Tetraploidy, aneuploidy and cancer

Current Opinion in Genetics and Development

Volumn 17, Issue 2, 2007, Pages 157-162

  Ganem, Neil J ^a   Storchova, Zuzana ^a   Pellman, David ^a  

^a BOSTON CHILDREN S HOSPITAL   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BRCA2 PROTEIN; DIHYDROCYTOCHALASIN B; KINESIN; MOLECULAR MOTOR; PROTEIN KIF4; PROTEIN P53; TUMOR SUPPRESSOR PROTEIN; UNCLASSIFIED DRUG;

ANEUPLOIDY; BARRETT ESOPHAGUS; BREAST EPITHELIUM; CANCER CELL; CARCINOGENESIS; CELL CYCLE ARREST; CELL CYCLE G1 PHASE; CELL PROLIFERATION; CENTROMERE; CHROMOSOMAL INSTABILITY; CHROMOSOME ABERRATION; CHROMOSOME BREAKAGE; CHROMOSOME REARRANGEMENT; CHROMOSOME SEGREGATION; CYTOKINESIS; DNA DAMAGE; DNA REPAIR; DNA REPLICATION; GENETIC STABILITY; GENOMIC INSTABILITY; HUMAN; IN VIVO STUDY; MITOSIS; NONHUMAN; ONCOGENE H RAS; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROTEIN FUNCTION; REVIEW; TETRAPLOIDY; UTERINE CERVIX CANCER;

ANEUPLOIDY; CELL PROLIFERATION; DNA REPLICATION; GENOMIC INSTABILITY; HUMANS; MODELS, GENETIC; NEOPLASMS; POLYPLOIDY; TUMOR SUPPRESSOR PROTEIN P53;

EID: 34047274772     PISSN: 0959437X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.gde.2007.02.011     Document Type: Review

References (52)

