Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28030798›Full record

ArticleOncotarget2017

Combined inhibition of Wee1 and Chk1 gives synergistic DNA damage in S-phase due to distinct regulation of CDK activity and CDC45 loading.

Sissel Hauge, Christian Naucke, Grete Hasvold, Mrinal Joel, Gro Elise Rødland, Petras Juzenas, Trond Stokke, Randi G Syljuåsen

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Oncotarget, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 37 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
37citing papers in PubMed
3.5field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

37 citing papers in PubMed, 51 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Embryonic Stem Cell-Specific Responses to DNA Replication Stress.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Sissel HaugeDepartment of Radiation Biology, Institute for Cancer Research, Norwegian Radium Hospital, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, N-0310, Norway.
Christian NauckeDepartment of Radiation Biology, Institute for Cancer Research, Norwegian Radium Hospital, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, N-0310, Norway.
Grete HasvoldDepartment of Radiation Biology, Institute for Cancer Research, Norwegian Radium Hospital, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, N-0310, Norway.
Mrinal JoelDepartment of Radiation Biology, Institute for Cancer Research, Norwegian Radium Hospital, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, N-0310, Norway.
Gro Elise RødlandDepartment of Radiation Biology, Institute for Cancer Research, Norwegian Radium Hospital, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, N-0310, Norway.
Petras JuzenasDepartment of Radiation Biology, Institute for Cancer Research, Norwegian Radium Hospital, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, N-0310, Norway.
Trond StokkeDepartment of Radiation Biology, Institute for Cancer Research, Norwegian Radium Hospital, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, N-0310, Norway.
Randi G SyljuåsenDepartment of Radiation Biology, Institute for Cancer Research, Norwegian Radium Hospital, Oslo University Hospital, Oslo, N-0310, Norway.
Oslo University Hospital · NO

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Recent studies have shown synergistic cytotoxic effects of simultaneous Chk1- and Wee1-inhibition. However, the mechanisms behind this synergy are not known. Here, we present a flow cytometry-based screen for compounds that cause increased DNA damage in S-phase when combined with the Wee1-inhibitor MK1775. Strikingly, the Chk1-inhibitors AZD7762 and LY2603618 were among the top candidate hits of 1664 tested compounds, suggesting that the synergistic cytotoxic effects are due to increased S-phase DNA damage. Combined Wee1- and Chk1-inhibition caused a strong synergy in induction of S-phase DNA damage and reduction of clonogenic survival. To address the underlying mechanisms, we developed a novel assay measuring CDK-dependent phosphorylations in single S-phase cells. Surprisingly, while Wee1-inhibition alone induced less DNA damage compared to Chk1-inhibition, Wee1-inhibition caused a bigger increase in S-phase CDK-activity. However, the loading of replication initiation factor CDC45 was more increased after Chk1- than Wee1-inhibition and further increased by the combined treatment, and thus correlated well with DNA damage. Therefore, when Wee1 alone is inhibited, Chk1 suppresses CDC45 loading and thereby limits the extent of unscheduled replication initiation and subsequent S-phase DNA damage, despite very high CDK-activity. These results can explain why combined treatment with Wee1- and Chk1-inhibitors gives synergistic anti-cancer effects.

Indexed as

A549 CellsCell Cycle ProteinsCell Line, TumorCheckpoint Kinase 1Cyclin-Dependent KinasesDNA DamageDNA ReplicationDrug SynergismFlow CytometryHumansNuclear ProteinsPhenylurea CompoundsProtein Kinase InhibitorsProtein-Tyrosine KinasesPyrazinesPyrazoles3-(carbamoylamino)-5-(3-fluorophenyl)-N-(3-piperidyl)thiophene-2-carboxamideadavosertibCDC45 protein, humanCell Cycle ProteinsCheckpoint Kinase 1CHEK1 protein, humanCyclin-Dependent KinasesLY2603618Nuclear ProteinsPhenylurea CompoundsProtein Kinase InhibitorsProtein-Tyrosine KinasesPyrazinesPyrazolesPyrimidinesPyrimidinonesThiophenesUreaWEE1 protein, humancancer treatmentCDK activitycheckpoint kinase inhibitorsDNA damagereplication stress

Identifiers

PMID28030798
PMCPMC5355238
OpenAlexW2561436545

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.