This Article Abstract Full Text (PDF) Supplementary Data Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Ridpath, J. R. Articles by Nakamura, J. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Ridpath, J. R. Articles by Nakamura, J.

Cells Deficient in the FANC/BRCA Pathway Are Hypersensitive to Plasma Levels of Formaldehyde

¹ Department of Environmental Sciences and Engineering, and ² Curriculum in Toxicology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina; ³ College of Arts and Sciences, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, Virginia; ⁴ Research Reactor Institute, Kyoto University, Kumatori, Japan; ⁵ Department of Radiation Genetics Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto, Japan; ⁶ GSF-National Research Center for Environment and Health, Institute for Molecular Radiobiology, Neuherberg-Munich, Germany; ⁷ Beatson Institute for Cancer Research, Glasgow, United Kingdom; ⁸ Medical Research Council Laboratory of Molecular Biology, Division of Protein and Nucleic Acid Chemistry, Cambridge, United Kingdom; ⁹ Department of Radiation and Cellular Oncology, University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois; and ¹⁰ Department of Human Genetics, Research Institute for Radiation Biology and Medicine, Hiroshima University, Hiroshima, Japan

Requests for reprints: Jun Nakamura, Department of Environmental Sciences and Engineering, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC 27599. Phone: 919-966-6140; Fax: 919-966-6123; E-mail: ynakamur{at}email.unc.edu.

	Abstract

Top Abstract Introduction Materials and Methods Results and Discussion References

 
Formaldehyde is an aliphatic monoaldehyde and is a highly reactive environmental human carcinogen. Whereas humans are continuously exposed to exogenous formaldehyde, this reactive aldehyde is a naturally occurring biological compound that is present in human plasma at concentrations ranging from 13 to 97 µmol/L. It has been well documented that DNA-protein crosslinks (DPC) likely play an important role with regard to the genotoxicity and carcinogenicity of formaldehyde. However, little is known about which DNA damage response pathways are essential for cells to counteract formaldehyde. In the present study, we first assessed the DNA damage response to plasma levels of formaldehyde using chicken DT40 cells with targeted mutations in various DNA repair genes. Here, we show that the hypersensitivity to formaldehyde is detected in DT40 mutants deficient in the BRCA/FANC pathway, homologous recombination, or translesion DNA synthesis. In addition, FANCD2-deficient DT40 cells are hypersensitive to acetaldehyde, but not to acrolein, crotonaldehyde, glyoxal, and methylglyoxal. Human cells deficient in FANCC and FANCG are also hypersensitive to plasma levels of formaldehyde. These results indicate that the BRCA/FANC pathway is essential to counteract DPCs caused by aliphatic monoaldehydes. Based on the results obtained in the present study, we are currently proposing that endogenous formaldehyde might have an effect on highly proliferating cells, such as bone marrow cells, as well as an etiology of cancer in Fanconi anemia patients. [Cancer Res 2007;67(23):11117–22]

	Introduction

Top Abstract Introduction Materials and Methods Results and Discussion References

 
Formaldehyde is an aliphatic monoaldehyde and is a highly reactive environmental pollutant found in automobile emissions and tobacco smoke. Recently, formaldehyde has been reevaluated by the IARC as a known environmental human carcinogen (group 1) due to a positive association between the extent of formaldehyde exposure of workers and their death from nasopharyngeal cancer (1). Whereas humans are continuously exposed to exogenous formaldehyde, this chemical is also a naturally occurring biological compound that is present in all tissues, cells, and bodily fluids. Formaldehyde and its oxidation product, formic acid, function as key intermediates in the "one-carbon pool" (2) used for the biosynthesis of purines, thymidine, and some amino acids. It has been found that the concentration of endogenous formaldehyde in human plasma ranges from 13 to 97 µmol/L (3, 4), with Heck et al. reporting an average of 82 µmol/L (calculated using 1.060 for the density of human blood). Formaldehyde is usually rapidly metabolized by reduction, oxidation, and reduced glutathione (GSH)–dependent pathways. However, saturation in formaldehyde metabolism may lead to DNA damage. It has been well documented that cells exposed to formaldehyde exhibit, as a major form of DNA damage, DNA-protein crosslinks (DPC; ref. 5). DNA-histone crosslinks have been shown to have a strong correlation with formaldehyde-induced tumor incidence in animals. As a result, the level of formaldehyde-induced DPCs is considered to be a good molecular dosimeter for formaldehyde cancer risk assessment (5). Although understanding the importance of DPCs with regard to the genotoxicity of formaldehyde is paramount, little is known about which DNA damage response pathways are essential for cells to counteract formaldehyde.

