| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Previous Article | Next Article ![]()
Molecular and Cellular Biology, January 2008, p. 177-187, Vol. 28, No. 1
0270-7306/08/$08.00+0 doi:10.1128/MCB.00880-07
Copyright © 2008, American Society for Microbiology. All Rights Reserved.
,
Dragana Kopanja,
Margalit B. Mokyr, and
Pradip Raychaudhuri*
Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Genetics (M/C 669), University of Illinois at Chicago, 900 South Ashland Avenue, Chicago, Illinois 60607
Received 18 May 2007/ Returned for modification 12 June 2007/ Accepted 21 October 2007
| ABSTRACT |
|---|
|
|
|---|
| INTRODUCTION |
|---|
|
|
|---|
The XPE gene encodes DDB2, a subunit of the damaged-DNA-binding protein DDB, which possesses a high affinity for CPDs and 6-4 photoproducts (reviewed in reference 48). Cells from XP-E patients exhibit a deficiency in NER. The NER deficiency in XP-E cells, along with several other in vivo studies, suggested a role for DDB2 in NER (25, 36, 48). Studies with DDB2–/– mice provided further evidence of a role for DDB2 in inhibiting UV-induced skin carcinogenesis (3, 22, 54), a characteristic of the XP gene products.
Because of the high affinity of DDB, a complex of DDB1 and DDB2, for damaged DNA, several studies have implicated DDB2 and DDB in the early damaged-DNA recognition step of NER. However, a direct role for DDB2 or DDB in NER is a point of controversy. Initial studies reported a stimulatory activity of DDB in NER assays in vitro (51). However, two recent studies carried out thorough analyses of the NER activities of DDB (26, 40). Those studies failed to detect any significant NER activity of DDB2 and its associated proteins. It is noteworthy that the in vitro studies were carried out with naked DNA and the assays analyzed the efficiency of excision of the damaged strand. Those studies did not rule out a role for DDB2 in repair in the context of chromatin or a role for DDB2 downstream of excision. Interestingly, DDB2 was shown also to associate with the CBP/p300 family of histone acetyltransferases and it was suggested that DDB participates in NER through remodeling of chromatin at damaged sites (13, 39).
We showed that DDB2, along with DDB1, associates with Cul4A (46). Moreover, Cul4A induces proteolysis of DDB2 through the ubiquitin-proteasome pathway and this proteolysis plays a significant role in regulating the level of DDB2 in S phase of the cell cycle (34). Interestingly, DDB2 also associates with the COP9 signalosome, which is believed to participate in this proteolysis through the ubiquitin-proteasome pathway (17). Degradation of DDB2 was observed also in UV-irradiated cells; it was shown that DDB2 is degraded within hours following UV irradiation (3, 14). However, the Cul4A-mediated proteolysis of DDB2 did not explain why a stable complex containing Cul4A, DDB1, and DDB2 could be detected in cell extracts (46). Recent studies have provided some insight regarding a functional role of the stable association of DDB2 with the Cul4A-DDB1 ligase. It has been suggested that the Cul4A-DDB1-DDB2 complex could participate in NER through ubiquitination of histones. For example, one study indicated that DDB2 functions as an adaptor for ubiquitination of histone H2A by the Cul4A-DDB1 ligase and suggested a role for H2A ubiquitination in the NER function of DDB2 (24). The other study identified Cul4-DDB1-DDB2 as the ubiquitin ligase of histones H3 and H4 and suggested that the ubiquitination of H3/H4 is important for recruiting the NER factor XPC to UV-damaged chromatin (52). Those studies also implied a role for Cul4A and Cul4B in the NER process. While those studies provided evidence of a role for Cul4-DDB1-DDB2 in ubiquitinating histones, the role of histone ubiquitination in NER has yet to be established.
A role for Cul4A-DDB1-DDB2 in the recruitment of XPC was suggested also by other studies. For example, one group suggested that the proteolysis of DDB2 by Cul4A is important for the recruitment of XPC to UV-damaged DNA (14). Those authors showed that depletion of Cul4A by small interfering RNA (siRNA) inhibited the recruitment of XPC onto damaged chromatin. Those studies linked the proteolysis of DDB2 to enhanced recruitment of XPC. However, the idea of enhanced XPC recruitment by DDB2 proteolysis is apparently at odds with studies by other groups. For example, Chen et al. (10) studied the role of c-Abl in regulating the function of DDB2. They showed that c-Abl enhanced the polyubiquitination and proteolysis of DDB2 by activating Cul4A. Moreover, those authors correlated the enhanced proteolysis of DDB2 to inhibition of NER by the c-Abl proto-oncoprotein. The apparently opposite observation could be a result of a different context, i.e., proteolysis of DDB2 at the site of damage versus damaged-site-independent proteolysis of DDB2. In another study, Zotter et al. (57) investigated the rate of XPG recruitment at the damaged chromatin. XPG is recruited by XPA, which in turn depends upon the recognition of damaged chromatin by XPC. Surprisingly, those authors did not see any difference in the rate of XPG recruitment between DDB2-proficient and DDB2-deficient cells. Their results argue against a role for DDB2 in the assembly of the excision complex.
