©1995 by The American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Inc.
Binding of the Escherichia coli UvrAB Proteins to the DNA Mono- and Diadducts of cis-N-2-Amino-N-2-methylamino-2,2,1-bicycloheptanedichloroplatinum(II) and Cisplatin
ANALYSIS OF THE FACTORS CONTROLLING RECOGNITION AND PROOF OF MONOADDUCT-MEDIATED UvrB-DNA CROSS-LINKING (*)

(Received for publication, July 18, 1994; and in revised form, June 14, 1995)

Bernard Lambert (1)(§) Jean-Luc Jestin (2) Pascale Bréhin (2) Catherine Oleykowski (3) Anthony T. Yeung (3)(¶) Patrick Mailliet (4) Claude Prétot (4) Jean-Bernard Le Pecq (4) Alain Jacquemin-Sablon (1) Jean-Claude Chottard (2)

From the  (1)Institut Gustave Roussy, URA 147 CNRS, U 140 INSERM, 94800 Villejuif, France, the (2)Université René Descartes, URA 400 CNRS, 75270 Paris cedex 06, France, the (3)Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19111, and the (4)Rhône-Poulenc Rorer SA, Centre de Recherche de Vitry-Alfortville, 94407 Vitry Cedex, France

ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
MATERIALS and METHODS
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
FOOTNOTES
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
REFERENCES

ABSTRACT

The interactions of the Escherichia coli endonuclease UvrAB proteins with the DNA mono- and diadducts of both the cis-racemic exo-[N-2-amino-N-2-methylamino-2,2,1-bicycloheptane]dichloroplatinum(II) (complex 1) and cisplatin (cis-diamminedichloroplatinum(II) (cis-DDP)), have been studied. Complex 1 reacts faster with DNA than cis-DDP and gives monoadducts with a longer lifetime (8 h 20 min chelation t compared with 2 h 40 min for cis-DDP). Using pSP65 plasmid [^3H]DNA, the filter binding assay was associated with the analysis of the nucleoprotein complexes to characterize the UvrAB recognition of the platinum adducts and to demonstrate the occurrence of platinum-mediated DNA-protein cross-linking. First, it is shown that the UvrAB proteins recognize the complex 1 mono- and diadducts with a higher affinity than those of cis-DDP. Fifteen times more cis-DDP adducts per plasmid are required than complex 1 adducts, to lead to similar UvrAB binding. However, the UvrAB proteins recognize monoadducts and diadducts of each complex with a similar affinity. Second, it is shown that UvrB is the protein involved in the nucleoprotein complexes formed from mono- and diadducts of complex 1 and cis-DDP. This protein is also partly cross-linked to DNA with a similar efficiency by monoadducts derived from complex 1 and cis-DDP. However, as UvrB has a greater affinity for the DNA adducts of complex 1 than for those of cis-DDP, more UvrB-platinum-DNA cross-links are formed with complex 1 than with cis-DDP. This study, using a bacterial repair system as a model, points to a possible strategy for making new cytotoxic platinum complexes for mammalian cells.


INTRODUCTION

cis-Diamminedichloroplatinum(II) (cis-DDP) (^1)is one of the most widely used anticancer chemotherapeutic agents. It is thought that this compound exerts its cytotoxic effects through damage to DNA by activating a programmed cell death(1, 2) . Several experimental arguments suggest that the cis-DDP biological properties might result from the specific recognition, by high affinity proteins, of the DNA structural motif induced by intrastrand chelation. Such proteins have been isolated and characterized(3, 4, 5) . It was shown that HMG1 and several other cellular proteins like SSRP1 which contain the same sequence motif, called HMG box, were implied in such recognition. HMG1 or HMG2 proteins are implied in transcription processes(6, 7) . This led the authors to suggest that intrastrand diadducts could induce a DNA structural motif which would mimic the natural binding site of such proteins. According to this hypothesis, cis-DDP activity would result from two nonmutually exclusive events due to the binding of HMG box containing proteins to the intrastrand diadducts: (i) the trapping of these proteins causing cell death by perturbating the transcription of critical genes, (ii) the inhibition of the binding of repair proteins preventing the excision of lesions. All these observations suggest that platinum derivatives able to form intrastrand diadducts should elicit pharmacological properties.

