Cancer Research Infection and Cancer: Biology, Therapeutics, and Prevention  09 AM Call for Abstracts
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Cancer Research Clinical Cancer Research
Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention Molecular Cancer Therapeutics
Molecular Cancer Research Cancer Prevention Research
Cancer Prevention Journals Portal Cancer Reviews Online
Annual Meeting Education Book Meeting Abstracts Online

[Cancer Research 50, 4453-4457, August 1, 1990]
© 1990 American Association for Cancer Research

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
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 Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Frankfurt, O. S.
Right arrow Articles by Sugarbaker, E. V.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Frankfurt, O. S.
Right arrow Articles by Sugarbaker, E. V.

Flow Cytometric Analysis of DNA Damage and Repair in the Cells Resistant to Alkylating Agents1

Oskar S. Frankfurt2, Daniel Seckinger and Everett V. Sugarbaker

Oncology Laboratory, Cedars Medical Center, Miami, Florida 33136

DNA damage in the cells sensitive and resistant to alkylating agents was determined by flow cytometry analysis of cells stained with anti-DNA monoclonal antibody (MOAB) F7-26. MOAB F7-26 interacted with single-stranded regions in alkylated DNA, and the binding of antibody to the cells increased in proportion to the decrease in cell viability. Development of resistance to L-phenylalanine mustard (L-PAM) in A2780 cells was associated with decreased immunoreactivity of DNA with MOAB F7-26. Fluorescence was significantly lower in resistant cells than in sensitive cells, and the difference in the binding of MOAB between two cell types increased with the dose of L-PAM. The enhancement of L-PAM cytotoxicity to resistant cells by buthionine sulfoximine and hyperthermia was accompanied by a proportional increase of MOAB F7-26 binding to DNA. The same relative potential of sensitization regimens was established by cell survival and MOAB staining. The time course of DNA repair established by decrease of MOAB binding after L-PAM removal was similar in sensitive and resistant cells. Resistance of A2780 cells to L-PAM was associated with low initial level of DNA damage and with decreased cytotoxicity per unit of damage. We conclude that resistant cells could be distinguished from sensitive cells by staining with MOAB F7-26 and that the sensitization of resistant cells could be quantitatively predicted by flow cytometry analysis of MOAB binding.

1 Supported by National Cancer Institute Grant CA50677.

2 To whom requests for reprints should be addressed, at Oncology Laboratory, Cedars Medical Center, 1400 N.W. 12th Avenue, Miami, FL 33136.

Received 2/20/90.





HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Cancer Research Clinical Cancer Research
Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention Molecular Cancer Therapeutics
Molecular Cancer Research Cancer Prevention Research
Cancer Prevention Journals Portal Cancer Reviews Online
Annual Meeting Education Book Meeting Abstracts Online
Copyright © 1990 by the American Association for Cancer Research.