Fanconi anemia is characterized by developmental abnormalities, susceptibility to certain cancers, and sensitivity to DNA-DNA crosslinking agents (6). At least 13 FANC complementation groups (A, B, C, D1, D2, E, F, G, I, J, L, M, N) have been identified (6). These proteins interact in a common pathway that activates FANCD2 via monoubiquitination (6). Upon recognition of a stalled replication fork, for instance, by the nuclear E3 monoubiquitin ligase core complex, activated FANCD2 is targeted to BRCA1 nuclear foci where it regulates DNA repair by possibly homologous recombination and translesion synthesis (6). DT40 cells and their isogenic mutants have predominantly been used to investigate the function of various gene products (7). In the present study, we assessed the DNA damage response to formaldehyde by the reverse genetic approach using the DT40 cell model system and isogenic human cancer cells deficient in the FANC pathway.

	Materials and Methods

Top Abstract Introduction Materials and Methods Results and Discussion References

 
Materials. Fetal bovine serum (FBS), 2,3-bis[2-methoxy-4-nitro-5-sulfophenyl]-2H-tetrazolium-5-carboxanilide inner salt (XTT), 1-methoxy-5-methylphenazinium methyl sulfate, acetaldehyde, acrolein, glyoxal, and methylglyoxal were obtained from Sigma. Formaldehyde and crotonaldehyde were purchased from Fisher Scientific and Across Organics, respectively. The total GSH quantification kit was from Dojindo Molecular Technologies, Inc. RPMI 1640 culture medium, chicken serum, and penicillin/streptomycin were obtained from Invitrogen.

Cell lines and cell culture. All DT40 mutants were derived from isogenic DT40 parent cell lines (Supplementary Table S1). The DT40 cells and their mutants were cultured as previously reported (8). Parental colorectal cancer cell lines (RKO) cells and isogenic clones harboring an engineered disruption of FANCC or FANCG (9) were cultured in a humidified 5% CO₂ atmosphere at 37°C. The medium consisted of RPMI 1640 cell culture medium containing 10% FBS (heat inactivated), 100 mg/mL penicillin, and 100 mg/mL streptomycin.

Cell survival assay. For DT40 cells and their mutants, suspended cells (600 cells per 250 µL per well) were seeded into 24-well plates, exposed to formaldehyde (and other aldehydes), and allowed to divide for 10 cycles. The formaldehyde used was 37% aqueous and was serially diluted in sterile 1x PBS (Life Technologies) to obtain the appropriate concentrations in the plates. All formaldehyde dilutions were made fresh and kept on ice. (Initially, a colony formation assay was attempted, but discontinued, as it seemed formaldehyde reacted adversely with the methylcellulose semisolid medium). After cultivation, cell viability was determined by the XTT assay (10). For RKO cells and their isogenic cells deficient in FANCC or FANCG, the adhesive cells (600 cells per 250 µL per well) were seeded into 24-well plates and cultivated for 2 days before treatment. After changing to fresh medium, the cells were exposed to formaldehyde and allowed to divide for 7 days. The medium was replenished at 4 days after treatment. The survival rates were determined as described above.

Determination of intracellular total GSH. Total GSH levels were measured according to the manufacturer's directions using a commercially available kit.

Statistical analysis. Survival data were log-transformed giving approximate normality. Analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) was used to test for mean intercept differences and differences in the slopes of the linear dose-response curves between wild-type and a series of mutant cells.

	Results and Discussion

Top Abstract Introduction Materials and Methods Results and Discussion References