Searching for new platinum derivatives, Hollis et al.(8, 9) synthesized cis-[Pt(NH(3))(2)(Am)Cl] complexes, where Am is an heterocyclic or aromatic amine ligand like pyridine, pyrimidine, purine, or aniline. These compounds form only monoadducts with DNA. Among them, some elicited antitumor properties, although the monoadducts were not recognized by the cellular SSRP1 protein(6) . Since these monoadducts were shown to inhibit DNA replication, it was proposed that their cytotoxic effect was due to the inability of the DNA repair systems to eliminate the lethal lesions. These results suggest, that depending on the nature of the nonleaving ligands, monoadducts could exhibit antitumor properties. Recently, in a cooperative program with our laboratories, Rhône-Poulenc Rorer synthesized platinum complexes characterized by bulky and hydrophobic substituted ethylenediamine ligands(10, 49) . These ligands were chosen in order to increase the affinity of the platinum compounds for the DNA major groove and also to decrease the chelation rate of the platinum monoadducts. Preliminary studies revealed that the rate of monoadducts formation from these complexes was higher than that observed for cis-DDP and that their chelation was indeed very slow. Several of these compounds, like the norbornyl derivative of Fig. 1(complex 1), were found to exhibit strong antitumor properties(10, 49) . Furthermore, these compounds were able to overcome cis-DDP resistance in L1210 cells. These observations suggest that their mechanism of action might be different from that of cis-DDP and might involve a biological processing of the monoadducts. Platinum mono and diadducts are repaired in prokaryotic and eukaryotic cells(2, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18) . Recent studies on trans-1,2-diaminocyclohexanedichloroplatinum(II), which is also characterized by a bulky nonexchangeable ligand, revealed that monoadducts were more efficiently repaired than diadducts by UvrABC excinuclease(14) . The recognition of monoadducts still bearing a labile ligand, chloro or aqua, could lead to its substitution by a protein nucleophilic group. Therefore, such monoadducts might become lethal lesions because of their ability to cross-link repair proteins to DNA. Such DNA-protein cross-linking was not observed with (DACH) dichloroplatinum complexes; however, the authors did not study the interaction of UvrABC excinuclease with monoadducts which still had a labile aqua or chloro ligand.


Figure 1: Structures of the platinum complexes.



In order to test this hypothesis, the UvrAB recognition (19, 20) of complex 1 and cis-DDP DNA adducts was studied using the filter binding assay. The determination of the rate constants of the first platination and chelation steps, together with the use of a technique which rapidly eliminates unbound platinum allowed us to discriminate between the recognition of chloro monoadducts and that of the final diadducts. The cross-linking of UvrAB proteins to DNA via chloroplatinum adducts was determined. The results for complex 1 and cis-DDP are discussed.


MATERIALS and METHODS

Reagents, Enzymes, and pSP65 Plasmid [^3H]DNA

cis-DDP was provided by Rhône-Poulenc Rorer. The platinum complex 1 (Fig. 1) was synthesized by Dr. M. Barreau and P. Mailliet (Rhône-Poulenc Rorer). The UvrA and UvrB proteins used in these studies were prepared and purified as described(21) . The purity of the proteins (more than 95%) was determined by SDS-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis. Nonradiolabeled and ^3H-labeled pSP65 DNA (3005 base pairs, from Promega) were prepared as described(22) . [^3H]Thymidine (60 Ci/mmol) was from Amersham Corp. [^14C]Thiourea (53 mCi/mmol) was from DuPont NEN. Nitrocellulose filters (BA85) were from Schleicher and Schuell. Membrane for microdialysis (VSWP 2500) was from Millipore. Sephadex G10 was from Pharmacia LKB. Stock solutions of platinum derivatives were prepared in dimethyl formamide, and dilutions were performed just prior to the experiments in NaClO(4) 10 mM adjusted to pH 5.5. Thiourea was from Sigma. The thiourea solution was made fresh in Tris-HCl 0.6 M, pH 7.5, and deionized on AG 501-X8 resin (Bio-Rad). Ultrogel AcA22 was from Biosepra.

DNA Platination Kinetics

pSP65 plasmid DNA (6.9 µM nucleotide concentration) was incubated at 37 °C with platinum derivatives (1.7 µM) in 100 ml of NaClO(4) 10 mM, pH 5.5. At the times indicated, 5- or 10-ml aliquots were taken, and the reaction was stopped by adding NaCl (0.5 M final concentration). Unbound platinum was eliminated by precipitation with ethanol. This technique allows the elimination of more than 95% of unbound platinum. After precipitation, aliquots were concentrated 10-20 times in perchloric acid (0.5 M final concentration). Then aliquots were incubated 2 h at 70 °C. DNA content of aliquots was determined at 260 nm. The actual DNA concentration was calculated using a calibration curve established with DNA solutions of known concentration treated with perchloric acid under the same experimental conditions. Platinum content was determined using a furnace-equipped atomic absorption spectrometer Perkin-Elmer 5100. A calibration curve was made between 0 and 500 µg/liter.

Kinetics of Monoadducts to Diadducts Chelation

The method was described previously(14) . Briefly, 0.5 mg/ml salmon sperm DNA was incubated with cis-DDP (510 µM) and compound 1 (230 µM) in TEN buffer (2 mM Tris-HCl, 0.2 mM EDTA and 25 mM NaCl, pH 7.4) for 30 min at 37 °C. These concentrations and the time of incubation were chosen in order to obtain 1.5 platinum adducts/100 bases.

The reaction was stopped by increasing the NaCl concentration to 0.5 M and cooling at 0 °C. Samples were dialyzed twice versus high-salt TEN buffer (TEN plus 0.5 M NaCl) at 0 °C. The samples were precipitated with 0.8 volume of isopropanol, suspended at 1 mg/ml in high-salt TEN. Samples were then dialyzed versus two changes of NaClO(4) 10 mM, pH 5.5, for 2 h at 0 °C in order to remove chloride.

