selective DNA-PK inhibitor that enhances radiation, chemotherapy and olaparib activity. Nat Commun. 2019;10(1):5065.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gavande NS, VanderVere-Carozza PS, Pawelczak KS, et al. Discovery and development of novel DNA-PK inhibitors by targeting the unique Ku-DNA interaction. Nucleic Acids Res. 2020;48(20):11536–11550.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sui J, Lin Y-F, Xu K, et al. DNA-PKcs phosphorylates hnRNP-A1 to facilitate the RPA-to-POT1 switch and telomere capping after replication. Nucleic Acids Res. 2015;43(12):5971–5983.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Connolly PF, Fearnhead HO. DNA-PK activity is associated with caspase-dependent myogenic differentiation. Febs J. 2016;283(19):3626–3636.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Park S-J, Gavrilova O, Brown AL, et al. DNA-PK promotes the mitochondrial, metabolic, and physical decline that occurs during aging. Cell Metab. 2017;25(5):1135–1146.e7.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Burleigh K, Maltbaek JH, Cambier S, et al. Human DNA-PK activates a STING-independent DNA sensing pathway. Sci Immunol. 2020;5(43):eaba4219.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zou L, Elledge SJ. Sensing DNA damage through ATRIP recognition of RPA-ssDNA complexes. Science. 2003;300(5625):1542–1548.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mimmler M, Peter S, Kraus A, et al. DNA damage response curtails detrimental replication stress and chromosomal instability induced by the dietary carcinogen PhIP. Nucleic Acids Res. 2016;44(21):10259–10276.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shiloh Y. ATM and related protein kinases: safeguarding genome integrity. Nat Rev Cancer. 2003;3(3):155–168.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shechter D, Costanzo V, Gautier J. ATR and ATM regulate the timing of DNA replication origin firing. Nat Cell Biol. 2004;6(7):648–655.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nghiem P, Park PK, Kim Y, et al. ATR inhibition selectively sensitizes G1 checkpoint-deficient cells to lethal premature chromatin condensation. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2001;98(16):9092–9097.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tibbetts RS, Cortez D, Brumbaugh KM, et al. Functional interactions between BRCA1 and the checkpoint kinase ATR during genotoxic stress. Genes Dev. 2000;14(23):2989–3002.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ghosh S, Narang H, Sarma A, et al. Activation of DNA damage response signaling in lung adenocarcinoma A549 cells following oxygen beam irradiation. Mutat Res. 2011;723(2):190–198.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ghosh S, Narang H, Sarma A, et al. DNA damage response signaling in lung adenocarcinoma A549 cells following gamma and carbon beam irradiation. Mutat Res. 2011;716(1-2):10–19.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shiotani B, Zou L. Single-stranded DNA orchestrates an ATM-to-ATR switch at DNA breaks. Mol Cell. 2009;33(5):547–558.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Delacroix S, Wagner JM, Kobayashi M, et al. The Rad9-Hus1-Rad1 (9-1-1) clamp activates checkpoint signaling via TopBP1. Genes Dev. 2007;21(12):1472–1477.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Choi J-H, Lindsey-Boltz LA, Kemp M, et al. Reconstitution of RPA-covered single-stranded DNA-activated ATR-Chk1 signaling. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2010;107(31):13660–13665.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zheng T, Zhou H, Li X, et al. RBMX is required for activation of ATR on repetitive DNAs to maintain genome stability. Cell Death Differ. 2020;27(11):3162–3176.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kim W, Zhao F, Wu R, et al. ZFP161 regulates replication fork stability and maintenance of genomic stability by recruiting the ATR/ATRIP complex. Nat Commun. 2019;10(1):5304.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Coquel F, Silva M-J, Técher H, et al. SAMHD1 acts at stalled replication forks to prevent interferon induction. Nature. 2018;557(7703):57–61.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bass TE, Luzwick JW, Kavanaugh G, et al. ETAA1 acts at stalled replication forks to maintain genome integrity. Nat Cell Biol. 2016;18(11):1185–1195.