 
Homologous recombination repair and nonhomologous end joining repair of DNA damage induced by formaldehyde. We assessed the contribution of each DNA damage response pathway to formaldehyde-induced DNA damage. Toward this end, we used a panel of isogenic DT40 cell mutants (Supplementary Table S1), each of which was defective in a particular DNA repair or cell cycle checkpoint response pathway. Here, we show that formaldehyde causes a reduction in survival of DT40-derived mutants that are deficient in homologous recombination repair. The homologous recombination repair pathway mutants showed sensitivity to formaldehyde in the following order: FANCD2 >> BRCA2 > BRCA1 = XRCC2 = RAD51C = RAD51D = XRCC3 = RAD54 > RAD52 > parent DT40 cells (Fig. 1A and B ; Supplementary Fig. S1A and B). In contrast, cell survival rates were largely equivalent between nonhomologous end joining (NHEJ)–deficient cells and parent DT40 cells (Fig. 1A and B; Supplementary Fig. S1C). One of the metabolic pathways used by cells to detoxify formaldehyde is GSH-dependent. Therefore, we tested whether there is an association between intracellular GSH levels and hypersensitivity of homologous recombination–deficient cells to formaldehyde. However, we found no correlation between GSH concentrations and formaldehyde-induced cell toxicity in series of isogenic DT40 cells (data not shown). These results revealed a requirement for the homologous recombination pathway, but not the NHEJ pathway, in processing DNA damage induced by formaldehyde, strongly suggesting that the homologous recombination pathway is involved in repair of DPCs.

View larger version (33K): [in this window] [in a new window] [Download PPT slide]   Figure 1. Relative LC50 values and linear regression analysis of cell survival results in DT40 cells and their mutants exposed to formaldehyde. A, each LC50 value was calculated from results of cell survival data shown in Figs. 2, 3, and 4. Relative LC50 values were normalized according to the LC50 value of parental wild-type cells. N.S., no significance. B, survival rates were log transformed for ANCOVA analysis to compare slopes or interceptions between two lines generated by linear regression lines derived from DT40 wild-type cells and mutants. The value of the slopes was calculated from survival data and was plotted for each mutant. All mutants except ku70 (one of the white columns) showed statistically significant difference in slopes or interception (P < 0.05).

View larger version (15K): [in this window] [in a new window] [Download PPT slide]   Figure 2. Sensitivity of DT40 cells and DT40-derived FANCD2-deficient cells to aldehydic agents. Survival of DT40 cells and FANCD2-deficient cells after exposure to acetaldehyde (A), methylglyoxal (B), acrolein (C), and crotonaldehyde (D). The concentration of each aldehyde is displayed on the x axis in a linear scale, whereas the survival rates are displayed on the y axis in a logarithmic scale. Points, mean for three or four wells; bars, SD. Reproducibility was confirmed at least thrice.

View larger version (12K): [in this window] [in a new window] [Download PPT slide]   Figure 3. Sensitivity of RKO cells and their isogenic cells disrupted in FANCC or FANCG to formaldehyde. Survival of parental RKO cells and their isogenic FANCC–/–/– and FANCG–/– cells after exposure to formaldehyde. The concentrations of formaldehyde are displayed on the x axis in a linear scale, whereas the survival rates are displayed on the y axis in a logarithmic scale. Points, mean for three or four wells; bars, SD. Reproducibility was confirmed at least thrice.

View larger version (19K): [in this window] [in a new window] [Download PPT slide]   Figure 4. Hypothesized pathway for the repair of DPC. DSB, DNA double-strand break.

Role of translesion DNA synthesis and cell cycle checkpoint pathways in the repair of DNA damage induced by formaldehyde. In the DT40 cell model system, REV1-deficient, REV3-deficient, and RAD18-deficient cells have been reported to be hypersensitive to various DNA-DNA intercrosslinking agents, including cisplatin and mitomycin C (15). To determine the role of translesion synthesis in the repair of DNA damage induced by formaldehyde, we exposed DT40 and DT40 cells deficient in REV1, REV3, and RAD18 along with POL to formaldehyde. For the REV1, REV3, and RAD18 mutants, our results show good agreement with the intercrosslinking study, whereas POL mutants were only marginally sensitive to formaldehyde (Fig. 1A and B; Supplementary Fig. S1E). Proliferating cell nuclear antigen (PCNA) has been reported to be partly ubiquitinated in a RAD18-dependent manner, and this monoubiquitination of PCNA is necessary for carrying out translesion synthesis by polymerase in yeasts (16). In addition, it has been proposed that ATR/CHK1 signaling is required for RAD18-mediated PCNA monoubiquitination against DNA damage induced by benzo(a)pyrene dihydrodiol epoxide (17). To further characterize the DNA damage response to formaldehyde, we exposed formaldehyde to cells deficient in the S-phase cell cycle components ATM or CHK1. Formaldehyde sensitivity in these cells was similar to parental cells (Fig. 1A and B; Supplementary Fig. S1F). These results suggest that neither the ATM nor CHK1 pathway participate in the DNA damage response to formaldehyde-induced DNA damage.

