Explore the vast range of titles available.

The strength of the DNA damage checkpoint critically influences cell fate, yet the mechanisms behind the fine tuning of checkpoint strength during the DNA damage response (DDR) are poorly understood. Here we show that Rad54B—a SNF2 helicase-like DNA-repair protein—limits the strength of both the G1/S and G2/M checkpoints. We find that Rad54B functions as a scaffold for p53 degradation via its direct interaction with the MDM2–MDMX ubiquitin–ligase complex. During the early phases of the DDR, Rad54B is upregulated, thereby maintaining low checkpoint strength and facilitating cell cycle progression. Once the p53-mediated checkpoint is established, Rad54B is downregulated, and high checkpoint strength is maintained. Constitutive upregulation of Rad54B activity, which is frequently observed in tumours, promotes genomic instability because of checkpoint override. Thus, the scaffolding function of Rad54B dynamically regulates the maintenance of genome integrity by limiting checkpoint strength. Rad54B is a poorly characterized DNA damage repair protein homologous to Rad54, a protein implicated in DNA damage repair through homologous recombination. Here the authors implicate Rad54B as a modulator of the DNA damage response through its interaction with the MDM2–MDMX complex to regulate p53 degradation.

Cell cycles, essential for biological function, have been investigated extensively. However, enabling a global understanding and defining a physical quantification of the stability and function of the cell cycle remains challenging. Based upon a mammalian cell cycle gene network, we uncovered the underlying Mexican hat landscape of the cell cycle. We found the emergence of three local basins of attraction and two major potential barriers along the cell cycle trajectory. The three local basins of attraction characterize the G1, S/G2, and M phases. The barriers characterize the G1 and S/G2 checkpoints, respectively, of the cell cycle, thus providing an explanation of the checkpoint mechanism for the cell cycle from the physical perspective. We found that the progression of a cell cycle is determined by two driving forces: curl flux for acceleration and potential barriers for deceleration along the cycle path. Therefore, the cell cycle can be promoted (suppressed), either by enhancing (suppressing) the flux (representing the energy input) or by lowering (increasing) the barrier along the cell cycle path. We found that both the entropy production rate and energy per cell cycle increase as the growth factor increases. This reflects that cell growth and division are driven by energy or nutrition supply. More energy input increases flux and decreases barrier along the cell cycle path, leading to faster oscillations. We also identified certain key genes and regulations for stability and progression of the cell cycle. Some of these findings were evidenced from experiments whereas others lead to predictions and potential anticancer strategies.

The transition from mitosis into the first gap phase of the cell cycle in budding yeast is controlled by the Mitotic Exit Network (MEN). The network interprets spatiotemporal cues about the progression of mitosis and ensures that release of Cdc14 phosphatase occurs only after completion of key mitotic events. The MEN has been studied intensively; however, a unified understanding of how localisation and protein activity function together as a system is lacking. In this paper, we present a compartmental, logical model of the MEN that is capable of representing spatial aspects of regulation in parallel to control of enzymatic activity. We show that our model is capable of correctly predicting the phenotype of the majority of mutants we tested, including mutants that cause proteins to mislocalise. We use a continuous time implementation of the model to demonstrate that Cdc14 Early Anaphase Release (FEAR) ensures robust timing of anaphase, and we verify our findings in living cells. Furthermore, we show that our model can represent measured cell–cell variation in Spindle Position Checkpoint (SPoC) mutants. This work suggests a general approach to incorporate spatial effects into logical models. We anticipate that the model itself will be an important resource to experimental researchers, providing a rigorous platform to test hypotheses about regulation of mitotic exit.