1. Comai L. The advantages and disadvantages of being polyploid. Nat Rev Genet 6 (2005) 836-846
2. Storchova Z., and Pellman D. From polyploidy to aneuploidy, genome instability and cancer. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol 5 (2004) 45-54
3. Kellis M., Birren B.W., and Lander E.S. Proof and evolutionary analysis of ancient genome duplication in the yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Nature 428 (2004) 617-624
4. Zimmet J., and Ravid K. Polyploidy: occurrence in nature, mechanisms, and significance for the megakaryocyte-platelet system. Exp Hematol 28 (2000) 3-16
5. Eggert U.S., Mitchison T.J., and Field C.M. Animal cytokinesis: from parts list to mechanisms. Annu Rev Biochem 75 (2006) 543-566
6. Mullins J.M., and Biesele J.J. Cytokinetic activities in a human cell line: the midbody and intercellular bridge. Tissue Cell 5 (1973) 47-61
7. Shi Q., and King R.W. Chromosome nondisjunction yields tetraploid rather than aneuploid cells in human cell lines. Nature 437 (2005) 1038-1042. Using sophisticated long-term time-lapse imaging, the authors discover that non-disjunction of a single chromosome during mitosis promotes cytokinesis failure and the generation of binucleated tetraploid cells.
8. Norden C., Mendoza M., Dobbelaere J., Kotwaliwale C.V., Biggins S., and Barral Y. The NoCut pathway links completion of cytokinesis to spindle midzone function to prevent chromosome breakage. Cell 125 (2006) 85-98
9. Weaver B.A., Silk A.D., and Cleveland D.W. Cell biology: nondisjunction, aneuploidy and tetraploidy. Nature 442 (2006) E9-E10 discussion E10
10. Rieder C.L., and Maiato H. Stuck in division or passing through: what happens when cells cannot satisfy the spindle assembly checkpoint. Dev Cell 7 (2004) 637-651
11. Brito D.A., and Rieder C.L. Mitotic checkpoint slippage in humans occurs via cyclin B destruction in the presence of an active checkpoint. Curr Biol 16 (2006) 1194-1200
12. Ogle B.M., Cascalho M., and Platt J.L. Biological implications of cell fusion. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol 6 (2005) 567-575
13. Duelli D.M., Hearn S., Myers M.P., and Lazebnik Y. A primate virus generates transformed human cells by fusion. J Cell Biol 171 (2005) 493-503. This work demonstrates that viral-induced cell fusion can lead to proliferating tetraploid human cells if different oncogenes or a mutated version of p53 are expressed.
14. Prasanth S.G., Prasanth K.V., and Stillman B. Orc6 involved in DNA replication, chromosome segregation, and cytokinesis. Science 297 (2002) 1026-1031
15. Daniels M.J., Wang Y., Lee M., and Venkitaraman A.R. Abnormal cytokinesis in cells deficient in the breast cancer susceptibility protein BRCA2. Science 306 (2004) 876-879
16. Boveri T. The Origin of Malignant Tumors (1929), Williams and Wilkins, Baltimore, MD
17. Olaharski A.J., Sotelo R., Solorza-Luna G., Gonsebatt M.E., Guzman P., Mohar A., and Eastmond D.A. Tetraploidy and chromosomal instability are early events during cervical carcinogenesis. Carcinogenesis 27 (2006) 337-343
18. Galipeau P.C., Cowan D.S., Sanchez C.A., Barrett M.T., Emond M.J., Levine D.S., Rabinovitch P.S., and Reid B.J. 17p (p53) allelic losses, 4 N (G2/tetraploid) populations, and progression to aneuploidy in Barrett's esophagus. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 93 (1996) 7081-7084
19. Rajagopalan H., and Lengauer C. Aneuploidy and cancer. Nature 432 (2004) 338-341
20. Sherr C.J., and McCormick F. The RB and p53 pathways in cancer. Cancer Cell 2 (2002) 103-112
21. Brinkley B.R. Managing the centrosome numbers game: from chaos to stability in cancer cell division. Trends Cell Biol 11 (2001) 18-21
22. Nigg E.A. Centrosome aberrations: cause or consequence of cancer progression?. Nat Rev Cancer 2 (2002) 815-825
23. Sluder G., and Nordberg J.J. The good, the bad and the ugly: the practical consequences of centrosome amplification. Curr Opin Cell Biol 16 (2004) 49-54
24. Saunders W. Centrosomal amplification and spindle multipolarity in cancer cells. Semin Cancer Biol 15 (2005) 25-32
25. Yang X., Yu K., Hao Y., Li D.M., Stewart R., Insogna K.L., and Xu T. LATS1 tumour suppressor affects cytokinesis by inhibiting LIMK1. Nat Cell Biol 6 (2004) 609-617
26. Fujiwara T., Bandi M., Nitta M., Ivanova E.V., Bronson R.T., and Pellman D. Cytokinesis failure generating tetraploids promotes tumorigenesis in p53-null cells. Nature 437 (2005) 1043-1047. This study directly tests the tetraploid intermediate hypothesis. The authors demonstrate that tetraploid, but not diploid, p53-null mouse mammary epithelial cells promote tumorigenesis in nude mice.
27. Mazumdar M., Lee J.H., Sengupta K., Ried T., Rane S., and Misteli T. Tumor formation via loss of a molecular motor protein. Curr Biol 16 (2006) 1559-1564. This study demonstrates that mouse embryonic stem cells lacking the chromokinesin Kif4 become aneuploid with both numerical and structural chromosome abnormalities. In addition, these aneuploid Kif4-null cells promote tumorigenesis in vivo.
28. Zhu C., and Jiang W. Cell cycle-dependent translocation of PRC1 on the spindle by Kif4 is essential for midzone formation and cytokinesis. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 102 (2005) 343-348
29. Duelli D.M., Padilla-Nash H.M., Berman D., Murphy K.M., Ried T., and Lazebnik Y. A virus causes cancer by inducing massive chromosomal instability through cell fusion. Curr Biol 17 (2007) 431-437
30. Stukenberg P.T. Triggering p53 after cytokinesis failure. J Cell Biol 165 (2004) 607-608
31. Andreassen P.R., Lohez O.D., Lacroix F.B., and Margolis R.L. Tetraploid state induces p53-dependent arrest of nontransformed mammalian cells in G1. Mol Biol Cell 12 (2001) 1315-1328
