Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 1994 Feb;85(2):187-93.
doi: 10.1111/j.1349-7006.1994.tb02081.x.

Different modes of cell-killing action between DNA topoisomerase I and II inhibitors revealed by kinetic analysis

Affiliations

Different modes of cell-killing action between DNA topoisomerase I and II inhibitors revealed by kinetic analysis

M Inaba et al. Jpn J Cancer Res. 1994 Feb.

Abstract

We compared the modes of cell-killing by DNA topoisomerase I and II inhibitors. The effects of camptothecin (CPT), KT-6528 and UCE6 upon colony formation by inhibiting DNA topoisomerase I, and of etoposide (VP-16), teniposide, amsacrine and UCT4-A as inhibitors of DNA topoisomerase II were analyzed based upon a kinetic method that distinguishes between cell cycle phase-specific and -nonspecific agents. Human colorectal cancer WiDr cells were exposed to several concentrations of each agent for various periods and 90%-inhibitory concentrations (IC90) at each time were determined by means of a clonogenic assay. When exposure times and corresponding IC90s were plotted on a log-log scale, all inhibitors of DNA topoisomerase II gave curves including a linear portion with a slope of -1, which is characteristic of cell cycle phase-nonspecific agents. In contrast, the curves for all inhibitors of DNA topoisomerase I had a much steeper slope than -1, which is typical of cell cycle phase-specific agents. In agreement with this finding, the cells were remarkably accumulated in the G2-M phase when exposed to VP-16, but in late S-phase when exposed to CPT as determined by a flow cytometric assay. These results indicated that the two classes of agents kill cells in a quite different manner although they are inhibitors of similar enzymes.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. ) Liu , L. F.DNA topoisomerase poisons as antitumor drugs . Annu. Rev. Biochem. , 58 , 351 – 375 ( 1989. ). - PubMed
    1. ) Pommier , Y.DNA topoisomerase I and II in cancer chemotherapy: update and perspectives . Cancer Chemother. Pharmacol. , 32 , 103 – 108 ( 1993. ). - PubMed
    1. ) Zhang , H. , D'Arpa , P. and Liu , L. F.A model for tumor cell killing by topoisomerase poisons . Cancer Cells , 2 , 23 – 27 ( 1990. ). - PubMed
    1. ) Gewirtz , D. A.Does bulk damage to DNA explain the cytostatic and cytotoxic effects of topoisomerase II inhibitors ? Biochem. Pharmacol. , 42 , 2253 – 2258 ( 1991. ). - PubMed
    1. ) Hsiang , Y.‐H. , Lihou , M. G. and Liu , L. F.Arrest of replication forks by drug‐stabilized topoisomerase I‐DNA cleavable complexes as a mechanism of cell killing by camptothecin . Cancer Res. , 49 , 5077 – 5082 ( 1989. ). - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources