The control of DNA repair by the cell cycle

Nature Cell Biology

Volumn 19, Issue 1, 2017, Pages 1-9

  Hustedt, Nicole ^a,b   Durocher, Daniel ^a,b  

^a MOUNT SINAI HOSPITAL   (Canada)

^b UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ANAPHASE PROMOTING COMPLEX; CYCLIN A; CYCLIN DEPENDENT KINASE 4; CYCLIN DEPENDENT KINASE 6; CYCLIN E; UBIQUITIN PROTEIN LIGASE E3; DNA DIRECTED DNA POLYMERASE; DNA SYNTHESOME; MULTIENZYME COMPLEX;

CELL CYCLE; CELL CYCLE M PHASE; CELL CYCLE PROGRESSION; CELL DIVISION; DNA DETERMINATION; DNA END JOINING REPAIR; DNA REPAIR; DNA REPLICATION; DOUBLE STRANDED DNA BREAK; GENOMICS; HOMOLOGOUS RECOMBINATION; HUMAN; IONIZING RADIATION; MITOSIS; NONHUMAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROTEIN ANALYSIS; PROTEIN CROSS LINKING; PROTEIN EXPRESSION; PROTEIN LOCALIZATION; PROTEIN PHOSPHORYLATION; PROTEIN PROTEIN INTERACTION; REVIEW; ANIMAL; CHROMOSOME; GENETICS; METABOLISM;

ANIMALS; CELL CYCLE; CHROMOSOMES; DNA BREAKS, DOUBLE-STRANDED; DNA REPAIR; DNA-DIRECTED DNA POLYMERASE; HOMOLOGOUS RECOMBINATION; HUMANS; MULTIENZYME COMPLEXES;

EID: 85007092835     PISSN: 14657392     EISSN: 14764679     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1038/ncb3452     Document Type: Review

References (150)

1. Jackson, S. P. & Bartek, J. The DNA-damage response in human biology and disease. Nature 461, 1071-1078 (2009).
2. Murray, A. W. & Hunt, T. The Cell Cycle: An Introduction (Freeman, 1993).
3. Sfeir, A. & Symington, L. S. Microhomology-mediated end joining: A back-up survival mechanism or dedicated pathway? Trends Biochem. Sci. 40, 701-714 (2015).
4. Lieber, M. R. The mechanism of double-strand DNA break repair by the nonhomologous DNA end-joining pathway. Annu. Rev. Biochem. 79, 181-211 (2010).
5. Betermier, M., Bertrand, P. & Lopez, B. S. Is non-homologous end-joining really an inherently error-prone process? PLoS Genet. 10, e1004086 (2014).
6. Wyatt, D. W. et al. Essential roles for polymerase theta-mediated end joining in the repair of chromosome breaks. Mol. Cell 63, 662-673 (2016).
7. Mateos-Gomez, P. A. et al. Mammalian polymerase theta promotes alternative NHEJ and suppresses recombination. Nature 518, 254-257 (2015).
8. Ceccaldi, R. et al. Homologous-recombination-deficient tumours are dependent on Pol?-mediated repair. Nature 518, 258-262 (2015).
9. Verma, P. & Greenberg, R. A. Noncanonical views of homology-directed DNA repair. Genes Dev. 30, 1138-1154 (2016).
10. Essers, J. et al. Analysis of mouse Rad54 expression and its implications for homologous recombination. DNA Repair 1, 779-793 (2002).
11. Symington, L. S. & Gautier, J. Double-strand break end resection and repair pathway choice. Annu. Rev. Genet. 45, 247-271 (2011).
12. Sartori, A. A. et al. Human CtIP promotes DNA end resection. Nature 450, 509-514 (2007).
13. Cannavo, E. & Cejka, P. Sae2 promotes dsDNA endonuclease activity within Mre11-Rad50-Xrs2 to resect DNA breaks. Nature 514, 122-125 (2014).
14. Garcia, V., Phelps, S. E., Gray, S. & Neale, M. J. Bidirectional resection of DNA double-strand breaks by Mre11 and Exo1. Nature 479, 241-244 (2011).