32. Guidotti J.E., Bregerie O., Robert A., Debey P., Brechot C., and Desdouets C. Liver cell polyploidization: a pivotal role for binuclear hepatocytes. J Biol Chem 278 (2003) 19095-19101
33. Uetake Y., and Sluder G. Cell cycle progression after cleavage failure: mammalian somatic cells do not possess a "tetraploidy checkpoint". J Cell Biol 165 (2004) 609-615
34. Wong C., and Stearns T. Mammalian cells lack checkpoints for tetraploidy, aberrant centrosome number, and cytokinesis failure. BMC Cell Biol 6 (2005) 6
35. 1.
36. Srsen V., and Merdes A. The centrosome and cell proliferation. Cell Div 1 (2006) 26
37. Aylon Y., Michael D., Shmueli A., Yabuta N., Nojima H., and Oren M. A positive feedback loop between the p53 and Lats2 tumor suppressors prevents tetraploidization. Genes Dev 20 (2006) 2687-2700. The authors demonstrate that disruption of the mitotic spindle with nocodazole causes the tumor suppressor protein Lats2 to translocate from the centrosome to the nucleus, where it activates p53 by inhibiting Mdm2 and arrests the cell cycle. The authors also show that loss of Lats2 promotes the accumulation of polyploid cells upon exposure to nocodazole.
38. Nelson D.A., Tan T.T., Rabson A.B., Anderson D., Degenhardt K., and White E. Hypoxia and defective apoptosis drive genomic instability and tumorigenesis. Genes Dev 18 (2004) 2095-2107
39. Castedo M., Coquelle A., Vivet S., Vitale I., Kauffmann A., Dessen P., Pequignot M.O., Casares N., Valent A., Mouhamad S., et al. Apoptosis regulation in tetraploid cancer cells. EMBO J 25 (2006) 2584-2595. The authors demonstrate that tetraploid cells arising from mitotic slippage or failed cytokinesis activate p53 and are prone to undergo Bax-dependent apoptosis. This work demonstrates that one mechanism that acts to limit tetraploidization in normal cells is apoptosis and that, as a result, defects in the regulation of apoptotic pathways can permit the survival of tetraploid cells.
40. Grandbois M., Beyer M., Rief M., Clausen-Schaumann H., and Gaub H.E. How strong is a covalent bond?. Science 283 (1999) 1727-1730
41. Nicklas R.B. The forces that move chromosomes in mitosis. Annu Rev Biophys Biophys Chem 17 (1988) 431-449
42. Bustamante C., Bryant Z., and Smith S.B. Ten years of tension: single-molecule DNA mechanics. Nature 421 (2003) 423-427
43. Storchova Z., Breneman A., Cande J., Dunn J., Burbank K., O'Toole E., and Pellman D. Genome-wide genetic analysis of polyploidy in yeast. Nature 443 (2006) 541-547. Using a genome-wide screen in budding yeast, the authors identify genes (PSL genes) required for growth of triploids and tetraploids, but not haploids or diploids. Interestingly, the vast majority of the identified genes affected genomic stability.
44. Hau P.M., Siu W.Y., Wong N., Lai P.B., and Poon R.Y. Polyploidization increases the sensitivity to DNA-damaging agents in mammalian cells. FEBS Lett 580 (2006) 4727-4736
45. Lin H., de Carvalho P., Kho D., Tai C.Y., Pierre P., Fink G.R., and Pellman D. Polyploids require Bik1 for kinetochore-microtubule attachment. J Cell Biol 155 (2001) 1173-1184
46. Andrews P.D., Ovechkina Y., Morrice N., Wagenbach M., Duncan K., Wordeman L., and Swedlow J.R. Aurora B regulates MCAK at the mitotic centromere. Dev Cell 6 (2004) 253-268
47. Hauf S., Cole R.W., LaTerra S., Zimmer C., Schnapp G., Walter R., Heckel A., van Meel J., Rieder C.L., and Peters J.M. The small molecule Hesperadin reveals a role for Aurora B in correcting kinetochore-microtubule attachment and in maintaining the spindle assembly checkpoint. J Cell Biol 161 (2003) 281-294
48. Gerstein A.C., Chun H.J., Grant A., and Otto S.P. Genomic convergence toward diploidy in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. PLoS Genet 2 (2006) e145. The authors demonstrate that isogenic haploid, diploid and tetraploid lines of budding yeast, when grown for ∼1800 generations, all converge toward diploidy. This suggests that budding yeast, which are usually diploid, have adapted to prefer a diploid DNA content. This is presumably because diploidy is the state where 'all parts fit best'.
49. Gaetz J., Gueroui Z., Libchaber A., and Kapoor T.M. Examining how the spatial organization of chromatin signals influences metaphase spindle assembly. Nat Cell Biol 8 (2006) 924-932. In this study, the authors use magnetic fields to align paramagnetic chromatin beads within a cell-free mitotic extract to generate chromatin 'strings' of various lengths and shapes. Interestingly, the authors observe that the size and shape of the metaphase spindles that assemble around these chromatin strings are constant, thus demonstrating that spindle size and shape are controlled not by chromatin signals, but rather by the concentration of microtubule regulatory proteins in the extract.
50. Thompson D.A., Desai M.M., and Murray A.W. Ploidy controls the success of mutators and nature of mutations during budding yeast evolution. Curr Biol 16 (2006) 1581-1590. Using evolution experiments, the authors demonstrate that diploid mutator yeast (which are mismatch repair defective) have a growth advantage over diploid non-mutators. By contrast, haploid mutators have no advantage versus haploid non-mutators. This suggests that in the presence of increased mutations, increased ploidy can offer an overall growth advantage.
51. Paquin C., and Adams J. Frequency of fixation of adaptive mutations is higher in evolving diploid than haploid yeast populations. Nature 302 (1983) 495-500
52. Quintyne N.J., Reing J.E., Hoffelder D.R., Gollin S.M., and Saunders W.S. Spindle multipolarity is prevented by centrosomal clustering. Science 307 (2005) 127-129. The authors demonstrate that some cancer cells can cluster supernumerary centrosomes into two poles to prevent chaotic multipolar mitoses. This clustering is dependent on the microtubule minus end-directed motor dynein.