Role of FANCD2 in the repair of DNA damage induced by endogenously existing aldehydes other than formaldehyde. Using DT40 cells deficient in FANCD2, the most sensitive cell line to formaldehyde, we addressed whether other major endogenously existing aldehydes cause similar hypersensitivity to FANCD2 cells. Among the endogenously existing aldehydes potentially capable of inducing DPCs (18), acetaldehyde caused hypersensitivity in FANCD2 cells at millimolar levels (Fig. 2A ). Methylglyoxal (Fig. 2B), glyoxal (data not shown), acrolein, and crotonaldehyde (Fig. 2C and D) showed no hypersensitivity in FANCD2 cells (Fig. 2B–D). These results suggest that the FANC pathway may be essential to counteract DPCs induced by aliphatic short monoaldehydes, but not DPCs caused by either aliphatic dicarbonyl compounds or ,β-unsaturated aldehydes. Another possibility is that either ,β-unsaturated aldehydes or aliphatic dicarbonyl compounds may more efficiently introduce other types of deleterious DNA lesions, such as exocyclic base adducts or oxidative base lesions.

Endogenous DPC-inducing agents and Fanconi anemia. Fanconi anemia, a rare disease with heterozygosity existing at a frequency of 0.4% of the population (19), is an inherited disorder associated with progressive bone marrow failure and predisposition to malignant leukemia and solid tumors (6). It has been well documented that cells from Fanconi anemia patients are hypersensitive to DNA interstrand crosslinking agents (6), with an associated increase in chromosomal breakage. We know, however, of no report that has described a condition whereby endogenous reactive agents, such as formaldehyde, have induced DPCs with the further induction of toxicity in cells deficient in the FANC pathway. It has been reported that endogenous formaldehyde in human plasma is detectable at concentrations ranging from 13 to 97 µmol/L (3, 4). The two most sensitive DT40 mutants are FANCD1 (BRCA2)–deficient and FANCD2-deficient cells, which showed hypersensitivity to formaldehyde at concentrations between 10 and 15 µmol/L. This observation raises a question about the relevance of data derived from the DT40 model system to the human cellular response to formaldehyde. Therefore, we exposed RKO cells and their isogenic cells disrupted in FANCC or FANCG. The human cells deficient in either FANCC or FANCG were hypersensitive to formaldehyde at concentrations 20 µmol/L or higher (FANCC) or 38 µmol/L or higher (FANCG; Fig. 3 ). These results indicate that the FANC/BRCA pathway plays a critical function in not only DT40 cells, but in human cells. Therefore, we currently hypothesize that endogenous formaldehyde induces DPCs and plays a critical role in the initiation of progressive bone marrow failure or predisposition to malignant tumors in Fanconi anemia patients.