The inhibition of the DNA damage response (DDR) pathway in the treatment of cancer has recently gained interest, and different DDR inhibitors have been developed. Among them, the most promising ones target the WEE1 kinase family, which has a crucial role in cell cycle regulation and DNA damage identification and repair in both nonmalignant and cancer cells. This review recapitulates and discusses the most recent findings on the biological function of WEE1/PKMYT1 during the cell cycle and in the DNA damage repair, with a focus on their dual role as tumor suppressors in nonmalignant cells and pseudo-oncogenes in cancer cells. We here report the available data on the molecular and functional alterations of WEE1/PKMYT1 kinases in both hematological and solid tumors. Moreover, we summarize the preclinical information on 36 chemo/radiotherapy agents, and in particular their effect on cell cycle checkpoints and on the cellular WEE1/PKMYT1-dependent response. Finally, this review outlines the most important pre-clinical and clinical data available on the efficacy of WEE1/PKMYT1 inhibitors in monotherapy and in combination with chemo/radiotherapy agents or with other selective inhibitors currently used or under evaluation for the treatment of cancer patients.

Quiescent neural stem cells (NSCs) in the adult mouse brain are the source of neurogenesis that regulates innate and adaptive behaviors. Adult NSCs in the subventricular zone are derived from a subpopulation of embryonic neural stem-progenitor cells (NPCs) that is characterized by a slower cell cycle relative to the more abundant rapid cycling NPCs that build the brain. Yet, how slow cell cycle can cause the establishment of adult NSCs remains largely unknown. Here, we demonstrate that Notch and an effector Hey1 form a module that is upregulated by cell cycle arrest in slowly dividing NPCs. In contrast to the oscillatory expression of the Notch effectors Hes1 and Hes5 in fast cycling progenitors, Hey1 displays a non-oscillatory stationary expression pattern and contributes to the long-term maintenance of NSCs. These findings reveal a novel division of labor in Notch effectors where cell cycle rate biases effector selection and cell fate. Adult neural stem cells are derived from an embryonic population of slowcycling progenitor cells, though how reduced cycling speed leads to establishment of the adult population has remained elusive. Here they show that non-oscillatory Notch-Hey signaling induced by slow-cycling contributes to long term maintenance of neural stem cells.

Normal cell-cycle progression is a crucial task for every multicellular organism, as it determines body size and shape, tissue renewal and senescence, and is also crucial for reproduction. On the other hand, dysregulation of the cell-cycle progression leading to uncontrolled cell proliferation is the hallmark of cancer. Therefore, it is not surprising that it is a tightly regulated process, with multifaceted and very complex control mechanisms. It is now well established that one of those mechanisms relies on ion channels, and in many cases specifically on potassium channels. Here, we summarize the possible mechanisms underlying the importance of potassium channels in cell-cycle control and briefly review some of the identified channels that illustrate the multiple ways in which this group of proteins can influence cell proliferation and modulate cell-cycle progression.

The tumor suppressor and deubiquitinase (DUB) BAP1 and its Drosophila ortholog Calypso assemble DUB complexes with the transcription regulators Additional sex combs-like (ASXL1, ASXL2, ASXL3) and Asx respectively. ASXLs and Asx use their DEUBiquitinase ADaptor (DEUBAD) domain to stimulate BAP1/Calypso DUB activity. Here we report that monoubiquitination of the DEUBAD is a general feature of ASXLs and Asx. BAP1 promotes DEUBAD monoubiquitination resulting in an increased stability of ASXL2, which in turn stimulates BAP1 DUB activity. ASXL2 monoubiquitination is directly catalyzed by UBE2E family of Ubiquitin-conjugating enzymes and regulates mammalian cell proliferation. Remarkably, Calypso also regulates Asx monoubiquitination and transgenic flies expressing monoubiquitination-defective Asx mutant exhibit developmental defects. Finally, the protein levels of ASXL2, BAP1 and UBE2E enzymes are highly correlated in mesothelioma tumors suggesting the importance of this signaling axis for tumor suppression. We propose that monoubiquitination orchestrates a molecular symbiosis relationship between ASXLs and BAP1. Additional sex combs-like (ASXLs) stimulate BAP1 deubiquitinase activity to induce tumor suppression, but how these complexes work in coordination in vivo is unclear. Here, the authors show the mutually reinforcing roles of BAP1 and ASXLs such that BAP1 promotes DEUBAD monoubiquitination of ASXL2, which in turn stimulates BAP1 DUB activity.