15. Shibata, A. et al. DNA double-strand break repair pathway choice is directed by distinct MRE11 nuclease activities. Mol. Cell 53, 7-18 (2014).
16. Nimonkar, A. V. 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. Park, J. Y., Zhang, F. & Andreassen, P. R. PALB2: the hub of a network of tumor suppressors involved in DNA damage responses. Biochim. Biophys. 1846, 263-275 (2014).
18. Roy, R., Chun, J. & Powell, S. N. BRCA1 and BRCA2: different roles in a common pathway of genome protection. Nat. Rev. Cancer 12, 68-78 (2011).
19. Cejka, P., Plank, J. L., Bachrati, C. Z., Hickson, I. D. & Kowalczykowski, S. C. Rmi1 stimulates decatenation of double Holliday junctions during dissolution by Sgs1-Top3. Nat. Struct. Mol. Biol. 17, 1377-1382 (2010).
20. Wu, L. & Hickson, I. D. The Bloom's syndrome helicase suppresses crossing over during homologous recombination. Nature 426, 870-874 (2003).
21. Ira, G., Malkova, A., Liberi, G., Foiani, M. & Haber, J. E. Srs2 and Sgs1-Top3 suppress crossovers during double-strand break repair in yeast. Cell 115, 401-411 (2003).
22. Ray, J. H. & German, J. 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. Wyatt, H. D., Sarbajna, S., Matos, J. & West, S. C. Coordinated actions of SLX1-SLX4 and MUS81-EME1 for Holliday junction resolution in human cells. Mol. Cell 52, 234-247 (2013).
24. Krasner, D. S., Daley, J. M., Sung, P. & Niu, H. 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. Symington, L. S. & Gautier, J. Double-strand break end resection and repair pathway choice. Annu. Rev. Genet. 45, 247-271 (2011).
26. Takata, M. 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. Siede, W., Friedl, A. A., Dianova, I., Eckardt-Schupp, F. & Friedberg, E. C. The Saccharomyces cerevisiae Ku autoantigen homologue affects radiosensitivity only in the absence of homologous recombination. Genetics 142, 91-102 (1996).
28. Pierce, A. J., Hu, P., Han, M., Ellis, N. & Jasin, M. Ku DNA end-binding protein modulates homologous repair of double-strand breaks in mammalian cells. Genes Dev. 15, 3237-3242 (2001).
29. Saintigny, Y. et al. Characterization of homologous recombination induced by replication inhibition in mammalian cells. EMBO J. 20, 3861-3870 (2001).
30. Frank-Vaillant, M. & Marcand, S. Transient stability of DNA ends allows nonhomologous end joining to precede homologous recombination. Mol. Cell 10, 1189-1199 (2002).
31. Ira, G. et al. DNA end resection, homologous recombination and DNA damage checkpoint activation require CDK1. Nature 431, 1011-1017 (2004).
32. Aylon, Y., Liefshitz, B. & Kupiec, M. The CDK regulates repair of double-strand breaks by homologous recombination during the cell cycle. EMBO J. 23, 4868-4875 (2004).
33. Jazayeri, A. 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. Huertas, P., Cortes-Ledesma, F., Sartori, A. A., Aguilera, A. & Jackson, S. P. CDK targets Sae2 to control DNA-end resection and homologous recombination. Nature 455, 689-692 (2008).
35. Chen, X. 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. Ferrari, M. 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. Huertas, P. & Jackson, S. P. Human CtIP mediates cell cycle control of DNA end resection and double strand break repair. J. Biol. Chem. 284, 9558-9565 (2009).
38. Makharashvili, N. & Paull, T. T. CtIP: A DNA damage response protein at the intersection of DNA metabolism. DNA Repair 32, 75-81 (2015).
39. Wang, H. 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. Yu, X., Wu, L. C., Bowcock, A. M., Aronheim, A. & Baer, R. 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. Yu, X. & Chen, J. 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. Stark, J. M., Pierce, A. J., Oh, J., Pastink, A. & Jasin, M. Genetic steps of mammalian homologous repair with distinct mutagenic consequences. Mol. Cell Biol. 24, 9305-9316 (2004).