DDB2 possesses a nuclear import function (34, 45), and it is important for the nuclear accumulation of the DDB1 subunit of DDB. The naturally occurring mutant forms of DDB2, identified from XP-E patients, are deficient in enhancing the nuclear accumulation of DDB1 (45). However, the significance of the DDB2-mediated nuclear accumulation of DDB1 has not been studied in detail. In this study, using DDB2–/– mouse embryonic fibroblasts (MEFs), we describe a new function of DDB1/DDB2 in the proteolysis of p53 that is phosphorylated at residue Ser18 (p53S18P). Previous studies showed that Cul4A-DDB1 cooperated with MDM2 in the proteolysis of p53 (5, 35). Here we show that the DDB2-mediated nuclear accumulation of DDB1 is important for the proteolysis of p53S18P following low-dose UV irradiation. In DDB2–/– cells, the proteolysis of p53S18P is inefficient and they accumulate p53S18P, leading to higher expression of p21Waf1/Cip1. Interestingly, deletion of p21Waf1/Cip1 eliminates the repair deficiency in DDB2–/– MEFs. These results provide genetic evidence of a link between the regulation of p21Waf1/Cip1 and the NER function of DDB2.
| MATERIALS AND METHODS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Irradiation. UV irradiation (12 J/m2) of cells was carried out with a Stratalinker adjusted to UV-C irradiation. Medium was removed, and cells were washed with phosphate-buffered saline (PBS) before irradiation. Following irradiation, cells were supplemented with culture medium. Ionizing radiation (IR) of the MEFs was carried out with a Cs-137 irradiator.
Decay rate and Western blot analysis. For analysis of the decay rates of phospho-p53, the MEFs were treated with cycloheximide (50 µg/ml) for 10 to 60 min. Cells were harvested after washing with PBS. Cells were lysed by suspension in 2 volumes of buffer containing 0.4 M NaCl, 20 mM Tris-HCl (pH 7.5), 0.1% NP-40, 5% (vol/vol) glycerol, 1 mM NaF, 1 mM Na-orthovanadate, and a protease inhibitor cocktail. Extracts (50 to 100 µg) were subjected to sodium dodecyl sulfate-10% polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis, followed by blotting to nitrocellulose. The blots were probed with antibodies to p53S15P (Calbiochem), p53-ab (Santa Cruz), Cdk2 (Santa Cruz), or tubulin (Santa Cruz).
Immunostaining. Cells were grown on glass coverslips and infected with recombinant adenovirus expressing T7 epitope-tagged DDB1 or DDB2 at 50 PFU/cell. One hour after UV irradiation, the cells were fixed in 4% paraformaldehyde in PBS for 20 min at room temperature and washed once with 0.1 M glycine in PBS, followed by permeabilization for 5 min with 0.1% Triton X in PBS. After fixation, the cells were washed four times with PBS (for 5 min each time) and blocked with 5% goat serum for 1 h at room temperature. Cells were incubated with the T7 monoclonal antibody (1:200) for 2 h at room temperature. The cells were then washed five times with PBS (for 5 min each time) and incubated with a 1:500 dilution of fluorescein isothiocyanate-conjugated goat anti-mouse antibody for 40 min at room temperature, followed by 10 washes with PBS (2 min each). The cell nuclei were labeled with 4',6'-diamidino-2-phenylindole (DAPI; 2 µg/ml) in PBS for 3 min at room temperature. After a final wash in PBS, the cells were mounted on slides with Vectashield (Vector) mounting medium and viewed with a Nikon microscope.
UDS assays. Unscheduled DNA synthesis (UDS) assays with MEFs were performed as previously described (47). Briefly, MEFs were treated with [3H]thymidine for 1 h to identify and distinguish the S-phase cells. Following that, the cells were subjected to UV irradiation (12 J/m2) and maintained in medium containing [3H]thymidine for 3 h in the absence of serum. The cells were incubated in medium containing unlabeled thymidine for an additional 30 min and then fixed, treated with EM-1 (Amersham), and developed for UDS measurement.