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Haahr P, Hoffmann S, Tollenaere MAX, et al. Activation of the ATR kinase by the RPA-binding protein ETAA1. Nat Cell Biol. 2016;18(11):1196–1207.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dodson GE, Shi Y, Tibbetts RS. DNA replication defects, spontaneous DNA damage, and ATM-dependent checkpoint activation in replication protein A-deficient cells. J Biol Chem. 2004;279(32):34010–34014.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Menolfi D, Jiang W, Lee BJ, et al. Kinase-dead ATR differs from ATR loss by limiting the dynamic exchange of ATR and RPA. Nat Commun. 2018;9(1):5351.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• O'Driscoll M, Ruiz-Perez VL, Woods CG, et al. A splicing mutation affecting expression of ataxia-telangiectasia and Rad3-related protein (ATR) results in Seckel syndrome. Nat Genet. 2003;33(4):497–501.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Taylor AMR, Rothblum-Oviatt C, Ellis NA, et al. Chromosome instability syndromes. Nat Rev Dis Primers. 2019;5(1):64.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stiff T, Reis C, Alderton GK, et al. Nbs1 is required for ATR-dependent phosphorylation events. Embo J. 2005;24(1):199–208.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Busino L, Donzelli M, Chiesa M, et al. Degradation of Cdc25A by beta-TrCP during S phase and in response to DNA damage. Nature. 2003;426(6962):87–91.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Heffernan TP, Simpson DA, Frank AR, et al. An ATR- and Chk1-dependent S checkpoint inhibits replicon initiation following UVC-induced DNA damage. Mol Cell Biol. 2002;22(24):8552–8561.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bartek J, Lukas C, Lukas J. Checking on DNA damage in S phase. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol. 2004;5(10):792–804.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Andreassen PR, D'Andrea AD, Taniguchi T. ATR couples FANCD2 monoubiquitination to the DNA-damage response. Genes Dev. 2004;18(16):1958–1963.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kais Z, Rondinelli B, Holmes A, et al. FANCD2 maintains fork stability in BRCA1/2-deficient tumors and promotes alternative end-joining DNA repair. Cell Rep. 2016;15(11):2488–2499.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sengupta S, Harris CC. p53: traffic cop at the crossroads of DNA repair and recombination. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol. 2005;6(1):44–55.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sørensen CS, Hansen LT, Dziegielewski J, et al. The cell-cycle checkpoint kinase Chk1 is required for mammalian homologous recombination repair. Nat Cell Biol. 2005;7(2):195–201.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shinozaki T, Nota A, Taya Y, et al. Functional role of Mdm2 phosphorylation by ATR in attenuation of p53 nuclear export. Oncogene. 2003;22(55):8870–8880.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kabeche L, Nguyen HD, Buisson R, et al. A mitosis-specific and R loop-driven ATR pathway promotes faithful chromosome segregation. Science. 2018;359(6371):108–114.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Herbert KJ, Puliyadi R, Prevo R, et al. Targeting TOPK sensitises tumour cells to radiation-induced damage by enhancing replication stress. Cell Death Differ. 2020.DOI:https://doi.org/10.1038/s41418-020-00655-1. Online ahead of print
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van Os NJH, Haaxma CA, van der Flier M, A-T Study Group, et al. Ataxia-telangiectasia: recommendations for multidisciplinary treatment. Dev Med Child Neurol. 2017;59(7):680–689.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Savitsky K, Sfez S, Tagle DA, et al. The complete sequence of the coding region of the ATM gene reveals similarity to cell cycle regulators in different species. Hum Mol Genet. 1995;4(11):2025–2032.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• O'Neill T, Dwyer AJ, Ziv Y, et al. Utilization of oriented peptide libraries to identify substrate motifs selected by ATM. J Biol Chem. 2000;275(30):22719–22727.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Banin S, Moyal L, Shieh S, et al. Enhanced phosphorylation of p53 by ATM in response to DNA damage. Science. 1998;281(5383):1674–1677.