Inviting an author to review:
Find an author and click ‘Invite to review selected article’ near their name.
Search for authorsSearch for similar articles
2
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Oxaliplatin disrupts nucleolar function through biophysical disintegration

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          SUMMARY

          Platinum (Pt) compounds such as oxaliplatin are among the most commonly prescribed anti-cancer drugs. Despite their considerable clinical impact, the molecular basis of platinum cytotoxicity and cancer specificity remain unclear. Here we show that oxaliplatin, a backbone for the treatment of colorectal cancer, causes liquid-liquid demixing of nucleoli at clinically relevant concentrations. Our data suggest that this biophysical defect leads to cell-cycle arrest, shutdown of Pol I-mediated transcription, and ultimately cell death. We propose that instead of targeting a single molecule, oxaliplatin preferentially partitions into nucleoli, where it modifies nucleolar RNA and proteins. This mechanism provides a general approach for drugging the increasing number of cellular processes linked to biomolecular condensates.

          Graphical abstract

          In brief

          Schmidt et al. report on the mechanism of the anti-cancer drug oxaliplatin. They find that oxaliplatin affects phase separation, disintegrates nucleoli, and indirectly inhibits rRNA synthesis. This suggests that targeting the nucleolus with drugs modulating its biophysical properties is a viable anti-cancer strategy.

          Related collections

          Most cited references59

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          The Cancer Cell Line Encyclopedia enables predictive modeling of anticancer drug sensitivity

          The systematic translation of cancer genomic data into knowledge of tumor biology and therapeutic avenues remains challenging. Such efforts should be greatly aided by robust preclinical model systems that reflect the genomic diversity of human cancers and for which detailed genetic and pharmacologic annotation is available 1 . Here we describe the Cancer Cell Line Encyclopedia (CCLE): a compilation of gene expression, chromosomal copy number, and massively parallel sequencing data from 947 human cancer cell lines. When coupled with pharmacologic profiles for 24 anticancer drugs across 479 of the lines, this collection allowed identification of genetic, lineage, and gene expression-based predictors of drug sensitivity. In addition to known predictors, we found that plasma cell lineage correlated with sensitivity to IGF1 receptor inhibitors; AHR expression was associated with MEK inhibitor efficacy in NRAS-mutant lines; and SLFN11 expression predicted sensitivity to topoisomerase inhibitors. Altogether, our results suggest that large, annotated cell line collections may help to enable preclinical stratification schemata for anticancer agents. The generation of genetic predictions of drug response in the preclinical setting and their incorporation into cancer clinical trial design could speed the emergence of “personalized” therapeutic regimens 2 .
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            The multifunctional nucleolus.

            The nucleolus is a distinct subnuclear compartment that was first observed more than 200 years ago. Nucleoli assemble around the tandemly repeated ribosomal DNA gene clusters and 28S, 18S and 5.8S ribosomal RNAs (rRNAs) are transcribed as a single precursor, which is processed and assembled with the 5S rRNA into ribosome subunits. Although the nucleolus is primarily associated with ribosome biogenesis, several lines of evidence now show that it has additional functions. Some of these functions, such as regulation of mitosis, cell-cycle progression and proliferation, many forms of stress response and biogenesis of multiple ribonucleoprotein particles, will be discussed, as will the relation of the nucleolus to human diseases.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Coexisting Liquid Phases Underlie Nucleolar Subcompartments.

              The nucleolus and other ribonucleoprotein (RNP) bodies are membrane-less organelles that appear to assemble through phase separation of their molecular components. However, many such RNP bodies contain internal subcompartments, and the mechanism of their formation remains unclear. Here, we combine in vivo and in vitro studies, together with computational modeling, to show that subcompartments within the nucleolus represent distinct, coexisting liquid phases. Consistent with their in vivo immiscibility, purified nucleolar proteins phase separate into droplets containing distinct non-coalescing phases that are remarkably similar to nucleoli in vivo. This layered droplet organization is caused by differences in the biophysical properties of the phases-particularly droplet surface tension-which arises from sequence-encoded features of their macromolecular components. These results suggest that phase separation can give rise to multilayered liquids that may facilitate sequential RNA processing reactions in a variety of RNP bodies. PAPERCLIP.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                101573691
                39703
                Cell Rep
                Cell Rep
                Cell reports
                2211-1247
                8 December 2022
                08 November 2022
                14 December 2022
                : 41
                : 6
                : 111629
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Department of Biochemistry, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, USA
                [2 ]Department of Medicine, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, USA
                [3 ]Stanford Cancer Institute, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, USA
                [4 ]Baxter Laboratory for Stem Cell Biology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, USA
                [5 ]Department of Biology, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA
                [6 ]Chan Zuckerberg Biohub, San Francisco, CA, USA
                [7 ]Lead contact
                Author notes

                AUTHOR CONTRIBUTIONS

                H.B.S., Z.A.J., R.R., and O.B. conceptualized the study and wrote the manuscript. H.B.S. and Z.A.J. performed experiments and analysis. B.E.W., M.O.A., and P.K.J. performed and analyzed mass spectrometry. K.H. aided with in vitro experiments. J.J.R. and S.J.D. performed cell survival experiments. M.D.L. provided cell lines.

                [* ]Correspondence: rrohatgi@ 123456stanford.edu (R.R.), onn@ 123456stanford.edu (O.B.)
                Article
                NIHMS1848913
                10.1016/j.celrep.2022.111629
                9749789
                36351392
                b06f0fd5-2a4d-4783-b651-9091d57fbea7

                This is an open access article under the CC BY license ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

                History
                Categories
                Article

                Cell biology
                Cell biology

                Comments

                Comment on this article