After aliquots were removed for determination of platinum content by AAS and of DNA concentration, the samples were divided into 200-µl aliquots and either left at 4 °C (controls) or incubated at 37 °C. The amount of monoadduct present at each time point was determined by adding 20 µl of 110 mM [^14C]thiourea (specific radioactivity of 5.23 µCi/µmol) and incubating for 10 min at 37 °C. The reaction was stopped by adding 2 ml of cold 5% trichloroacetic acid and cooling to 4 °C. In order to reduce the background, samples were pelleted, the supernatant was removed by aspiration, and the pellet was redissolved in 0.2 ml of 0.1 N NaOH. After reprecipitation of the DNA with cold 5% trichloroacetic acid, the samples were collected by filtration on a glass fiber filter for further analysis.

Plasmid DNA Platination and Nucleoprotein Filter Binding Assay

Since nonlabeled DNA and [^3H]DNA were kept in TE buffer (10 mM Tris-HCl and 2 mM EDTA), samples (10-50 µl) of these DNA were microdialyzed against NaClO(4) 10 mM, pH 5.5 at 0 °C for 2 h prior to platinum treatment. [^3H]DNA (nucleotide concentration of 6.9 µM) was treated with platinum compounds at a drug:nucleotide ratio of 1/4 and incubated in 10 mM NaClO(4), pH 5.5, at 37 °C. At the indicated time, the DNA platination was terminated by two consecutive 2-min centrifugations of 250-µl aliquots on 2.5-ml Sephadex G10 columns that had been equilibrated previously with 10 mM NaClO(4), pH 5.5. Control experiments revealed that this technique allows the elimination of more than 99% of unbound platinum complex. In addition, it was verified that no significant platination occurred during the centrifugation (data not shown).

The formation of stable nucleoprotein complexes between UvrAB and platinated DNA was measured by trapping the native protein-DNA complexes onto nitrocellulose filters as described(22) . The 140-µl reaction mixture consisted of 40 mM potassium morpholinopropane sulfonate buffer at pH 7.5, 85 mM KCl, 1 mM dithiothreitol, 15 mM MgSO(4), 2 mM ATP (binding buffer), 200 fmol (each protein) of UvrA and UvrB, and 14 fmol of [^3H]DNA treated or not treated with platinum compounds. After 10-min incubation at 37 °C, the reaction was stopped by addition of 5 ml of cold 2 SSC (0.3 M NaCl, 0.03 M trisodium citrate). After 5 min in ice in order to eliminate nonspecific binding, the nucleoprotein complexes were collected by trapping onto a BA85 nitrocellulose filter.

All the data were analyzed using nonlinear regression (GraphPAD program, San Diego, CA).

In the text, the results of the binding assay (Fig. 4A and 5A) are expressed as t values which correspond to the incubation time between DNA and the platinum complex required to obtain half the fraction of DNA retained on the filter at infinite time.


Figure 4: UvrAB binding to DNA treated with the platinum complexes to form mainly monoadducts. DNA was incubated with the platinum complexes at 37 °C in NaClO(4) (10 mM, pH 5.5) as described under ``Materials and Methods.'' At the times indicated, unbound platinum complexes were removed by two spun G10 chromatographies, and platinated DNA was incubated with UvrA and UvrB proteins. Then, the filter binding assay was performed (see ``Materials and Methods''). Results are the mean of three independent experiments and are expressed with the standard error of the mean. A, UvrAB binding to platinated DNA as a function of the incubation time between DNA and the platinum complexes. bullet, complex 1; black square; cis-DDP. The results were analyzed by nonlinear regression using GraphPad system (San Diego, CA). The best fits were obtained with exponential and sigmoid curves respectively for complex 1 (R^2: 0.98) and cis-DDP (R^2: 0.999). B, comparison of the relative UvrAB recognition efficiencies for DNA-monoadducts of complex 1 and cis-DDP. The apparent number of proteins bound per plasmid DNA (u) was determined from the fitted curves of A according to , where is the filter retention efficiency (see text), and u is the average number of proteins bound to DNA. The amount of platinum per plasmid was computed from the fitted curves of Fig. 2. The filter retention efficiency is similar for both platinum complexes, since binding experiments were performed in the same conditions. The apparent average number of proteins bound per plasmid is expressed as a function of the platinum amount per plasmid. Linear regressions give u = 0.3 platinum-adducts per plasmid (r = 0.993) and u = 0.02 platinum-adducts per plasmid (r = 0.998), respectively, for complex 1 and cis-DDP. Solid line, complex 1; dotted line, cis-DDP.




Figure 2: Quantification of platinum bound to DNA as a function of incubation time. ^3H-Labeled plasmid DNA (6.9 µM) was treated with platinum complexes at a concentration of 1.7 µM (r(b) = 0.25) at 37 °C in 10 mM NaClO(4) at pH 5.5. Quantification was performed using AAS. bullet, complex 1; black square, cis-DDP. Results were fitted with sigmoid curves. The R^2 values were 0.997 and 0.995, respectively, for complex 1 and cis-DDP.



Since platinum derivatives interact preferentially with guanine that can be considered to be distributed at random, the location of platinum adducts results in a Poisson distribution. The UvrAB proteins binding reflects the amount of binding of platinum to DNA. Therefore, the number of proteins bound specifically to platinum adducts is also described by a Poisson distribution. The apparent average number of proteins bound to DNA (u) can be expressed as follows,

where is the filter binding efficiency which is considered as the probability that a protein complexed to DNA at a particular site, is held on the filter, u is the average number of proteins bound to DNA, and f is the fraction of DNA retained on the filter(23, 24) .