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Canman CE, Lim DS, Cimprich KA, et al. Activation of the ATM kinase by ionizing radiation and phosphorylation of p53. Science. 1998;281(5383):1677–1679.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kozlov S, Gueven N, Keating K, et al. ATP activates ataxia-telangiectasia mutated (ATM) in vitro. Importance of autophosphorylation. J Biol Chem. 2003;278(11):9309–9317.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van den Bosch M, Bree RT, Lowndes NF. The MRN complex: coordinating and mediating the response to broken chromosomes. EMBO Rep. 2003;4(9):844–849.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stewart GS, Maser RS, Stankovic T, et al. The DNA double-strand break repair gene hMRE11 is mutated in individuals with an ataxia-telangiectasia-like disorder. Cell. 1999;99(6):577–587.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Uziel T, Lerenthal Y, Moyal L, et al. Requirement of the MRN complex for ATM activation by DNA damage. Embo J. 2003;22(20):5612–5621.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carson CT, Schwartz RA, Stracker TH, et al. The Mre11 complex is required for ATM activation and the G2/M checkpoint. Embo J. 2003;22(24):6610–6620.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lukas C, Falck J, Bartkova J, et al. Distinct spatiotemporal dynamics of mammalian checkpoint regulators induced by DNA damage. Nat Cell Biol. 2003;5(3):255–260.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang Z, Gong Y, Peng B, et al. MRE11 UFMylation promotes ATM activation. Nucleic Acids Res. 2019;47(8):4124–4135.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tang M, Li Z, Zhang C, et al. SIRT7-mediated ATM deacetylation is essential for its deactivation and DNA damage repair. Sci Adv. 2019;5(3):eaav1118.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rogakou EP, Boon C, Redon C, et al. Megabase chromatin domains involved in DNA double-strand breaks in vivo. J Cell Biol. 1999;146(5):905–916.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goldberg M, Stucki M, Falck J, et al. MDC1 is required for the intra-S-phase DNA damage checkpoint. Nature. 2003;421(6926):952–956.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mochan TA, Venere M, DiTullio RA, Jr, et al. 53BP1 and NFBD1/MDC1-Nbs1 function in parallel interacting pathways activating ataxia-telangiectasia mutated (ATM) in response to DNA damage. Cancer Res. 2003;63(24):8586–8591.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Foray N, Marot D, Gabriel A, et al. A subset of ATM- and ATR-dependent phosphorylation events requires the BRCA1 protein. Embo J. 2003;22(11):2860–2871.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kim S-T, Xu B, Kastan MB. Involvement of the cohesin protein, Smc1, in Atm-dependent and independent responses to DNA damage. Genes Dev. 2002;16(5):560–570.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yarden RI, Pardo-Reoyo S, Sgagias M, et al. BRCA1 regulates the G2/M checkpoint by activating Chk1 kinase upon DNA damage. Nat Genet. 2002;30(3):285–289.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gatei M, Zhou BB, Hobson K, et al. Ataxia telangiectasia mutated (ATM) kinase and ATM and Rad3 related kinase mediate phosphorylation of Brca1 at distinct and overlapping sites. In vivo assessment using phospho-specific antibodies. J Biol Chem. 2001;276(20):17276–17280.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rodriguez M, Yu X, Chen J, et al. Phosphopeptide binding specificities of BRCA1 COOH-terminal (BRCT) domains. J Biol Chem. 2003;278(52):52914–52918.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sivanand S, Rhoades S, Jiang Q, et al. Nuclear acetyl-CoA production by ACLY promotes homologous recombination. Mol Cell. 2017;67(2):252–265.e6.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chen C-C, Kass EM, Yen W-F, et al. ATM loss leads to synthetic lethality in BRCA1 BRCT mutant mice associated with exacerbated defects in homology-directed repair. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2017;114(29):7665–7670.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhang T, Cronshaw J, Kanu N, et al. UBR5-mediated ubiquitination of ATMIN is required for ionizing radiation-induced ATM signaling and function. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2014;111(33):12091–12096.