Quantitative reverse transcription-PCR assays. MEFs (wild type or DDB2–/–) and HeLa cells (control or expressing DDB2 short hairpin RNA [shRNA]) were either left untreated or UV irradiated (12 J/m2). Total RNAs were extracted from the treated and untreated cells with Trizol. One microgram of the total RNA was then subjected to DNase I treatment with RQ1 RNase-free DNase I (Invitrogen). The DNase I-treated RNA was then reverse transcribed with an iScript cDNA synthesis kit (Bio-Rad) according to the manufacturer's protocol. PCR amplification was performed in triplicate with the following primers: mouse p21, 5'-TTCCGCACAGGAGCAAAGTG-3' and 5'-AAGTCAAAGTTCCACCGTTCTCG-3' (annealing temperature, 64°C); mouse GAPDH gene, 5'-AACTTTGGCATTGTGGAAGG-3' and 5'-CCATCCACAGTCTTCTGGGT-3' (annealing temperature, 60°C); human p21, 5'-AGGGGACAGCAGAGGAAGA-3' and 5'-GGCGTTTGGAGTGGTAGAA-3' (annealing temperature, 61.2°C); human cyclophilin, 5'-GCAGACAAGGTCCCAAAGACAG-3' and 5'CACCCTGACACATAAACCCTGG-3' (annealing temperature, 55.7°C). Each PCR mixture contained 0.05 µg of cDNA, a 100 nM concentration of each primer, and 1x iQ SYBR green Supermix (Bio-Rad) in a 25-µl volume. Real-time PCR was performed with the MyiQ single-color real-time PCR detection system (Bio-Rad). Melting curve analysis was performed for every reaction, and a single sharp peak was observed. To create a standard curve for relative quantification, the sample that was not treated with UV was chosen as a standard control, diluted in water (1x, 0.2x, and 0.04x), and subjected to real-time quantitative PCR in triplicate. The dilution value (starting quantity) of the standard was plotted against the threshold cycle number at which fluorescence first increased above the background by the use of MyiQ software (Bio-Rad). The expression of the indicated gene in each sample was evaluated with this standard curve. The levels of p21 mRNA were normalized against the levels of GAPDH mRNA (for MEFs) and cyclophilin mRNA (for HeLa cell lines), which were used as internal controls. The change in the levels of p21 mRNA was calculated by dividing the normalized values of p21 RNA in the UV-irradiated samples by the normalized values of p21 mRNA in the nonirradiated samples.
Ubiquitination of p53S18P and p53. p53 ubiquitination was analyzed by a previously described procedure (53).
| RESULTS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
|
|
|
The instability of p53 in UV-irradiated (12 J/m2) cells in Fig. 3 is apparently in disagreement with the notion that UV irradiation stabilizes p53. We observed only a marginal increase in the steady-state levels of p53 following UV irradiation at 12 J/m2 (Fig. 4a). In MEFs, robust stabilization could be detected only when high-dose UV irradiation was used (Fig. 4a). The difference in the stability of p53S18P between wild-type and DDB2–/– cells was detected in UV-irradiated cells only. When wild-type and DDB2–/– MEFs were compared following IR, no significant difference in the decay of p53S18P was observed (Fig. 4b). These observations suggest the existence of an active mechanism that induces the proteolysis of p53S18P following low-dose UV irradiation but not following irradiation with a high dose of UV or IR. Moreover, the rapid proteolysis of p53S18P following low-dose UV involves the XP-E gene product DDB2 because DDB2–/– cells are deficient in that process. However, roles of other modifications of p53 could not be ruled out because we analyzed modification only at one site.
|
|
|
|
|
To investigate the role of p21Waf1/Cip1, we used a lentivirus expressing p21Waf1/Cip1 shRNA to knock down the levels of p21Waf1/Cip1 in UV-irradiated DDB2–/– MEFs. MEFs were infected with the p21Waf1/Cip1 shRNA expression virus or a control lentivirus. Infected cells were subjected to UV irradiation and processed for UDS (47). An aliquot of infected cells was also analyzed for a reduction in the level of p21Waf1/Cip1. The shRNA caused only a twofold reduction in the level of p21Waf1/Cip1; a quantification of the p21Waf1/Cip1 level is shown in Fig. 9a. Nevertheless, the twofold reduction in the level of p21Waf1/Cip1 was sufficient to cause a significant increase in UDS in DDB2–/– MEFs (Fig. 9b). A greater number of nuclei exhibited a higher number of grains in p21Waf1/Cip1 knockdown cells compared to the control, suggesting that accumulation of p21Waf1/Cip1 in DDB2–/– MEFs contributes to the repair deficiency in those cells.