Plasmid DNA Platination and Isolation of DNA-Protein Complexes

An isotopic dilution of ^3H-labeled pSP65 (10,000 cpm/µg) at a nucleotide concentration of 6.9 µM was treated with platinum derivatives at a 1/4 drug:nucleotide ratio. Incubation was performed in 10 mM NaClO(4), pH 5.5, at 37 °C for 30 and 70 min, respectively, for complex 1 and cis-DDP. Such incubation times were chosen in order to obtain 30 and 40 platinum adducts, respectively, of complex 1 and cis-DDP (see Fig. 2). Reactions were stopped by addition of NaCl (0.5 M final concentration). Unbound platinum was eliminated by DNA precipitation with ethanol. DNA pellets were suspended in NaClO(4) 10 mM, pH 5.5, and filtered through a Sephadex G50 column equilibrated with NaClO(4). One part of the sample was used for the UvrAB binding, the other part was incubated 20 h at 37 °C prior to the UvrAB binding, in order to allow the conversion of monoadducts into diadducts.

The UvrAB binding and the isolation of DNA-protein complexes were performed using a method described previously (25, 26) after slight modifications. This method was as follows: 6.7 nM of ^3H-labeled pSP65, treated as above, was incubated with UvrA and UvrB proteins, both 94 nM, at 37 °C in 80 or 140 µl of binding buffer containing 20% glycerol. After 10 min of incubation at 37 °C, samples were loaded onto an AcA22 gel exclusion column (1.0 13 cm) equilibrated in the same binding buffer with 300 mM KCl at 25 °C. The column was run at 4 ml/h, and 700-µl fractions were collected. The DNA content of each fraction was quantified by scintillation counting of 50-µl aliquots. For protein determination, aliquots corresponding to the peak fraction and equivalent either to 90 or 120 ng of DNA were analyzed by SDS-PAGE and silver staining.


RESULTS

DNA Platination

Plasmid DNA (6.9 µM) was treated with the platinum complexes (r(b) = 0.25, where r(b) = adducts per base ratio) as described under ``Materials and Methods.'' The quantification of platinum bound to DNA (i.e. DNA-platinum monoadducts and diadducts) was performed using AAS. The results presented in Fig. 2show that DNA platination involves at least two consecutive steps. They show that, in our experimental conditions, complex 1 reacts faster with DNA than cis-DDP. Further investigation of the kinetic scheme is underway.

Kinetics of Monoadducts to Diadducts Chelation

The chelation reaction was monitored by trapping the monoadducts with [^14C]thiourea, as reported by Page et al.(14) . In Fig. 3, the kinetics of chelation of the monoadducts derived from complex 1 is compared with that of the monoadducts from cis-DDP. The chelation t values are, respectively, 8 h 20 min and 2 h 40 min for complex 1 and cis-DDP.


Figure 3: Kinetics of monoadducts to diadducts conversion. Salmon sperm DNA was treated with platinum derivatives in order to obtain a r(b) of 0.015 (see ``Materials and Methods''). Monoadducts to diadducts conversion was performed by incubating platinated DNA in NaClO(4) 10 mM, pH 5.5, at 37 °C. At the times indicated, aliquots were taken and the r(b) of monoadducts was determined by incorporation of [^14C]thiourea. The percentage of monoadducts was determined by the ratio of the monoadduct r(b) on the total platinum r(b). bullet, complex 1; black square, cis-DDP.



UvrAB Binding to Platinated DNA in Which Most of the Adducts Are Monoadducts

DNA was treated with compound 1 and cis-DDP at a r(b) = 0.25. At the times indicated in Fig. 4, aliquots were taken, and the small molecules in them were removed by gel filtration in order to eliminate unbound platinum before incubation of the DNA fractions with the UvrAB proteins. The filter binding assay was then performed (see ``Materials and Methods''). The DNA-UvrAB protein complex versus DNA-platination time relationship is a product of the platinum-adduct formation rate and the UvrAB binding efficiency to a given platinum-adduct. The results are presented in Fig. 4A. The amount of nucleoprotein complexes increases with the DNA-platination time. The formation of the nucleoprotein complexes is faster for complex 1 than for cis-DDP with respective t of 2.4 ± 0.11 min and 39 ± 0.9 min. Since in these experiments DNA was treated with the platinum complexes in the same experimental conditions as those used for the quantification of platinum bound to DNA, the apparent average number of proteins bound to platinated DNA (u) as a function of the amount of platinum adducts can be derived (Fig. 4B). Linear regressions gave u = 0.3 platinum adducts per plasmid and 0.02 platinum adducts per plasmid, respectively, for complex 1 and cis-DDP. One needs 15 times more adducts from cis-DDP than from complex 1 to obtain an identical apparent average number of proteins bound to DNA. The filter binding assay was performed with different levels of platination in the same experimental conditions for both platinum compounds (i.e. can be assumed to be the same). This allows us to compare the relative UvrAB recognition efficiencies on platinated DNA obtained with complex 1 and cis-DDP. Therefore, UvrAB proteins recognize complex 1 monoadducts with a better efficiency than those from cis-DDP.

Recognition of the DNA Diadducts by UvrAB Proteins

For the complexes used in this study, the chelation step of the monoadducts to form the diadducts is much slower than the first platination step ( Fig. 2and Fig. 3). Therefore, one can compare the interaction of UvrAB proteins with both the mono- and diadducts formed with complexes 1 and cis-DDP. For compound 1, the slow chelation observed in Fig. 3suggests that, in our conditions, even at a time of 120 min, the binding of the UvrAB proteins to the platinated DNA mainly corresponds to the formation of the nucleoprotein complexes with monoadducts.

In order to determine the UvrAB binding efficiency on DNA diadducts, we allowed the monoadducts free of unbound platinum compounds to undergo the chelation step before addition of the UvrAB proteins. At various platination times, samples were filtered on G10 columns and incubated for 20 h at 37 °C. This length of incubation was shown to produce more than 80 and 99% diadducts, respectively, from complex 1 and cis-DDP (data extrapolated from Fig. 3). The filter binding assay yielded the following t of incubation to obtain half the maximum protein binding: 1.9 ± 0.44 and 32.5 ± 1.4 min, respectively, for complex 1 and cis-DDP (Fig. 5A). The apparent number of proteins bound to DNA as a function of platinum per plasmid was analyzed. Linear regression gave u = 0.3 platinum adducts per plasmid and 0.03 platinum adducts per plasmid, respectively, for complex 1 and cis-DDP. About 10 times more cis-DDP diadducts than complex 1 diadducts are needed to obtain a similar apparent average number of proteins bound to DNA (Fig. 5B). Since the experimental conditions were identical to those described for monoadducts (similar ), UvrAB proteins recognize complex 1 diadducts with a better efficiency than those formed from cis-DDP.


Figure 5: UvrAB binding to DNA-platinum diadducts. DNA was treated as described in the legend to Fig. 4, but after filtration on G10 column, the samples were incubated 20 h at 37 °C in NaClO(4) 10 mM, pH 5.5, to allow the conversion of monoadducts to diadducts before incubation with UvrAB proteins. Then, the filter binding assay was performed. All the data were analyzed as described in the legend to Fig. 4. A, UvrAB binding to DNA platinum diadducts as a function of the ANA platination time. The best fits were obtained with exponential and sigmoid curves, respectively, for complex 1 (R^2: 0.993) and cis-DDP (R^2: 0.997). bullet, complex 1; black square, cis-DDP. B, comparison of the relative UvrAB recognition efficiencies for DNA-diadducts of complex 1 and cis-DDP. The apparent average number of proteins and the amount of platinum bound to DNA were computed as described in the legend to Fig. 4B. Linear regressions gave u = 0.3 platinum adducts per plasmid (r = 0.996) and u = 0.03 platinum adducts per plasmid (r = 0.999), respectively, for complex 1 and cis-DDP. Solid line, complex 1; dotted line, cis-DDP.



Determination of the Uvr Protein Involved in the Nucleoprotein Complexes

It has been shown that the UvrA protein delivers UvrB at the site of damage on DNA. However according to the UvrA-to-UvrB ratio in our reaction mixture, UvrA could also be involved in the nucleoprotein complex(25) . The filter binding assay does not allow for the determination of which UvrA and/or UvrB protein(s) is/are involved in the nucleoprotein complexes. In order to address this issue, UvrA and UvrB proteins were incubated with nonplatinated DNA or platinated DNA containing either mono- or diadducts from each platinum compound. The DNA-protein complexes were isolated using a size exclusion chromatography, and their protein content was analyzed by SDS-PAGE and silver staining according to Orren and Sancar(25, 26) . Higher concentrations of pSP65 DNA and Uvr proteins than those used for the filter binding assay were required to allow the Uvr protein determination by silver staining. However, in order to allow a relevant comparison with the results obtained with the filter binding assay, the same UvrA-to-UvrB and Uvr protein-to-plasmid molecule ratios were kept identical in the reaction mixtures in both experiments. The results are presented in the Fig. 6. No UvrA and/or UvrB binding was observed with nonplatinated DNA. For platinated DNA, a major band corresponding to the UvrB protein was observed whatever the nature of the damage (mono- or diadducts) and whatever the platinum compound used (complex 1 or cis-DDP).


Figure 6: Binding of UvrA and UvrB proteins to DNA containing mainly either mono- or diadducts of complex 1 or cis-DDP. Reaction mixtures in 80 µl of binding buffer containing 94 nM UvrA and UvrB, 6.7 nM^3H-labeled pSP65 bearing either 30 mono- or diadducts of complex 1 per plasmid, or 40 mono- or diadducts of cis-DDP per plasmid were loaded onto a gel exclusion column. 700-µl fractions were collected and their DNA content quantified by scintillation counting. Peak fraction aliquots equivalent to 90 ng of DNA were analyzed by SDS-PAGE and silver staining. St, UvrA and UvrB proteins used as standards. In this experiment, the UvrA standard migrated as a doublet resulting from oxidation of its sulfhydryl groups(21) . Lane a, non platinated DNA; lanes b and d, DNA containing, respectively, 30 and 40 monoadducts of complex 1 and cis-DDP per plasmid; lanes c and e, DNA containing respectively 30 and 40 diadducts of complex 1 and cis-DDP per plasmid. ★, limit of the stacking gel. Nonplatinated DNA enters into the stacking gel whereas platinated DNA does not. In lane c, one can observe a weak smear. Such a smear was only observed with DNA containing complex 1 diadducts and might result from the degradation of a small amount of platinated DNA during the 20-h incubation at 37 °C in NaClO(4).