43. Schlegel, B. P., Jodelka, F. M. & Nunez, R. BRCA1 promotes induction of ssDNA by ionizing radiation. Cancer Res. 66, 5181-5189 (2006).
44. Cruz-Garcia, A., Lopez-Saavedra, A. & Huertas, P. BRCA1 accelerates CtIP-mediated DNA-end resection. Cell Rep. 9, 451-459 (2014).
45. Steger, M. et al. Prolyl isomerase PIN1 regulates DNA double-strand break repair by counteracting DNA end resection. Mol. Cell 50, 333-343 (2013).
46. Orthwein, A. et al. A mechanism for the suppression of homologous recombination in G1 cells. Nature 528, 422-426 (2015).
47. Barton, O. et al. Polo-like kinase 3 regulates CtIP during DNA double-strand break repair in G1. J. Cell Biol. 206, 877-894 (2014).
48. Tomimatsu, N. et al. Phosphorylation of EXO1 by CDKs 1 and 2 regulates DNA end resection and repair pathway choice. Nat. Commun. 5, 3561 (2014).
49. Wohlbold, L. 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. Falck, J. et al. CDK targeting of NBS1 promotes DNA-end resection, replication restart and homologous recombination. EMBO Rep. 13, 561-568 (2012).
51. Ferretti, L. P., Lafranchi, L. & Sartori, A. A. Controlling DNA-end resection: A new task for CDKs. Front. Genet. 4, 99 (2013).
52. Chen, X. 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. Tkac, J. et al. HELB is a feedback inhibitor of DNA end resection. Mol. Cell 61, 405-418 (2016).
54. Guler, G. D. 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. Gu, J. 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. Spencer, S. L. et al. The proliferation-quiescence decision is controlled by a bifurcation in CDK2 activity at mitotic exit. Cell 155, 369-383 (2013).
57. Jirawatnotai, S. et al. A function for cyclin D1 in DNA repair uncovered by protein interactome analyses in human cancers. Nature 474, 230-234 (2011).
58. Kanakkanthara, A. et al. Cyclin A2 is an RNA binding protein that controls Mre11 mRNA translation. Science 353, 1549-1552 (2016).
59. Cheong, N., Wang, X., Wang, Y. & Iliakis, G. Loss of S-phase-dependent radioresistance in irs-1 cells exposed to Xrays. Mutat. Res. 314, 77-85 (1994).
60. Rothkamm, K., Kruger, I., Thompson, L. H. & Lobrich, M. Pathways of DNA double-strand break repair during the mammalian cell cycle. Mol. Cell Biol. 23, 5706-5715 (2003).
61. Karanam, K., Kafri, R., Loewer, A. & Lahav, G. 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. Saredi, G. et al. H4K20me0 marks post-replicative chromatin and recruits the TONSL-MMS22L DNA repair complex. Nature 534, 714-718 (2016).
63. Piwko, W. 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. Duro, E. et al. Identification of the MMS22L-TONSL complex that promotes homologous recombination. Mol. Cell 40, 632-644 (2010).
65. O'Donnell, L. et al. The MMS22L-TONSL complex mediates recovery from replication stress and homologous recombination. Mol. Cell 40, 619-631 (2010).
66. Botuyan, M. V. et al. Structural basis for the methylation state-specific recognition of histone H4K20 by 53BP1 and Crb2 in DNA repair. Cell 127, 1361-1373 (2006).
67. Fradet-Turcotte, A. et al. 53BP1 is a reader of the DNA-damage-induced H2A Lys 15 ubiquitin mark. Nature 499, 50-54 (2013).
68. Sjogren, C. & Nasmyth, K. Sister chromatid cohesion is required for postreplicative double-strand break repair in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Curr. Biol. 11, 991-995 (2001).
69. Sonoda, E. et al. Scc1/Rad21/Mcd1 is required for sister chromatid cohesion and kinetochore function in vertebrate cells. Dev. Cell 1, 759-770 (2001).
70. Bauerschmidt, C. 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. Strom, L., Lindroos, H. B., Shirahige, K. & Sjogren, C. Postreplicative recruitment of cohesin to double-strand breaks is required for DNA repair. Mol. Cell 16, 1003-1015 (2004).