WEE1 kinase is a key regulator of the G2/M transition. The WEE1 kinase inhibitor AZD1775 (WEE1i) induces origin firing in replicating cells. We show that WEE1i induces CDK1-dependent RIF1 phosphorylation and CDK2- and CDC7-dependent activation of the replicative helicase. WEE1 suppresses CDK1 and CDK2 kinase activities to regulate the G1/S transition after the origin licensing is complete. We identify a role for WEE1 in cell cycle regulation and important effects of AZD1775, which is in clinical trials.

Quiescence is a fundamental feature of plant life, which enables plasticity, renewal and fidelity of the somatic cell line. Cellular quiescence is defined by arrest in a particular phase of the cell cycle, typically G1 or G2; however, the regulation of quiescence and proliferation can also be considered across wider scales in space and time. As such, quiescence is a defining feature of plant development and phenology, from meristematic stem cell progenitors to terminally differentiated cells, as well as dormant or suppressed seeds and buds. While the physiology of each of these states differs considerably, each is referred to as 'cell cycle arrest' or 'G1 arrest'. Here the physiology and molecular regulation of (1) meristematic quiescence, (2) dormancy and (3) terminal differentiation (cell cycle exit) are considered in order to determine whether and how the molecular decisions guiding these nuclear states are distinct. A brief overview of the canonical cell cycle regulators is provided, and the genetic and genomic, as well as physiological, evidence is considered regarding two primary questions: (1) Are the canonical cell cycle regulators superior or subordinate in the regulation of quiescence? (2) Are these three modes of quiescence governed by distinct molecular controls? Meristematic quiescence, dormancy and terminal differentiation are each predominantly characterized by G1 arrest but regulated distinctly, at a level largely superior to the canonical cell cycle. Meristematic quiescence is intrinsically linked to non-cell-autonomous regulation of meristem cell identity, and particularly through the influence of ubiquitin-dependent proteolysis, in partnership with reactive oxygen species, abscisic acid and auxin. The regulation of terminal differentiation shares analogous features with meristematic quiescence, albeit with specific activators and a greater role for cytokinin signalling. Dormancy meanwhile appears to be regulated at the level of chromatin accessibility, by Polycomb group-type histone modifications of particular dormancy genes.

Key Points Mitotic exit comprises all the mitotic stages after 'satisfaction' of the spindle assembly checkpoint, including chromosome segregation, cytokinesis and reassembly of interphase cell structures. Mitotic exit is largely driven by inactivation of mitotic kinases, as well as by activation of counteracting mitotic exit phosphatases, which leads to a net dephosphorylation of a large range of substrates. The key mitotic exit phosphatase in budding yeast is Cdc14, which is regulated by two regulatory networks: Cdc14 early anaphase release (FEAR) and mitotic exit network (MEN). Animal cell mitotic exit depends on protein phosphatases PP1 and PP2A, and the key function of Cdc14 does not seem to be conserved in species other than budding yeast. A regulatory network involving Greatwall kinase and its substrates, the PP2A-inhibitors α-endosulphine (ENSA) and cyclic AMP-regulated phosphoprotein 19 (ARPP19), establishes a mutual inhibition between cyclin-dependent kinase 1 (CDK1) and PP2A. Mitotic exit phosphatases are attractive candidate targets for the development of future cancer therapeutics. The regulation of mitotic exit requires the rapid reversal of mitotic phosphorylation on a broad range of substrates. This requires not only inactivation of mitotic kinases but also activation of protein phosphatases, which work in regulatory networks to ensure that an interphase cell is correctly established. The mitosis-to-interphase transition involves dramatic cellular reorganization from a state that supports chromosome segregation to a state that complies with all functions of an interphase cell. This process, termed mitotic exit, depends on the removal of mitotic phosphorylations from a broad range of substrates. Mitotic exit regulation involves inactivation of mitotic kinases and activation of counteracting protein phosphatases. The key mitotic exit phosphatase in budding yeast, Cdc14, is now well understood. By contrast, in animal cells, it is now emerging that mitotic exit relies on distinct regulatory networks, including the protein phosphatases PP1 and PP2A.