Determination of SDS/EDTA-resistant Cross-links between Platinated DNA and the UvrAB Proteins

According to the previous results, UvrAB binding to the platinum monoadducts occurs much faster than their chelation. Therefore, a reaction between these chloro monoadducts and a nucleophilic group of the UvrAB proteins might lead to covalent cross-linking. Such cross-linking cannot occur with diadducts. The UvrAB binding was performed on DNA mono- and diadducts. Protein-DNA cross-linking was evaluated using the resistance of the nucleoprotein complexes to a denaturing treatment by 0.2% SDS, 50 mM EDTA. EDTA was used to chelate the Mg cation. Without ATP-Mg, the noncovalent UvrAB-DNA nucleoprotein complexes dissociate and cannot rebind(22) . An incubation with SDS was added to the EDTA treatment in order to eliminate hydrophobic interactions between Uvr proteins and the DNA. In these conditions no nucleoprotein complexes were observed with a UV-treated DNA containing pyrimidine dimers (data not shown). The results are presented in Fig. 7. The amount of SDS/EDTA-resistant nucleoprotein complexes of platinated DNA with UvrAB increases with the amount of platinum adducts. Much more SDS/EDTA-resistant complexes are formed when the UvrAB proteins are added to the DNA immediately after the platination step than after the supplementary 20-h incubation period (Fig. 7A). When the apparent average number of proteins bound to DNA, obtained after the dissociating SDS/EDTA treatment, is expressed as a function of the number of platinum adducts per plasmid (Fig. 7B), the monoadducts formed from complex 1 appear to be more efficient than those formed from cis-DDP to induce cross-linking between the UvrAB proteins and platinated DNA.


Figure 7: Cross-linking between UvrAB proteins and platinated DNA. DNA samples containing increasing amounts of monoadducts or diadducts were prepared as described in the legends of Fig. 4and Fig. 5. The platinated DNA was incubated with UvrAB proteins as described under ``Materials and Methods.'' After a 10-min incubation with UvrAB proteins, samples (140 µl) were divided into two parts. One part was used as a control for the filter binding assay (data not shown). To the second part, SDS and EDTA (0.2% SDS, 50 mM EDTA final concentration) were added, and the samples were incubated at 37 °C for 30 min. After dilution by 5 ml of warmed 2 SSC buffer and an incubation at 37 °C for 5 min, the nucleoprotein complexes resistant to SDS/EDTA treatment were collected onto nitrocellulose filter. A, determination of SDS/EDTA-resistant nucleoprotein complexes as a function of the DNA platination time between DNA and the platinum complexes. UvrAB addition after DNA platination: bullet, complex 1; black square, cis-DDP. UvrAB addition after 20-h incubation at 37 °C following platination of DNA: , complex 1; , cis-DDP. B, comparison of the amounts of protein cross-linked to DNA adducts of complex 1 and cis-DDP. The apparent average number of proteins and the amount of platinum per plasmid were determined as described in the legend of Fig. 4B. UvrAB addition after DNA platination: solid line, complex 1; dotted line, cis-DDP. UvrAB addition after 20-h incubation at 37 °C following platination: dashed line, complex 1; no SDS/EDTA resistant nucleoprotein complexes were observed with cis-DDP in this range of adduct ratio.



Determination of the Uvr Protein Cross-linked to DNA via Platinum Monoadducts

The isolation and analysis of nucleoprotein complexes by SDS-PAGE and silver staining allowed the detection of the bound but noncross-linked UvrB protein. In these conditions, Uvr proteins cross-linked to DNA stay in the well resulting from the nonmigration of the pSP65 plasmid DNA in the SDS-polyacrylamide gel. Such cross-linked Uvr proteins could only migrate in the gel after a cyanide or a thiourea treatment which are known to dissociate platinum adducts from DNA(27, 28) . To identify the protein cross-linked to DNA, we used the following two steps procedure. First, nucleoprotein complexes were isolated and analyzed by SDS-PAGE and silver staining before and after SDS/EDTA treatment. The results are shown in Fig. 8. First, the SDS/EDTA treatment before gel exclusion column leads to the disappearance of the UvrB protein. Such a treatment allows the dissociation of the noncross-linked UvrB protein from the platinated DNA, whatever the platinum derivative used. Second, SDS/EDTA-treated pSP65 DNA was treated with thiourea, using conditions which dissociate the platinum adducts from the DNA(28) . A cyanide treatment could not be used because of its interference with the silver staining step. The results are shown in Fig. 9. A band corresponding to the UvrB protein appears only for the pSP65 DNA which contains monoadducts of complex 1 and not for that containing either cis-DDP monoadducts or complex 1 diadducts.