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Colomer C, Margalef P, Villanueva A, et al. IKKα kinase regulates the DNA damage response and drives chemo-resistance in cancer. Mol Cell. 2019;75(4):669–682.e5.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Li N, Banin S, Ouyang H, et al. ATM is required for IkappaB kinase (IKKk) activation in response to DNA double strand breaks. J Biol Chem. 2001;276(12):8898–8903.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sapkota GP, Deak M, Kieloch A, et al. Ionizing radiation induces ataxia telangiectasia mutated kinase (ATM)-mediated phosphorylation of LKB1/STK11 at Thr-366. Biochem J. 2002;368(Pt 2):507–516.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baskaran R, Wood LD, Whitaker LL, et al. Ataxia telangiectasia mutant protein activates c-Abl tyrosine kinase in response to ionizing radiation. Nature. 1997;387(6632):516–519.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gatei M, Sloper K, Sorensen C, et al. Ataxia-telangiectasia-mutated (ATM) and NBS1-dependent phosphorylation of Chk1 on Ser-317 in response to ionizing radiation. J Biol Chem. 2003;278(17):14806–14811.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mladenov E, Fan X, Dueva R, et al. Radiation-dose-dependent functional synergisms between ATM, ATR and DNA-PKcs in checkpoint control and resection in G2-phase. Sci Rep. 2019;9(1):8255.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Li MY, Liu JQ, Chen DP, et al. Radiotherapy induces cell cycle arrest and cell apoptosis in nasopharyngeal carcinoma via the ATM and Smad pathways. Cancer Biol Ther. 2017;18(9):681–693.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhang J, Willers H, Feng Z, et al. Chk2 phosphorylation of BRCA1 regulates DNA double-strand break repair. Mol Cell Biol. 2004;24(2):708–718.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chen G, Yuan SS, Liu W, et al. Radiation-induced assembly of Rad51 and Rad52 recombination complex requires ATM and c-Abl. J Biol Chem. 1999;274(18):12748–12752.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Foray N, Marot D, Randrianarison V, et al. Constitutive association of BRCA1 and c-Abl and its ATM-dependent disruption after irradiation. Mol Cell Biol. 2002;22(12):4020–4032.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Powell SN, Kachnic LA. Roles of BRCA1 and BRCA2 in homologous recombination, DNA replication fidelity and the cellular response to ionizing radiation. Oncogene. 2003;22(37):5784–5791.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Siliciano JD, Canman CE, Taya Y, et al. DNA damage induces phosphorylation of the amino terminus of p53. Genes Dev. 1997;11(24):3471–3481.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Saito S, Goodarzi AA, Higashimoto Y, et al. ATM mediates phosphorylation at multiple p53 sites, including Ser(46), in response to ionizing radiation. J Biol Chem. 2002;277(15):12491–12494.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hwang SY, Kuk MU, Kim JW, et al. ATM mediated-p53 signaling pathway forms a novel axis for senescence control. Mitochondrion. 2020;55:54–63.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lim YC, Quek H, Offenhäuser C, et al. ATM inhibition prevents interleukin-6 from contributing to the proliferation of glioblastoma cells after ionizing radiation. J Neurooncol. 2018;138(3):509–518.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Li W, Yanowitz JL. ATM and ATR influence meiotic crossover formation through antagonistic and overlapping functions in Caenorhabditis elegans. Genetics. 2019;212(2):431–443.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cheng Z, Zheng YZ, Li Y-Q, et al. Cellular senescence in mouse hippocampus after irradiation and the role of p53 and p21. J Neuropathol Exp Neurol. 2017;76(4):260–269.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ghosh S, Krishna M. Role of Rad52 in fractionated irradiation induced signaling in A549 lung adenocarcinoma cells. Mutat Res. 2012;729(1-2):61–72.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ghosh S, Maurya DK, Krishna M. Role of iNOS in bystander signaling between macrophages and lymphoma cells. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2008;72(5):1567–1574.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kubbutat MH, Jones SN, Vousden KH. Regulation of p53 stability by Mdm2. Nature. 