72. Unal, E. 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. Kim, J. S., Krasieva, T. B., LaMorte, V., Taylor, A. M. & Yokomori, K. Specific recruitment of human cohesin to laser-induced DNA damage. J. Biol. Chem. 277, 45149-45153 (2002).
74. Wilson, M. D. et al. The structural basis of modified nucleosome recognition by 53BP1. Nature 536, 100-103 (2016).
75. Zimmermann, M., Lottersberger, F., Buonomo, S. B., Sfeir, A. & de Lange, T. 53BP1 regulates DSB repair using Rif1 to control 5' end resection. Science 339, 700-704 (2013).
76. Di Virgilio, M. et al. Rif1 prevents resection of DNA breaks and promotes immunoglobulin class switching. Science 339, 711-715 (2013).
77. Escribano-Diaz, C. 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. Feng, L., Fong, K. W., Wang, J., Wang, W. & Chen, J. RIF1 counteracts BRCA1-mediated end resection during DNA repair. J. Biol. Chem. 288, 11135-11143 (2013).
79. Callen, E. et al. 53BP1 Mediates productive and mutagenic DNA repair through distinct phosphoprotein interactions. Cell 153, 1266-1280 (2013).
80. Munoz, I. M., Jowsey, P. A., Toth, R. & Rouse, J. 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. Xu, G. et al. REV7 counteracts DNA double-strand break resection and affects PARP inhibition. Nature 521, 541-544 (2015).
82. Boersma, V. et al. MAD2L2 controls DNA repair at telomeres and DNA breaks by inhibiting 5' end resection. Nature 521, 537-540 (2015).
83. Bouwman, P. 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. Bunting, S. F. et al. 53BP1 inhibits homologous recombination in Brca1-deficient cells by blocking resection of DNA breaks. Cell 141, 243-254 (2010).
85. Cao, L. 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. Chapman, J. R., Sossick, A. J., Boulton, S. J. & Jackson, S. P. BRCA1-associated exclusion of 53BP1 from DNA damage sites underlies temporal control of DNA repair. J. Cell Sci. 125, 3529-3534 (2012).
87. Densham, R. M. et al. Human BRCA1-BARD1 ubiquitin ligase activity counteracts chromatin barriers to DNA resection. Nat. Struct. Mol. Biol. 23, 647-655 (2016).
88. Chapman, J. R. 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. Jacquet, K. 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. Tang, J. et al. Acetylation limits 53BP1 association with damaged chromatin to promote homologous recombination. Nat. Struct. Mol. Biol. 20, 317-325 (2013).
91. Ochs, F. et al. 53BP1 fosters fidelity of homology-directed DNA repair. Nat. Struct. Mol. Biol. 23, 714-721 (2016).
92. Zeman, M. K. & Cimprich, K. A. Causes and consequences of replication stress. Nat. Cell Biol. 16, 2-9 (2014).
93. Semlow, D. R., Zhang, J., Budzowska, M., Drohat, A. C. & Walter, J. C. Replication-dependent unhooking of DNA interstrand cross-links by the NEIL3 glycosylase. Cell 167, 498-511 (2016).
94. Kottemann, M. C. & Smogorzewska, A. Fanconi anaemia and the repair of Watson and Crick DNA crosslinks. Nature 493, 356-363 (2013).
95. Williams, H. L., Gottesman, M. E. & Gautier, J. The differences between ICL repair during and outside of S phase. Trends Biochem. Sci. 38, 386-393 (2013).
96. Marteijn, J. A., Lans, H., Vermeulen, W. & Hoeijmakers, J. H. Understanding nucleotide excision repair and its roles in cancer and ageing. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 15, 465-481 (2014).
97. Williams, H. L., Gottesman, M. E. & Gautier, J. Replication-independent repair of DNA interstrand crosslinks. Mol. Cell 47, 140-147 (2012).
98. Garcia-Rodriguez, N., Wong, R. P. & Ulrich, H. D. Functions of ubiquitin and SUMO in DNA replication and replication Stress. Front. Genet. 7, 87 (2016).
99. Karras, G. I. & Jentsch, S. The RAD6 DNA damage tolerance pathway operates uncoupled from the replication fork and is functional beyond S phase. Cell 141, 255-267 (2010).
100. Daigaku, Y., Davies, A. A. & Ulrich, H. D. Ubiquitin-dependent DNA damage bypass is separable from genome replication. Nature 465, 951-955 (2010).
101. Clarke, D. J., Johnson, R. T. & Downes, C. S. 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. Oliveira, R. A., Hamilton, R. S., Pauli, A., Davis, I. & Nasmyth, K. Cohesin cleavage and Cdk inhibition trigger formation of daughter nuclei. Nat. Cell Biol. 12, 185-192 (2010).
103. Wechsler, T., Newman, S. & West, S. C. Aberrant chromosome morphology in human cells defective for Holliday junction resolution. Nature 471, 642-646 (2011).
104. Matos, J., Blanco, M. G., Maslen, S., Skehel, J. M. & West, S. C. Regulatory control of the resolution of DNA recombination intermediates during meiosis and mitosis. Cell 147, 158-172 (2011).
105. Chan, Y. W. & West, S. C. Spatial control of the GEN1 Holliday junction resolvase ensures genome stability. Nat. Commun. 5, 4844 (2014).
106. Blanco, M. G., Matos, J. & West, S. C. Dual control of Yen1 nuclease activity and cellular localization by Cdk and Cdc14 prevents genome instability. Mol. Cell 54, 94-106 (2014).
107. Eissler, C. L. 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. Matos, J. & West, S. C. Holliday junction resolution: regulation in space and time. DNA Repair 19, 176-181 (2014).
109. Le Beau, M. M. 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. Glover, T. W., Berger, C., Coyle, J. & Echo, B. DNA polymerase alpha inhibition by aphidicolin induces gaps and breaks at common fragile sites in human chromosomes. Hum. Genet. 67, 136-142 (1984).
111. Durkin, S. G. & Glover, T. W. Chromosome fragile sites. Annu. Rev. Genet. 41, 169-192 (2007).
112. Ying, S. et al. MUS81 promotes common fragile site expression. Nat. Cell Biol. 15, 1001-1007 (2013).
113. Naim, V., Wilhelm, T., Debatisse, M. & Rosselli, F. 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. Ehmsen, K. T. & Heyer, W. D. Saccharomyces cerevisiae Mus81-Mms4 is a catalytic, DNA structure-selective endonuclease. Nucleic Acids Res. 36, 2182-2195 (2008).
115. Fricke, W. M., Bastin-Shanower, S. A. & Brill, S. J. Substrate specificity of the Saccharomyces cerevisiae Mus81-Mms4 endonuclease. DNA Repair 4, 243-251 (2005).
116. Minocherhomji, S. et al. Replication stress activates DNA repair synthesis in mitosis. Nature 528, 286-290 (2015).
117. Chan, K. L., North, P. S. & Hickson, I. D. BLM is required for faithful chromosome segregation and its localization defines a class of ultrafine anaphase bridges. EMBO J. 26, 3397-3409 (2007).
118. Biebricher, A. et al. PICH: A DNA translocase specially adapted for processing anaphase bridge DNA. Mol. Cell 51, 691-701 (2013).
119. Hengeveld, R. C. et al. Rif1 is required for resolution of ultrafine DNA bridges in anaphase to ensure genomic stability. Dev. Cell 34, 466-474 (2015).
120. Zirkle, R. E. & Bloom, W. Irradiation of parts of individual cells. Science 117, 487-493 (1953).
121. Rieder, C. L. & Cole, R. W. 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. Terasawa, M., Shinohara, A. & Shinohara, M. Canonical non-homologous end joining in mitosis induces genome instability and is suppressed by Mphasespecific phosphorylation of XRCC4. PLoS Genet. 10, e1004563 (2014).
123. Metzger, L. & Iliakis, G. 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. Mikhailov, A., Cole, R. W. & Rieder, C. L. DNA damage during mitosis in human cells delays the metaphase/anaphase transition via the spindle-assembly checkpoint. Curr. Biol. 12, 1797-1806 (2002).