Figure 8: Dissociation of the noncross-linked UvrB-platinum-DNA complexes by SDS/EDTA treatment. Reaction mixtures in 140 µl of binding buffer containing 94 nM of UvrA and UvrB (each protein), 6.7 nM^3H-labeled pSP65 bearing, respectively, 30 and 40 monoadducts of complex 1, and cis-DDP per plasmid were incubated or not with 0.2% SDS, 50 mM EDTA at 37 °C for 30 min. The non-SDS/EDTA-treated samples were loaded onto a gel exclusion column. The SDS/EDTA-treated samples were dialyzed twice against 2 SSC containing 1 mM dithiothreitol and 20% glycerol for 1 h at 37 °C in order to eliminate SDS and loaded onto a gel exclusion column equilibrated in a modified binding buffer containing 50 mM KCl, 50 mM EDTA, 50 µM dithiothreitol, and deprived of ATP. 700-µl fractions were collected. Aliquots (90 ng of DNA) were analyzed by SDS-PAGE and silver staining. ★, limit of the stacking gel. Lanes a and c, non-SDS/EDTA-treated samples containing, respectively, DNA monoadducts of complex 1 and cis-DDP; lanes b and d, SDS/EDTA-treated samples containing, respectively, DNA monoadducts of complex 1 and cis-DDP.




Figure 9: Demonstration of the formation of cross-linked UvrB-platinum-DNA complexes using a thiourea treatment. Aliquots (120 ng of DNA) corresponding to SDS/EDTA-treated samples of Fig. 8(lanes b and d) were incubated for 24 h at 37 °C in the presence (+) or in the absence(-) of 1 M thiourea, 0.3 M Tris-HCl, pH 7.5. In the absence of thiourea, the samples were incubated in 0.3 M Tris-HCl, pH 7.5. Then samples were analyzed by SDS-PAGE and silver staining. St, UvrA and UvrB standards; lanes a and b, DNA containing, respectively, 30 and 40 monoadducts of complex 1 and cis-DDP; lane c, DNA containing 30 diadducts of complex 1. ★, limit of the stacking gel. As already observed in the Fig. 6, platinated DNA does not enter the stacking gel until it was treated with thiourea treatment which dissociates platinum adducts from DNA. It has to be noted that the thiourea treatment does not interfere with silver staining. Furthermore, a silver-stained smear is observed in all the wells even in the unloaded wells. Such a smear results from the heavy silver staining of the gel.




DISCUSSION

The racemic complex, cis-[N-2-amino N-2-methylamino-2,2,1-bicycloheptane]dichloroplatinum(II) with exo configuration (complex 1) bears a bulky hydrophobic norbornyl substituent on the ethylenediamine ligand. It was designed to have a higher affinity than cis-DDP for DNA major groove and also to give monoadducts with longer lifetimes.

Two questions were addressed in this work: (i) do the UvrA and/or UvrB proteins of the Escherichia coli repair system exhibit different recognition efficiencies for the complex 1 and cis-DDP DNA adducts and for the mono- and diadducts of each complex and (ii) does complex 1 yield long-living monoadducts and are such adducts able to cross-link the UvrA and/or UvrB proteins to DNA?

First Platination and Chelation Steps

AAS monitoring of DNA platination by complex 1 shows that it is faster than that by cis-DDP (Fig. 2). The platination profiles of Fig. 2are in agreement with a two-step process as previously observed for the reaction of DNA fragments with cis-DDP, the first one being the aquation of the chloro complex(29, 30) .

For the chelation step, the monoadducts of complex 1 are more slowly converted into diadducts than those of cis-DDP, with respective t of 8 h 20 ± 20 min and 2 h 40 ± 30 min (Fig. 3). A decrease in the chelation rate was already reported for PtCl(2)(DACH) compared with PtCl(2)(en) and cis-DDP (t: respectively 4 h 24, 1 h 50 min, and 2 h 20 min, (14) ). It is noteworthy that the trans-1,2-diaminocyclohexane ligand is hydrophobic, but less bulky than the norbornyl ethylenediammine ligand.

UvrAB Recognition of the DNA-Platinum Mono- and Diadducts

Using the filter binding assay, we compared the UvrAB recognition of platinum adducts formed with complex 1 and cis-DDP. The results show that the UvrAB proteins recognize, respectively, the monoadducts and diadducts of complex 1 with a higher efficiency than the monoadducts and diadducts of cis-DDP. Furthermore, for complex 1, the UvrAB proteins recognize the mono- and diadducts with the same efficiency. For cis-DDP, a slightly better recognition is found for the diadducts. The nucleoprotein complexes formed, with an UvrA-to-UvrB stoichiometric ratio, from the adducts of complex 1 and cis-DDP were isolated and analyzed by SDS-PAGE as such or after SDS/EDTA dissociation. Apart from tiny amounts of UvrA, UvrB was the major protein identified. The SDS/EDTA treatment led to the disappearance of stable nucleoprotein complexes with the filter binding assay (Fig. 7) together with the absence of UvrB on SDS-polyacrylamide gel (Fig. 8), suggesting that it is the only one involved in the stable recognition complex. Orren and Sancar (25) using the same UvrA-to-UvrB ratio found that UvrA was also involved in the nucleoprotein complexes in about twice the amount of UvrB. However, the UvrA concentration (>125 nM) was higher than ours (94 nM) with an UvrA-to-plasmid ratio higher than 14.