1997;387(6630):299–303.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Khosravi R, Maya R, Gottlieb T, et al. Rapid ATM-dependent phosphorylation of MDM2 precedes p53 accumulation in response to DNA damage. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 1999;96(26):14973–14977.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tsabar M, Mock CS, Venkatachalam V, et al. A switch in p53 dynamics marks cells that escape from DSB-induced cell cycle arrest. Cell Rep. 2020;32(5):107995.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fava LL, Schuler F, Sladky V, et al. The PIDDosome activates p53 in response to supernumerary centrosomes. Genes Dev. 2017;31(1):34–45.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Uxa S, Bernhart SH, Mages CFS, et al. DREAM and RB cooperate to induce gene repression and cell-cycle arrest in response to p53 activation. Nucleic Acids Res. 2019;47(17):9087–9103.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shamloo B, Usluer S. p21 in cancer research. Cancers (Basel). 2019;11(8):1178.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• el-Deiry WS, Tokino T, Velculescu VE, et al. WAF1, a potential mediator of p53 tumor suppression. Cell. 1993;75(4):817–825.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sherr CJ, Roberts JM. CDK inhibitors: positive and negative regulators of G1-phase progression. Genes Dev. 1999;13(12):1501–1512.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Orlando S, Gallastegui E, Besson A, et al. p27Kip1 and p21Cip1 collaborate in the regulation of transcription by recruiting cyclin-Cdk complexes on the promoters of target genes. Nucleic Acids Res. 2015;43(14):6860–6873.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• LaBaer J, Garrett MD, Stevenson LF, et al. New functional activities for the p21 family of CDK inhibitors. Genes Dev. 1997;11(7):847–862.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harper JW, Elledge SJ, Keyomarsi K, et al. Inhibition of cyclin-dependent kinases by p21. Mol Biol Cell. 1995;6(4):387–400.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jascur T, Brickner H, Salles-Passador I, et al. Regulation of p21(WAF1/CIP1) stability by WISp39, a Hsp90 binding TPR protein. Mol Cell. 2005;17(2):237–249.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barr AR, Cooper S, Heldt FS, et al. DNA damage during S-phase mediates the proliferation-quiescence decision in the subsequent G1 via p21 expression. Nat Commun. 2017;8(1):14728.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Waldman T, Lengauer C, Kinzler KW, et al. Uncoupling of S phase and mitosis induced by anticancer agents in cells lacking p21. Nature. 1996;381(6584):713–716.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fischer M, Quaas M, Steiner L, et al. The p53-p21-DREAM-CDE/CHR pathway regulates G2/M cell cycle genes. Nucleic Acids Res. 2016;44(1):164–174.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reyes J, Chen J-Y, Stewart-Ornstein J, et al. Fluctuations in p53 signaling allow escape from cell-cycle arrest. Mol Cell. 2018;71(4):581–591.e5.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Her J, Bunting SF. How cells ensure correct repair of DNA double-strand breaks. J Biol Chem. 2018;293(27):10502–10511.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sonoda E, Sasaki MS, Morrison C, et al. Sister chromatid exchanges are mediated by homologous recombination in vertebrate cells. Mol Cell Biol. 1999;19(7):5166–5169.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tripathi V, Agarwal H, Priya S, et al. MRN complex-dependent recruitment of ubiquitylated BLM helicase to DSBs negatively regulates DNA repair pathways. Nat Commun. 2018;9(1):1016.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ye Z, Larry HR, Honglu W. Involvement of nucleotide excision and mismatch repair mechanisms in double strand break repair. Curr Genomics. 2009;10(4):250–258.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shahi A, Lee J-H, Kang Y, et al. Mismatch-repair protein MSH6 is associated with Ku70 and regulates DNA double-strand break repair. Nucleic Acids Res. 2011;39(6):2130–2143.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chang HHY, Pannunzio NR, Adachi N, et al. Non-homologous DNA end joining and alternative pathways to double-strand break repair. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol. 2017;18(8):495–506.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Neal JA, Meek K. Choosing the right path: does DNA-PK help make the decision? Mutat Res. 2011;711(1-2):73–86.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Riballo E, Woodbine L, Stiff T, et al. XLF-Cernunnos promotes DNA ligase IV-XRCC4 re-adenylation following ligation. Nucleic Acids Res. 2009;37(2):482–492.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nemoz C, Ropars V, Frit P, et al. XLF and APLF bind Ku80 at two remote sites to ensure DNA repair by non-homologous end joining. Nat Struct Mol Biol. 2018;25(10):971–980.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Frit P, Ropars V, Modesti M, et al. Plugged into the Ku-DNA hub: The NHEJ network. Prog Biophys Mol Biol. 2019;147:62–76.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Conlin MP, Reid DA, Small GW, et al. DNA ligase IV guides end-processing choice during nonhomologous end joining. Cell Rep. 2017;20(12):2810–2819.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Riballo E, Critchlow SE, Teo S-H, et al. Identification of a defect in DNA ligase IV in a radiosensitive leukaemia patient. Curr Biol. 1999;9(13):699–702.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Modesti M, Hesse JE, Gellert M. DNA binding of Xrcc4 protein is associated with V(D)J recombination but not with stimulation of DNA ligase IV activity. Embo J. 1999;18(7):2008–2018.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Frank KM, Sekiguchi JM, Seidl KJ, et al. Late embryonic lethality and impaired V(D)J recombination in mice lacking DNA ligase IV. Nature. 1998;396(6707):173–177.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barnes DE, Stamp G, Rosewell I, et al. Targeted disruption of the gene encoding DNA ligase IV leads to lethality in embryonic mice. Curr Biol. 1998;8(25):1395–1398.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Serrano-Benítez A, Cortés-Ledesma F, Ruiz JF. "An End to a Means": how DNA-end structure shapes the double-strand break repair process”. Front Mol Biosci. 2020;6:153.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lee SE, Mitchell RA, Cheng A, et al. Evidence for DNA-PK-dependent and -independent DNA double-strand break repair pathways in mammalian cells as a function of the cell cycle. Mol Cell Biol. 1997;17(3):1425–1433.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baumann P, West SC. Role of the human RAD51 protein in homologous recombination and double-stranded-break repair. Trends Biochem Sci. 1998;23(7):247–251.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Matsuzaki K, Kondo S, Ishikawa T, et al. Human RAD51 paralogue SWSAP1 fosters RAD51 filament by regulating the anti-recombinase FIGNL1 AAA + ATPase. Nat Commun. 2019;10(1):1407.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van Dyck E, Stasiak AZ, Stasiak A, et al. Binding of double-strand breaks in DNA by human Rad52 protein. Nature. 1999;398(6729):728–731.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lim DS, Hasty P. A mutation in mouse rad51 results in an early embryonic lethal that is suppressed by a mutation in p53. Mol Cell Biol. 1996;16(12):7133–7143.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rijkers T, Van Den Ouweland J, Morolli B, et al. Targeted inactivation of mouse RAD52 reduces homologous recombination but not resistance to ionizing radiation. Mol Cell Biol. 1998;18(11):6423–6429.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Essers J, Hendriks RW, Swagemakers SM, et al. Disruption of mouse RAD54 reduces ionizing radiation resistance and homologous recombination. Cell. 1997;89(2):195–204.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pierce AJ, Johnson RD, Thompson LH, et al. XRCC3 promotes homology-directed repair of DNA damage in mammalian cells. Genes Dev. 1999;13(20):2633–2638.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Patel DS, Misenko SM, Her J, et al. BLM helicase regulates DNA repair by counteracting RAD51 loading at DNA double-strand break sites. J Cell Biol. 2017;216(11):3521–3534.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Callebaut I, Mornon JP. From BRCA1 to RAP1: a widespread BRCT module closely associated with DNA repair. FEBS Lett. 1997;400(1):25–30.