|
|
| DISCUSSION |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Stability of p53/p53S18P in UV-irradiated MEFs. DNA-damaging agents, including UV irradiation, were shown to stabilize p53 by phosphorylating p53 at the Mdm2-binding site through the activation of ATM/ATR and the checkpoint kinases (reviewed in reference 50). However, recent studies with phosphorylation-defective mutants in mouse knock-in models have challenged that view (49 and references therein). In this study, we analyzed the stability of p53 and p53S18P in MEFs. One major caveat of our analyses arises from the fact that p53 is modified extensively and we assayed only total p53 and p53S18P. Therefore, we could not rule out contributions of other modifications in our study. We observed that a low dose of UV irradiation (12 J/m2) does not cause significant stabilization of p53 or p53S18P at the early time points. The stabilization was seen in MEFs when treated with high-dose UV irradiation (60 J/m2). Therefore, the mechanisms that stabilize p53 are active only in high-dose-UV-irradiated cells. We observed phosphorylation of p53 within 1 h at the Ser18 residue, a site phosphorylated by the ATM/ATR kinases, following low-dose UV irradiation. In the wild-type MEFs, Ser18-phosphorylated p53 was as unstable as p53 (Fig. 3). That is consistent with the previous finding that phosphorylation at Ser18 is insufficient for stabilization of p53 (9). Treatment with a proteasome inhibitor stabilized both p53 and p53S18P (Fig. 3). Previous studies suggested that, following the repair of UV- and IR-induced DNA damage, phospho-p53 is dephosphorylated by PPM1D phosphatase (30). Our observations suggest the existence of an additional active mechanism involving the ubiquitin-proteasome pathway that eliminates p53S18P in low-dose-UV-irradiated cells.
In DDB2–/– MEFs, on the other hand, a form of p53 containing phosphorylation at Ser18 (p53S18P) accumulated, resulting from increased stability. The accumulation of p53S18P was associated with an increase in the expression of p21Waf1/Cip1, confirming the presence of higher levels of active p53 in DDB2–/– MEFs. The accumulation of p53S18P in UV-irradiated DDB2–/– MEFs could be explained also by continued phosphorylation in repair-deficient cells. However, the kinetics of accumulation of p53S18P is quite rapid. It was shown that repair-deficient cells exhibited increased stabilization of p53 only at later time points (2). Moreover, the levels of p53S18P were comparable between wild-type and DDB2–/– MEFs in the presence of a proteasome inhibitor. We did not observe a huge increase in the level of p53S18P in DDB2–/– MEFs in the presence of MG132 (Fig. 3b), which would be expected from continued phosphorylation in repair-deficient cells. Also, we observed that in DDB2–/– MEFs, the half-life of p53S18P was much longer than that of total p53 (Fig. 3c), suggesting that they are degraded through different pathways. Furthermore, we show that deletion of p21Waf1/Cip1, a major downstream target of p53S18P, reverses the repair deficiency in DDB2–/– MEFs, providing evidence that accumulation of p53S18P is the cause rather than the effect of repair deficiency. Our observations are clearly congruent with the notion that p53S18P is actively degraded in low-dose-UV-irradiated cells and that there is a deficiency in the proteolysis of p53S18P in DDB2–/– MEFs.
Phospho-p53 is a target of the Cul4A-DDB1 ligase. We showed that Cul4A could target p53 for proteolysis. Moreover, expression of Cul4A delayed the accumulation of p53 following UV irradiation (35). Interestingly, the Cul4A-mediated proteolysis of p53 is dependent upon Mdm2 because Cul4A failed to enhance the decay of p53 in p53/Mdm2– MEFs. Moreover, Cul4A-mediated proteolysis is inhibited by ARF, an inhibitor of Mdm2 (35). Since Cul4A associates with Mdm2, we think that Cul4A functions as a cofactor for Mdm2-mediated proteolysis of p53. It is noteworthy that Cul4A remains associated with the COP9 signalosome, which was shown to associate with p53/Mdm2 and play a role in the proteolysis of p53 (6). It is possible that Cul4A enhances the signalosome pathway of proteolysis of p53. Another group confirmed our results (5), providing additional evidence of a role for DDB1 in the Cul4A/Mdm2-mediated proteolysis of p53. In this study, we showed that DDB1 preferentially bound to p53 that is phosphorylated at Ser18. Moreover, expression of Cul4A accelerated the decay of p53 phosphorylated at Ser18. These results suggest that DDB1 allows the targeting of p53S18P by Cul4A. Interestingly, the nuclear accumulation of DDB1 is enhanced by UV irradiation requiring DDB2 (Fig. 2). Therefore, we suggest that the delay in the proteolysis of p53S18P in DDB2–/– MEFs is a result of a lower level of DDB1 in the nucleus compared to that in UV-irradiated wild-type MEFs, as p53S18P is believed to be a nuclear protein. Our observations provide insight into the mechanism by which p53S18P is targeted for proteolysis in low-dose-UV-irradiated cells. It is noteworthy that phospho-Chk1 has been shown to be a target of proteolysis involving Cul4A following genotoxic stress (55).
