Skip Navigation



Carcinogenesis Advance Access published online on February 20, 2006
Carcinogenesis, doi:10.1093/carcin/bgi319
This Article
Right arrow Advance Access manuscript (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
27/5/883    most recent
bgi319v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Andreassen, P. R.
Right arrow Articles by D'Andrea, A. D.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Andreassen, P. R.
Right arrow Articles by D'Andrea, A. D.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author 2006. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org
Received July 28, 2005
Revised September 5, 2005
Accepted December 17, 2005

REVIEW

DNA damage responses and their many interactions with the replication fork

Paul R. Andreassen 1 *, Gary Ho 2, and Alan D. D'Andrea 2

1 Division of Experimental Hematology, Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, Department of Pediatrics, University of Cincinnati College of Medicine, Cincinnati, OH 45229, USA
2 Department of Radiation Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts 02115, USA

* To whom correspondence should be addressed.
Paul R. Andreassen, E-mail: Paul.Andreassen{at}cchmc.org


  Abstract

The cellular response to DNA damage is composed of cell cycle checkpoint and DNA repair mechanisms that serve to ensure proper replication of the genome prior to cell division. The function of the DNA damage response during DNA replication in S phase is critical to this process. Recent evidence has suggested a number of interrelationships of DNA replication and cellular DNA damage responses. These include S phase checkpoints which suppress replication initiation or elongation in response to DNA damage. Also, many components of the DNA damage response are required either for the stabilization of, or for restarting, stalled replication forks. Further, translesion synthesis permits DNA replication to proceed in the presence of DNA damage and can be coordinated with subsequent repair by homologous recombination (HR). Finally, cohesion of sister chromatids is established coincident with DNA replication and is required for subsequent DNA repair by homologous recombination. Here we review these processes, all of which occur at, or are related to, the advancing replication fork. We speculate that these multiple interdependencies of DNA replication and DNA damage responses integrate the many steps necessary to ensure accurate duplication of the genome.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 J. Virol.Home page
G. J. Nichols, J. Schaack, and D. A. Ornelles
Widespread Phosphorylation of Histone H2AX by Species C Adenovirus Infection Requires Viral DNA Replication
J. Virol., June 15, 2009; 83(12): 5987 - 5998.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 MutagenesisHome page
P. Gottipati and T. Helleday
Transcription-associated recombination in eukaryotes: link between transcription, replication and recombination
Mutagenesis, May 1, 2009; 24(3): 203 - 210.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Nucleic Acids ResHome page
X. Meng, Y. Zhou, S. Zhang, E. Y. C. Lee, D. N. Frick, and M. Y. W. T. Lee
DNA damage alters DNA polymerase {delta} to a form that exhibits increased discrimination against modified template bases and mismatched primers
Nucleic Acids Res., February 1, 2009; 37(2): 647 - 657.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Mol. Cell. Biol.Home page
S. Kumar and J. A. Huberman
Checkpoint-Dependent Regulation of Origin Firing and Replication Fork Movement in Response to DNA Damage in Fission Yeast
Mol. Cell. Biol., January 15, 2009; 29(2): 602 - 611.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Cancer Res.Home page
S. Burdak-Rothkamm, K. Rothkamm, and K. M. Prise
ATM Acts Downstream of ATR in the DNA Damage Response Signaling of Bystander Cells
Cancer Res., September 1, 2008; 68(17): 7059 - 7065.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Genes Dev.Home page
M. Segurado and J. F.X. Diffley
Separate roles for the DNA damage checkpoint protein kinases in stabilizing DNA replication forks
Genes & Dev., July 1, 2008; 22(13): 1816 - 1827.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Clin. Cancer Res.Home page
S. Ashwell and S. Zabludoff
DNA Damage Detection and Repair Pathways--Recent Advances with Inhibitors of Checkpoint Kinases in Cancer Therapy
Clin. Cancer Res., July 1, 2008; 14(13): 4032 - 4037.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Molecular Cancer TherapeuticsHome page
J. A. Casado, P. Rio, E. Marco, V. Garcia-Hernandez, A. Domingo, L. Perez, J. C. Tercero, J. J. Vaquero, B. Albella, F. Gago, et al.
Relevance of the Fanconi anemia pathway in the response of human cells to trabectedin
Mol. Cancer Ther., May 1, 2008; 7(5): 1309 - 1318.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Cancer Res.Home page
J. Wray, J. Liu, J. A. Nickoloff, and Z. Shen
Distinct RAD51 Associations with RAD52 and BCCIP in Response to DNA Damage and Replication Stress
Cancer Res., April 15, 2008; 68(8): 2699 - 2707.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 aacredbookHome page
E. R. Plummer and H. Calvert
Targeting Poly(ADP-Ribose) Polymerase: A Two-Armed Strategy for Cancer Therapy
Am. Assoc. Cancer Res. Educ. Book, April 12, 2008; 2008(1): 15 - 22.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 DevelopmentHome page
M. Yamaguchi, N. Fujimori-Tonou, Y. Yoshimura, T. Kishi, H. Okamoto, and I. Masai
Mutation of DNA primase causes extensive apoptosis of retinal neurons through the activation of DNA damage checkpoint and tumor suppressor p53
Development, April 1, 2008; 135(7): 1247 - 1257.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J. Cell Sci.Home page
X. H. Zhang, C. Zhao, and Z. A. Ma
The increase of cell-membranous phosphatidylcholines containing polyunsaturated fatty acid residues induces phosphorylation of p53 through activation of ATR
J. Cell Sci., December 1, 2007; 120(23): 4134 - 4143.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Clin. Cancer Res.Home page
E. R. Plummer and H. Calvert
Targeting Poly(ADP-Ribose) Polymerase: A Two-Armed Strategy for Cancer Therapy
Clin. Cancer Res., November 1, 2007; 13(21): 6252 - 6256.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Mol. Biol. CellHome page
B. Hodgson, A. Calzada, and K. Labib
Mrc1 and Tof1 Regulate DNA Replication Forks in Different Ways during Normal S Phase
Mol. Biol. Cell, October 1, 2007; 18(10): 3894 - 3902.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J. Biol. Chem.Home page
S. Zhang, Y. Zhou, S. Trusa, X. Meng, E. Y. C. Lee, and M. Y. W. T. Lee
A Novel DNA Damage Response: RAPID DEGRADATION OF THE p12 SUBUNIT OF DNA POLYMERASE {delta}
J. Biol. Chem., May 25, 2007; 282(21): 15330 - 15340.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.