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Patel KJ, Yu VP, Lee H, et al. Involvement of Brca2 in DNA repair. Mol Cell. 1998;1(3):347–357.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cortez D, Wang Y, Qin J, et al. Requirement of ATM-dependent phosphorylation of brca1 in the DNA damage response to double-strand breaks. Science. 1999;286(5442):1162–1166.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chen J, Silver DP, Walpita D, et al. Stable interaction between the products of the BRCA1 and BRCA2 tumor suppressor genes in mitotic and meiotic cells. Mol Cell. 1998;2(3):317–328.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhong Q, Chen CF, Li S, et al. Association of BRCA1 with the hRad50-hMre11-p95 complex and the DNA damage response. Science. 1999;285(5428):747–750.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moynahan ME, Chiu JW, Koller BH, et al. Brca1 controls homology-directed DNA repair. Mol Cell. 1999;4(4):511–518.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Haas KT, Lee M, Esposito A, et al. Single-molecule localization microscopy reveals molecular transactions during RAD51 filament assembly at cellular DNA damage sites. Nucleic Acids Res. 2018;46(5):2398–2416.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• He YJ, Meghani K, Caron M-C, et al. DYNLL1 binds to MRE11 to limit DNA end resection in BRCA1-deficient cells. Nature. 2018;563(7732):522–526.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Balajee AS, Bohr VA. Genomic heterogeneity of nucleotide excision repair. Gene. 2000;250(1-2):15–30.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Araújo SJ, Kuraoka I. Nucleotide excision repair genes shaping embryonic development. Open Biol. 2019;9(10):190166
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kusakabe M, Onishi Y, Tada H, et al. Mechanism and regulation of DNA damage recognition in nucleotide excision repair. Genes Environ. 2019;41(1):2.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Feltrin RDS, Segatto ALA, de Souza TA, et al. Open gaps in the evolution of the eukaryotic nucleotide excision repair. DNA Repair (Amst). 2020;95:102955.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lindsey-Boltz LA. Bringing it all together: coupling excision repair to the dna damage checkpoint. Photochem Photobiol. 2017;93(1):238–244.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Borszéková Pulzová L, Ward TA, Chovanec M. XPA: DNA repair protein of significant clinical importance. IJMS. 2020;21(6):2182.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Despras E, Pfeiffer P, Salles B, et al. Long-term XPC silencing reduces DNA double-strand break repair. Cancer Res. 2007;67(6):2526–2534.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jacobs AL, Schär P. DNA glycosylases: in DNA repair and beyond. Chromosoma. 2012;121(1):1–20.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Caldecott KW. Mammalian DNA base excision repair: dancing in the moonlight. DNA Repair (Amst). 2020;93:102921.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Howard MJ, Wilson SH. DNA scanning by base excision repair enzymes and implications for pathway coordination. DNA Repair (Amst). 2018;71:101–107.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Limpose KL, Corbett AH, Doetsch PW. BERing the burden of damage: pathway crosstalk and posttranslational modification of base excision repair proteins regulate DNA damage management. DNA Repair (Amst). 2017;56:51–64.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pećina-Šlaus N, Kafka A, Salamon I, et al. Mismatch repair pathway, genome stability and cancer. Front Mol Biosci. 2020;7:122.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liu D, Keijzers G, Rasmussen LJ. DNA mismatch repair and its many roles in eukaryotic cells. Mutat Res. 2017;773:174–187.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Franchitto A, Pichierri P, Piergentili R, et al. The mammalian mismatch repair protein MSH2 is required for correct MRE11 and RAD51 relocalization and for efficient cell cycle arrest induced by ionizing radiation in G2 phase. Oncogene. 2003;22(14):2110–2120.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang Q, Ponomareva ON, Lasarev M, et al. High frequency induction of mitotic recombination by ionizing radiation in Mlh1 null mouse cells. Mutat Res. 2006;594(1-2):189–198.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar