Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32826875›Full record

ArticleCell death & disease2020

In vitro analysis reveals necroptotic signaling does not provoke DNA damage or HPRT mutations.

Mark A Miles, Christine J Hawkins

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cell death & disease, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 46% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Mutagenic Consequences of Sublethal Cell Death Signaling.International journal of molecular sciences · 2021
    Review
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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Mark A MilesDepartment of Biochemistry and Genetics, La Trobe Institute for Molecular Science, La Trobe University, Victoria, Australia. m.miles@latrobe.edu.au.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2162-2939
Christine J HawkinsDepartment of Biochemistry and Genetics, La Trobe Institute for Molecular Science, La Trobe University, Victoria, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8120-1071
La Trobe University · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Most anticancer drugs provoke apoptotic signaling by damaging DNA or other means. Genotoxic therapies may enhance a patient's risk of developing "therapy-related cancers" due to the accumulation of oncogenic mutations that may occur in noncancerous cells. Mutations can also form upon apoptotic signaling due to sublethal caspase activity, implying that apoptosis activating drugs may also be oncogenic. Necroptosis is a different way of killing cancer cells: this version of caspase-independent cell death is characterized by receptor-interacting protein kinase-3 (RIPK3) and mixed lineage kinase-like domain protein (MLKL) activation, leading to cell membrane rupture and controlled cell lysis. The mutagenic potential of sublethal necroptotic signaling has not yet been directly investigated. Smac mimetics drugs, which activate apoptotic or necroptotic cell death, do not induce mutations but the mechanistic basis for this lack of mutagenic activity has not been determined. In this study, we compared the mutagenic potential of these two cell death pathways by engineering cells to activate either apoptotic or necroptotic signaling by exposing them to Smac mimetics with or without TNFα, and/or enforcing or preventing expression of apoptotic or necroptotic regulators. We discovered that sublethal concentrations of Smac mimetics in contexts that activated apoptotic signaling provoked DNA damage and mutations in surviving cells. Mutagenesis was dependent on executioner caspase activation of the nuclease CAD. In contrast, RIPK3- and MLKL-dependent necroptotic signaling following Smac mimetic treatment was not mutagenic. Likewise, DNA damage was not provoked in cells expressing a lethal constitutively active MLKL mutant. These data reveal that cells surviving sublethal necroptotic signaling do not sustain genomic damage and provide hope for a reduced risk of therapy-related malignancies in patients treated with necroptosis-inducing drugs.

Indexed as

Signal TransductionAnimalsCaspasesCell DeathCell LineDNA DamageHumansHypoxanthine PhosphoribosyltransferaseMiceMutagenesisMutationNecroptosisProtein KinasesReceptor-Interacting Protein Serine-Threonine KinasesSerpinsThiazolesCaspasesHypoxanthine Phosphoribosyltransferaseinterleukin-1beta-converting enzyme inhibitorLCL161MLKL protein, humanProtein KinasesReceptor-Interacting Protein Serine-Threonine KinasesRIPK3 protein, humanSerpinsThiazolesTumor Necrosis Factor-alphaViral Proteins

Identifiers

PMID32826875
PMCPMC7442655
OpenAlexW3080964396

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.