p21Waf1/Cip1 and NER in UV-irradiated cells.
p21Waf1/Cip1 is not required for NER, as cells lacking p21Waf1/Cip1 carry out NER efficiently following UV irradiation (47). However, because p21Waf1/Cip1 binds PCNA, a factor required for both NER and DNA replication (37), several groups have investigated the possibility of inhibitory effects of p21Waf1/Cip1 on NER. Initial studies by Li et al. (27) and Shivji et al. (43), with in vitro assay systems for both excision and resynthesis steps, did not find any inhibitory effect of p21Waf1/Cip1 on NER. Pan et al. (38), on the other hand, observed significant inhibition of both excision and resynthesis by p21Waf1/Cip1 by using similar in vitro assays. In their assays, resynthesis was more sensitive to inhibition by p21Waf1/Cip1 than was excision. Moreover, a peptide corresponding to the C-terminal residues of p21Waf1/Cip1 that binds to PCNA was able to inhibit NER in vitro (38). The apparent discrepancy in the observations could have resulted from differences in the extracts used in the assays. For example, excess cyclin-cdk in the extracts would sequester p21Waf1/Cip1, blocking its interaction with PCNA. Interestingly, later studies by Shivji et al. (44) indicated that prebinding of p21Waf1/Cip1 with PCNA could inhibit the filling of a 30-nucleotide gap, a model for the resynthesis step of NER, by purified DNA polymerases
and
. That study also confirmed that a synthetic PCNA-binding p21Waf1/Cip1 peptide is an efficient inhibitor of NER. The inhibition of NER by the C-terminal PCNA-binding domain of p21Waf1/Cip1 was further confirmed by both in vitro and in vivo experiments by Cooper et al. (12). It is possible that the C-terminal peptide of p21Waf1/Cip1 dissected away the interference from cyclin-cdk (which binds to the N-terminal region of p21Waf1/Cip1), allowing the inhibition of NER to be easily detectable. In vivo accumulation of endogenous p21Waf1/Cip1 also inhibits NER. A recent report indicated that Gadd45–/– keratinocytes accumulate p21Waf1/Cip1 at a high level and that the cells are deficient in NER. Moreover, deletion of p21Waf1/Cip1 restores NER capacity to Gadd45-deficient keratinocytes (31). These results are different from what was observed in MEFs, in which deletion of p21Waf1/Cip1 in the Gadd45–/– background did not increase repair function (47). To explain the discrepancy, Maeda et al. (31) stated that, unlike Gadd45–/– keratinocytes, Gadd45–/– MEFs did not accumulate p21Waf1/Cip1 (31). In our present study, we consistently observed that DDB2–/– MEFs expressed p21Waf1/Cip1 at a higher level compared to wild-type MEFs following UV irradiation, an observation that is expected from an accumulation of p53S18P in those cells. Therefore, we considered a potential role for high-level p21Waf1/Cip1 in the inhibition of NER in DDB2–/– MEFs.
We observed that shRNA-mediated knockdown of the p21Waf1/Cip1 level by 50% caused a huge increase in repair synthesis in DDB2–/– MEFs, suggesting that the increased expression of p21Waf1/Cip1 in DDB2–/– MEFs was responsible for the reduced level of UDS. These results were further confirmed by generating DDB2–/– p21–/– double-knockout mice. The MEFs from the double-knockout embryos, unlike those from DDB2–/– embryos, exhibited wild-type levels of UDS. Our results suggest that the regulation of the mechanism that stimulates the synthesis of p21Waf1/Cip1 is critical for efficient NER. We propose that by actively degrading p53S18P, Cul4A-DDB1 and DDB2 maintain the synthesis of p21Waf1/Cip1 at a level that supports efficient repair synthesis. We think that by enhancing DDB2-mediated nuclear import of DDB1, UV irradiation causes an increase in the Cul4A-DDB1-DDB2 complex bound to damaged chromatin. As suggested by others, chromatin-bound Cul4A-DDB1-DDB2 may have a role in histone modification and XP-C recruitment. We see damaged-chromatin binding as a mechanism also to ensure nuclear accumulation of the active ligase. Subsequent proteolysis of DDB2 (3, 14, 33) releases Cul4A-DDB1 from damaged DNA, allowing it to target p53S18P. Because p21Waf1/Cip1 is believed to be an inhibitor of repair synthesis, we suggest that, in addition to its potential role in CPD excision, DDB2 plays an important role in repair synthesis.
| ACKNOWLEDGMENTS |
|---|
We thank H. Kiyokawa, Northwestern University, for the p21 shRNA-expressing lentivirus.
| FOOTNOTES |
|---|
Published ahead of print on 29 October 2007. ![]()
Supplemental material for this article may be found at http://mcb.asm.org/. ![]()
Present address: Ben May Institute for Cancer Research, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL 60637. ![]()
| REFERENCES |
|---|
|
|
|---|
2. Abrahams, P. J., R. Schouten, T. van Laar, A. Houweling, C. Terleth, and A. J. van der Eb. 1995. Different regulation of p53 stability in UV-irradiated normal and DNA repair deficient human cells. Mutat. Res. 336:169-180.[CrossRef][Medline]
3. Alekseev, S., H. Kool, H. Rebel, M. Fousteri, J. Moser, C. Backendorf, F. R. de Gruijl, H. Vrieling, and L. H. Mullenders. 2005. Enhanced DDB2 expression protects mice from carcinogenic effects of chronic UV-B irradiation. Cancer Res. 65:10298-10306.
4. Arias, E. E., and J. C. Walter. 2006. PCNA functions as a molecular platform to trigger Cdt1 destruction and prevent re-replication. Nat. Cell Biol. 8:84-90.[CrossRef][Medline]
5. Banks, D., M. Wu, L. A. Higa, J. Quan, T. Ye, R. Kobayashi, H. Sun, and H. Zhang. 2006. L2DTL/CDT2 and PCNA interact with p53 and regulate p53 polyubiquitination and protein stability through MDM2 and CUL4A/DDB1 complex. Cell Cycle 5:1719-1729.[Medline]
6. Bech-Otschir, D., R. Kraft, X. Huang, P. Henklein, B. Kapelari, C. Pollmann, and W. Dubiel. 2001. COP9 signalosome-specific phosphorylation targets p53 to degradation by the ubiquitin system. EMBO J. 20:1630-1639.[CrossRef][Medline]
7. Bendjennat, M., J. Boulaire, T. Jascur, H. Brickner, V. Barbier, A. Sarasin, A. Fotedar, and R. Fotedar. 2003. UV irradiation triggers ubiquitin-dependent degradation of p21WAF1 to promote DNA repair. Cell 114:599-610.[CrossRef][Medline]
8. Cang, Y., J. Zhang, S. A. Nicholas, J. Bastien, B. Li, P. Zhou, and S. P. Goff. 2006. Deletion of DDB1 in mouse brain and lens leads to p53-dependent elimination of proliferating cells. Cell 127:929-940.[CrossRef][Medline]
9. Chao, C., M. Hergenhahn, M. D. Kaeser, Z. Wu, S. Saito, R. Iggo, M. Hollstein, E. Appella, and Y. Xu. 2003. Cell type- and promoter-specific roles of Ser18 phosphorylation in regulating p53 responses. J. Biol. Chem. 278:41028-41033.
10. Chen, X., J. Zhang, J. Lee, P. S. Lin, J. M. Ford, N. Zheng, and P. Zhou. 2006. A kinase-independent function of c-Abl in promoting proteolytic destruction of damaged DNA binding proteins. Mol. Cell 22:489-499.[CrossRef][Medline]
11. Cleaver, J. E. 2005. Cancer in xeroderma pigmentosum and related disorders of DNA repair. Nat. Rev. Cancer 5:564-573.[CrossRef][Medline]
12. Cooper, M. P., A. S. Balajee, and V. A. Bohr. 1999. The C-terminal domain of p21 inhibits nucleotide excision repair in vitro and in vivo. Mol. Biol. Cell 10:2119-2129.
13. Datta, A., S. Bagchi, A. Nag, P. Shiyanov, G. R. Adami, T. Yoon, and P. Raychaudhuri. 2001. The p48 subunit of the damaged-DNA binding protein DDB associates with the CBP/p300 family of histone acetyltransferase. Mutat. Res. 486:89-97.[Medline]
14. El-Mahdy, M. A., Q. Zhu, Q. E. Wang, G. Wani, M. Praetorius-Ibba, and A. A. Wani. 2006. Cullin 4A-mediated proteolysis of DDB2 protein at DNA damage sites regulates in vivo lesion recognition by XPC. J. Biol. Chem. 281:13404-13411.
15. Ford, J. M., and P. Hanawalt. 1997. Expression of wild-type p53 is required for efficient global genomic nucleotide excision repair in UV-irradiated human fibroblasts. J. Biol. Chem. 272:28073-28080.
16. Friedberg, E. C. 2001. How nucleotide excision repair protects against cancer. Nat. Rev. Cancer 1:22-33.[CrossRef][Medline]
17. Groisman, R., J. Polanowska, I. Kuraoka, J. Sawada, M. Saijo, R. Drapkin, A. F. Kisselev, K. Tanaka, and Y. Nakatani. 2003. The ubiquitin ligase activity in the DDB2 and CSA complexes is differentially regulated by the COP9 signalosome in response to DNA damage. Cell 113:357-367.[CrossRef][Medline]
18. Higa, L. A., I. S. Mihaylov, D. P. Banks, J. Zheng, and H. Zhang. 2003. Radiation-mediated proteolysis of CDT1 by CUL4-ROC1 and CSN complexes constitutes a new checkpoint. Nat. Cell Biol. 5:1008-1015.[CrossRef][Medline]
19. Higa, L. A., M. Wu, T. Ye, R. Kobayashi, H. Sun, and H. Zhang. 2006. CUL4-DDB1 ubiquitin ligase interacts with multiple WD40-repeat proteins and regulates histone methylation. Nat. Cell Biol. 8:1277-1283.[CrossRef][Medline]
20. Hu, J., C. M. McCall, T. Ohta, and Y. Xiong. 2004. Targeted ubiquitination of Cdt1 by the DDB1-Cul4A-Roc1 ligase in response to DNA damage. Nat. Cell Biol. 6:1003-1009.[CrossRef][Medline]
21. Hu, J., and Y. Xiong. 2006. An evolutionarily conserved function of proliferating cell nuclear antigen for Cdt1 degradation by the Cul4-Ddb1 ubiquitin ligase in response to DNA damage. J. Biol. Chem. 281:3753-3756.
22. Itoh, T., D. Cado, R. Kamide, and S. Linn. 2004. DDB2 gene disruption leads to skin tumors and resistance to apoptosis after exposure to ultraviolet light but not a chemical carcinogen. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 101:2052-2057.
23. Itoh, T., and S. Linn. 2005. The fate of p21CDKN1A in cells surviving UV-irradiation. DNA Repair 4:1457-1462.[Medline]
24. Kapetanaki, M. G., J. Guerrero-Santoro, D. C. Bisi, C. L. Hsieh, V. Rapic-Otrin, and A. S. Levine. 2006. The DDB1-CUL4ADDB2 ubiquitin ligase is deficient in xeroderma pigmentosum group E and targets histone H2A at UV-damaged DNA sites. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 103:2588-2593.
25. Keeney, S., A. P. Eker, T. Brody, W. Vermeulen, D. Bootsma, J. H. Hoeijmakers, and S. Linn. 1994. Correction of the DNA repair defect in xeroderma pigmentosum group E by injection of a DNA damage-binding protein. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 91:4053-4056.
26. Kulaksiz, G., J. T. Reardon, and A. Sancar. 2005. Xeroderma pigmentosum complementation group E protein (XPE/DDB2): purification of various complexes of XPE and analyses of their damaged DNA binding and putative DNA repair properties. Mol. Cell. Biol. 25:9784-9792.
27. Li, R., S. Waga, G. J. Hannon, D. Beach, and B. Stillman. 1994. Differential effects by the p21 CDK inhibitor on PCNA-dependent DNA replication and repair. Nature 371:534-537.[CrossRef][Medline]
28. Liu, W., A. F. Nichols, J. A. Graham, R. Dualan, A. Abbas, and S. Linn. 2000. Nuclear transport of human DDB protein induced by ultraviolet light. J. Biol. Chem. 275:21429-21434.
29. Lovejoy, C. A., K. Lock, A. Yenamandra, and D. Cortez. 2006. DDB1 maintains genome integrity through regulation of Cdt1. Mol. Cell. Biol. 26:7977-7990.
30. Lu, X., B. Nannenga, and L. A. Donehower. 2005. PPM1D dephosphorylates Chk1 and p53 and abrogates cell cycle checkpoints. Genes Dev. 19:1162-1174.
31. Maeda, T., R. A. Espino, E. G. Chomey, L. Luong, A. Bano, D. Meakins, and V. A. Tron. 2005. Loss of p21Waf1/Cip1 in Gadd45-deficient keratinocytes restores DNA repair capacity. Carcinogenesis 26:1804-1810.
32. McDonald, E. R., III, G. S. Wu, T. Waldman, and W. S. El-Diery. 1996. Repair defect in p21Waf1/Cip1–/– human cancer cells. Cancer Res. 56:2250-2256.
33. Nag, A., T. Bondar, S. Shiv, and P. Raychaudhuri. 2001. The XP-E gene product DDB2 is a specific target of cullin 4A in mammalian cell. Mol. Cell. Biol. 21:6738-6747.
34. Nag, A., A. Datta, K. Yoo, D. Bhattacharyya, A. Chakrabortty, X. Wang, B. L. Slagle, R. H. Costa, and P. Raychaudhuri. 2001. DDB2 induces nuclear accumulation of the hepatitis B virus X protein independently of binding to DDB1. J. Virol. 75:10383-10389.
35. Nag, A., S. Bagchi, and P. Raychaudhuri. 2004. Cul4A physically associates with MDM2 and participates in the proteolysis of p53. Cancer Res. 64:8152-8165.
36. Nichols, A. F., T. Itoh, J. A. Graham, W. Liu, M. Yamaizumi, and S. Linn. 2000. Human damage-specific DNA-binding protein p48. Characterization of XPE mutations and regulation following UV irradiation. J. Biol. Chem. 275:21422-21428.
37. Nichols, A. F., and A. Sancar. 1992. Purification of PCNA as a nucleotide excision repair protein. Nucleic Acids Res. 20:2441-2446.[Medline]
38. Pan, Z. Q., J. T. Reardon, Li, L., H. Flores-Rozas, R. Legerski, A. Sancar, and J. Hurwitz. 1995. Inhibition of nucleotide excision repair by the cyclin-dependent kinase inhibitor p21. J. Biol. Chem. 270:22008-22016.
39. Rapi
Otrin, V., I. Kuraoka, T. Nardo, M. McLenigan, A. P. Eker, M. Stefanini, A. S. Levine, and R. D. Wood. 1998. Relationship of the xeroderma pigmentosum group E DNA repair defect to the chromatin and DNA binding proteins UV-DDB and replication protein A. Mol. Cell. Biol. 18:3182-3190.
40. Reardon, J. T., and A. Sancar. 2003. Recognition and repair of the cyclobutane thymine dimer, a major cause of skin cancers, by the human excision nuclease. Genes Dev. 17:2539-2551.
41. Sancar, A., L. A. Lindsey-Boltz, K. Unsal-Kacmaz, and S. Linn. 2004. Molecular mechanisms of mammalian DNA repair and the DNA damage checkpoints. Annu. Rev. Biochem. 73:39-85.[CrossRef][Medline]
42. Senga, T., U. Sivaprasad, W. Zhu, J. H. Park, E. E. Arias, J. C. Walter, and A. Dutta. 2006. PCNA is a cofactor for Cdt1 degradation by CUL4/DDB1-mediated N-terminal ubiquitination. J. Biol. Chem. 281:6246-6252.
43. Shivji, M. K., S. J. Grey, U. P. Strausfeld, R. D. Wood, and J. J. Blow. 1994. Cip1 inhibits DNA replication but not PCNA-dependent nucleotide excision-repair. Curr. Biol. 4:1062-1068.[CrossRef][Medline]
44. Shivji, M. K., E. Ferrari, K. Ball, U. Hubscher, and R. D. Wood. 1998. Resistance of human nucleotide repair synthesis in vitro to p21Cdn1. Oncogene 17:2827-2838.[CrossRef][Medline]
45. Shiyanov, P., S. A. Hayes, M. Donepudi, A. F. Nichols, S. Linn, B. L. Slagle, and P. Raychaudhuri. 1999. The naturally occurring mutants of DDB are impaired in stimulating nuclear import of the p125 subunit and E2F1-activated transcription. Mol. Cell. Biol. 19:4935-4943.
46. Shiyanov, P., A. Nag, and P. Raychaudhuri. 1999. Cullin 4A associates with the UV-damaged DNA-binding protein DDB. J. Biol. Chem. 274:35309-35312.
47. Smith, M. L., J. M. Ford, M. C. Hollander, R. A. Bortnick, S. A. Amundson, Y. R. Seo, C. X. Deng, P. C. Hanawalt, and A. J. Fornace, Jr. 2000. p53-mediated DNA repair responses to UV radiation: studies of mouse cells lacking p53, p21, and/or gadd45 genes. Mol. Cell. Biol. 20:3705-3714.
48. Tang, J., and G. Chu. 2002. Xeroderma pigmentosum complementation group E and UV-damaged DNA-binding protein. DNA Repair 1:601-616.[Medline]
49. Toledo, F., and G. M. Wahl. 2006. Regulating the p53 pathways: in vitro hypotheses, in vivo veritas. Nat. Rev. Cancer 6:909-923.[CrossRef][Medline]
50. Wahl, G. M., and A. M. Carr. 2001. The evolution of diverse biological responses to DNA damage: insight from yeast and p53. Nat. Cell Biol. 3:E277-E284.[CrossRef][Medline]
51. Wakasugi, M., A. Kawashima, H. Morioka, S. Linn, A. Sancar, T. Mori, O. Nikaido, and T. Mat