Possible DNA repair pathways for DPCs induced by formaldehyde. It is widely accepted that formaldehyde predominantly introduces DPCs in cells. The DPC formation is believed to be related to formaldehyde-induced cancer in animals and humans; however, little information is available in terms of the DNA damage response to formaldehyde. Interestingly, we recognized that the DNA damage responses to formaldehyde in the DT40 cell model system were similar to those of cisplatin (15). For example, survival of isogenic DT40 mutants to cisplatin is in the following order: REV3 > FANCC > RAD18 > XRCC2 > XRCC3 > PARP1 > RAD54 > BRCA1 > XPA = ATM > BRCA2 = MSH3 > parental DT40 cells. Because both DNA-DNA crosslinks and DPCs have the potential to cause stalled DNA replication forks and may introduce double-strand breaks, hypersensitivity of homologous recombination–deficient cells to formaldehyde is likely due to DPCs. Furthermore, cisplatin induces DPCs in addition to interstrand or intrastrand crosslinks. The similarity of the DNA damage response in DT40 mutants to cisplatin and formaldehyde also raised the possibility that DPCs caused by cisplatin may have a role in the hypersensitivity of DT40 cells deficient in the FANC/BRCA and homologous recombination pathways. We also found hypersensitivity of PARP1-deficient DT40 cells to formaldehyde. Interestingly, PARP1 also inhibits homologous recombination from interference by Ku and ligase IV in DT40 cells (20). This report, combined with our results, suggests that without precise regulation of homologous recombination in the absence of PARP1, the homologous recombination repair pathway for the repair of double-strand breaks induced by DPCs may not efficiently restore the integrity of genomic DNA. Although XPA mutants are more resistant to formaldehyde compared with homologous recombination–deficient cells (a characteristic shared with cisplatin; ref. 15), XPA-deficient cells were moderately hypersensitive to formaldehyde, suggesting a reasonable role for NER in the elimination of DNA damage caused by formaldehyde. Figure 4 shows a possible DNA repair pathway to counteract DPCs induced by formaldehyde. In the error-free DPC excision process, formaldehyde-induced DPCs could be first degraded to DNA–amino acid crosslinks (DAC) by a cellular proteasome. The NER pathway may recognize and eliminate the DACs followed by DNA repair synthesis (11, 12, 14). In contrast, error-prone DPC excision processes could exist to tolerate formaldehyde-induced damage. After degradation of DPCs to DACs but before initiation of excision repair, DNA replication may start and translesion synthesis DNA polymerases may by-pass and extend DNA synthesis past the DACs. After DNA replication, the NER pathway may recognize and eliminate the DACs followed by DNA repair synthesis. Because homologous recombination–deficient cells are hypersensitive to formaldehyde, the requirement for homologous recombination repair for uncoupling of initiation of DNA replication and excision repair processes can be hypothesized. The NER pathway recognizes and eliminates DACs. Before the completion of excision repair, DNA replication could begin and lead to the formation of DNA double-strand breaks with subsequent repair by a homologous recombination–dependent pathway. Another possibility is that DPCs formed during DNA replication cause stalled DNA replication forks, followed by the formation of DNA double-strand breaks. The homologous recombination–dependent pathway could then repair these DNA double-strand breaks.

	Acknowledgments

 
Grant support: Center for Environmental Health and Susceptibility grant NIEHS P30-ES10126, Superfund Basic Research Program grant NIEHS P42-ES05948, and University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Department of Environmental Sciences and Engineering B.B. Parker Fellows Program, and Public Health Service training grant (J.R. Ridpath).

The costs of publication of this article were defrayed in part by the payment of page charges. This article must therefore be hereby marked advertisement in accordance with 18 U.S.C. Section 1734 solely to indicate this fact.

We thank Dr. Tadayoshi Bessho, Dr. Elizabeth Fryar Tita, Dr. Nadia Georgieva, Dr. Scott Blutman, and Brian F. Pachkowski for critically reading the manuscript and Dr. Scott E. Kern for providing isogenic RKO cells.

	Footnotes

 
Note: Supplementary data for this article are available at Cancer Research Online (http://cancerres.aacrjournals.org/).

Current address for M. Takata: Radiation Biology Center, Kyoto University, Kyoto, Japan, and M. Yamazoe: Wakayama Medical University, School of Medicine, Wakayama, Japan.

Received 8/ 7/07. Revised 9/24/07. Accepted 10/11/07.

	References

Top Abstract Introduction Materials and Methods Results and Discussion References

 