125. Musacchio, A. Spindle assembly checkpoint: the third decade. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B 366, 3595-3604 (2011).
126. Rogakou, E. P., Boon, C., Redon, C. & Bonner, W. M. Megabase chromatin domains involved in DNA double-strand breaks in vivo. J. Cell Biol. 146, 905-916 (1999).
127. Kato, T. A., Okayasu, R. & Bedford, J. S. 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. Giunta, S., Belotserkovskaya, R. & Jackson, S. P. DNA damage signaling in response to double-strand breaks during mitosis. J. Cell Biol. 190, 197-207 (2010).
129. van Vugt, M. A. 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. Gomez-Godinez, V. et al. Analysis of DNA double-strand break response and chromatin structure in mitosis using laser microirradiation. Nucleic Acids Res. 38, e202 (2010).
131. Mari, P. O. 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. Britton, S., Coates, J. & Jackson, S. P. 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. Nelson, G., Buhmann, M. & von Zglinicki, T. DNA damage foci in mitosis are devoid of 53BP1. Cell Cycle 8, 3379-3383 (2009).
134. Orthwein, A. et al. Mitosis inhibits DNA double-strand break repair to guard against telomere fusions. Science 344, 189-193 (2014).
135. Jullien, D., Vagnarelli, P., Earnshaw, W. C. & Adachi, Y. Kinetochore localisation of the DNA damage response component 53BP1 during mitosis. J. Cell Sci. 115, 71-79 (2002).
136. Benada, J., Burdova, K., Lidak, T., von Morgen, P. & Macurek, L. Polo-like kinase 1 inhibits DNA damage response during mitosis. Cell Cycle 14, 219-231 (2015).
137. Lee, D. H. et al. Dephosphorylation enables the recruitment of 53BP1 to double-strand DNA breaks. Mol. Cell 54, 512-525 (2014).
138. Hayashi, M. T., Cesare, A. J., Fitzpatrick, J. A., Lazzerini-Denchi, E. & Karlseder, J. A telomere-dependent DNA damage checkpoint induced by prolonged mitotic arrest. Nat. Struct. Mol. Biol. 19, 387-394 (2012).
139. Gomez, M. et al. PARP1 is a TRF2-associated poly(ADP-ribose)polymerase and protects eroded telomeres. Mol. Biol. Cell 17, 1686-1696 (2006).
140. Hayashi, M. T., Cesare, A. J., Rivera, T. & Karlseder, J. Cell death during crisis is mediated by mitotic telomere deprotection. Nature 522, 492-496 (2015).
141. Peterson, S. E. 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. Ayoub, N. et al. The carboxyl terminus of Brca2 links the disassembly of Rad51 complexes to mitotic entry. Curr. Biol. 19, 1075-1085 (2009).
143. Freire, R., van Vugt, M. A., Mamely, I. & Medema, R. H. Claspin: timing the cell cycle arrest when the genome is damaged. Cell Cycle 5, 2831-2834 (2006).
144. Oakley, G. G. et al. RPA phosphorylation in mitosis alters DNA binding and protein-protein interactions. Biochemistry 42, 3255-3264 (2003).
145. Anantha, R. W., Sokolova, E. & Borowiec, J. A. RPA phosphorylation facilitates mitotic exit in response to mitotic DNA damage. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 105, 12903-12908 (2008).
146. Esashi, F. et al. CDK-dependent phosphorylation of BRCA2 as a regulatory mechanism for recombinational repair. Nature 434, 598-604 (2005).
147. Krajewska, M. et al. Forced activation of Cdk1 via wee1 inhibition impairs homologous recombination. Oncogene 32, 3001-3008 (2013).
148. Royou, A., Gagou, M. E., Karess, R. & Sullivan, W. BubR1-and Polo-coated DNA tethers facilitate poleward segregation of acentric chromatids. Cell 140, 235-245 (2010).
149. Giunta, S. & Jackson, S. P. 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. O'Connor, M. J. Targeting the DNA damage response in cancer. Mol. Cell 60, 547-560 (2015).