1. Cogliano VJ, Grosse Y, Baan RA, Straif K, Secretan MB, El Ghissassi F. Meeting report: summary of IARC monographs on formaldehyde, 2-butoxyethanol, and 1-tert-butoxy-2-propanol. Environ Health Perspect 2005;113:1205–8.[Medline]
2. Neuberger A. The metabolism of glycine and serine. Amsterdam: Elsevier; 1981.
3. Szarvas T, Szatloczky E, Volford J, et al. Determination of endogenous formaldehyde level in human blood and urine by dimedone-¹⁴C radiometric method. J Radioanal Nucl Chem 1986;106:357–67.[CrossRef]
4. Heck H, Casanova M. The implausibility of leukemia induction by formaldehyde: a critical review of the biological evidence on distant-site toxicity. Regul Toxicol Pharmacol 2004;40:92–106.[CrossRef][Medline]
5. Hubal EA, Schlosser PM, Conolly RB, Kimbell JS. Comparison of inhaled formaldehyde dosimetry predictions with DNA-protein cross-link measurements in the rat nasal passages. Toxicol Appl Pharmacol 1997;143:47–55.[CrossRef][Medline]
6. Kennedy RD, D`Andrea AD. The Fanconi Anemia/BRCA pathway: new faces in the crowd. Genes Dev 2006;19:2925–40.[CrossRef]
7. Yamazoe M, Sonoda E, Hochegger H, Takeda S. Reverse genetic studies of the DNA damage response in the chicken B lymphocyte line DT40. DNA Repair (Amst) 2004;3:1175–85.[CrossRef][Medline]
8. Tano K, Nakamura J, Asagoshi K, et al. Interplay between DNA polymerases β and in repair of oxidation DNA damage in chicken DT40 cells. DNA Repair (Amst) 2007;6:869–75.[CrossRef][Medline]
9. Gallmeier E, Calhoun ES, Rago C, et al. Targeted disruption of FANCC and FANCG in human cancer provides a preclinical model for specific therapeutic options. Gastroenterology 2006;130:2145–54.[CrossRef][Medline]
10. Scudiero DA, Shoemaker RH, Paull KD, et al. Evaluation of a soluble tetrazolium/formazan assay for cell growth and drug sensitivity in culture using human and other tumor cell lines. Cancer Res 1988;48:4827–33.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
11. Minko IG, Zou Y, Lloyd RS. Incision of DNA-protein crosslinks by UvrABC nuclease suggests a potential repair pathway involving nucleotide excision repair. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2002;99:1905–9.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
12. Reardon JT, Sancar A. Repair of DNA-polypeptide crosslinks by human excision nuclease. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2006;103:4056–61.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
13. Schreiber V, Dantzer F, Ame JC, de Murcia G. Poly(ADP-ribose): novel functions for an old molecule. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol 2006;7:517–28.[CrossRef][Medline]
14. Quievryn G, Zhitkovich A. Loss of DNA-protein crosslinks from formaldehyde-exposed cells occurs through spontaneous hydrolysis and an active repair process linked to proteasome function. Carcinogenesis 2000;21:1573–80.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
15. Nojima K, Hochegger H, Saberi A, et al. Multiple repair pathways mediate tolerance to chemotherapeutic cross-linking agents in vertebrate cells. Cancer Res 2005;65:11704–11.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
16. Haracska L, Torres-Ramos CA, Johnson RE, Prakash S, Prakash L. Opposing effects of ubiquitin conjugation and SUMO modification of PCNA on replicational bypass of DNA lesions in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Mol Cell Biol 2004;24:4267–74.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
17. Bi X, Barkley LR, Slater DM, et al. Rad18 regulates DNA polymerase and is required for recovery from S-Phase checkpoint-mediated arrest. Mol Cell Biol 2006;26:3527–40.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
18. Kuykendall JR, Bogdanffy MS. Efficiency of DNA-histone crosslinking induced by saturated and unsaturated aldehydes in vitro. Mutat Res 1992;283:131–6.[CrossRef][Medline]
19. Schroeder TM, Anschutz F, Knopp A. Spontaneous chromosome aberrations in familial panmyelopathy. Humangenetik 1964;1:194–6.[CrossRef][Medline]
20. Hochegger H, Dejsuphong D, Fukushima T, et al. (2006) Parp-1 protects homologous recombination from interference by Ku and Ligase IV in vertebrate cells. EMBO J 2006;25:1305–14.[CrossRef][Medline]

This article has been cited by other articles:

				T. Nakano, A. Katafuchi, M. Matsubara, H. Terato, T. Tsuboi, T. Masuda, T. Tatsumoto, S. P. Pack, K. Makino, D. L. Croteau, et al. Homologous Recombination but Not Nucleotide Excision Repair Plays a Pivotal Role in Tolerance of DNA-Protein Cross-links in Mammalian Cells J. Biol. Chem., October 2, 2009; 284(40): 27065 - 27076. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				A. M. H. Salem, T. Nakano, M. Takuwa, N. Matoba, T. Tsuboi, H. Terato, K. Yamamoto, M. Yamada, T. Nohmi, and H. Ide Genetic Analysis of Repair and Damage Tolerance Mechanisms for DNA-Protein Cross-Links in Escherichia coli J. Bacteriol., September 15, 2009; 191(18): 5657 - 5668. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				S MASUNAGA, K TANO, M WATANABE, G KASHINO, M SUZUKI, Y KINASHI, K ONO, and J NAKAMURA Evaluation of the potential of hexamethylenetetramine, compared with tirapazamine, as a combined agent with {gamma}-irradiation and cisplatin treatment in vivo Br. J. Radiol., May 1, 2009; 82(977): 392 - 400. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

This Article Abstract Full Text (PDF) Supplementary Data Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Ridpath, J. R. Articles by Nakamura, J. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Ridpath, J. R. Articles by Nakamura, J.