The UvrABC endonuclease is known to recognize a variety of DNA damages (19) . This broad spectrum led the authors to postulate that the UvrABC endonuclease rather recognizes the DNA structural deformation induced by the various adducts than the characteristic features of each adduct. Despite the absence of structural data on the mono- and diadducts of complex 1 with DNA, it is likely that they are similar to those of the corresponding cis-DDP adducts. For the latter, it is known that the square planar coordination of platinum(II) is the major factor controlling the stereochemistry of the adducts and that it induces DNA bending for the intrastrand diadducts (31) but not for the monoadducts(32, 33, 34) . Therefore one expected different UvrAB recognition of the mono- and diadducts for both complex 1 and cis-DDP. The UvrAB proteins recognize a variety of adducts even the O^6-methylguanine ones which cause little distortion of the DNA helix(35) . Our results showing a similar recognition of both the mono- and diadducts of complex 1 and cis-DDP suggest that simple structural determinants do not, by themselves, control the UvrAB recognition. Our UvrAB results for a population of lesions located randomly on a supercoiled DNA can be compared with the UvrABC repair results of defined adducts reported by Page et al.(14) . They found a better UvrABC repair efficiency for the [G]Pt(dien) or [G]PtCl(en) and [G]PtCl(DACH) monoadducts trapped with dithiothreitol than for the [GG] diadducts of cis-PtCl(2)(DACH). Visse et al.(36) concluded from footprinting experiments that the recognition complex involves binding of the proteins to the convex side of the bend formed by the platinum GG-chelate. Clearly, this does not explain the similar recognition of the mono- and diadducts of complex 1 and of cis-DDP. The norbornyl ethylenediamine ligand is bulkier than the two ammine ones, and molecular mechanics modeling of the mono- and diadducts shows that both remain in the major groove of the straight and bent structures (not shown). The more efficient binding of UvrB to both mono- and diadducts of complex 1 suggests that hydrophobic interactions might be favorable to recognition in the major groove area. Several results suggest that the UvrABC, or actually UvrAB recognition efficiency, is not directly related to the UvrABC incision efficiency. The latter depends upon the torsional constraint of the damaged DNA, whereas the former does not (22, 37) . Using supercoiled DNA, Beck et al.(12) showed that UvrABC incised cis- and trans-DDP-treated DNA with the same efficiency, whereas using linear DNA, they found that only the one treated with cis-DDP was incised. UvrABC incision efficiency is also dependent upon the sequence of the damaged DNA strand. It has been observed that the UvrABC incision efficiency of a DNA treated with acetylaminofluorene varied with the DNA sequence, whereas recognition did not(38) . All these results suggest that the UvrAB recognition and UvrC incision steps might obey different binding criteria. The recognition would work for bent DNA structures as well as for any type of adducts, particularly with bulky hydrophobic groups, whereas incision would be more sensitive to the DNA sequence and the torsional constraint(39) .

UvrB-platinum-DNA Cross-links

Thanks to the slow chelation reaction of our platinum monoadducts (Fig. 3), we studied the interaction of the UvrAB proteins with monoadducts still bearing an exchangeable (chloro or aqua) ligand on platinum. The results show that only UvrB is cross-linked to the DNA and that only the monoadducts of complex 1 are able to cross-link efficiently the protein. The mechanism of the cross-linking is unknown. However, it could result from a substitution of the labile ligand by a nucleophilic group of the protein such as a histidine imidazole or more likely a thioether group of a methionine or a thiol group of a cysteine, within the UvrB-DNA recognition complex. The substitution of the chloro ligand of a DNA platinum monoadduct by a sulfur nucleophile from the UvrB protein does not require an aquation step (40) and should be an efficient reaction, provided a favorable proximity would exist between the platinum and the sulfur nucleophile. Platinum derivatives react with thiol-containing peptides or proteins (41, 42, 43) and could react with the UvrB cysteine residues(44) . That such a reaction requires UvrB binding to the platinated DNA is shown by the absence of UvrB cross-linking when the UvrAB proteins are incubated with the platinated DNA under SDS/EDTA dissociating conditions (data not shown). The UvrB cross-linking could be facilitated by its close contact with DNA when the preincision complex is formed(26, 45) . It is noteworthy that a small amount of UvrB-platinum-DNA cross-linked nucleoprotein complexes was also observed following the UvrAB treatment of DNA platinated with compound 1, after 20-h incubation to allow the chelation of the monoadducts. Such cross-linking probably results from the presence of remaining nonchelated monoadducts. According to the slow chelation kinetics of the complex 1-DNA monoadducts (Fig. 3), a 20-h incubation after the first platination is less than three times the 8 h 20 min chelation t and therefore too short to allow a complete conversion of the monoadducts(46) . Fig. 7B shows that cross-linking between the UvrB proteins and platinated DNA occurs at very small platination ratios for complex 1, whereas it is not observed for cis-DDP until an average of 20 adducts per plasmid (3005 base pairs) are formed. This can be correlated to the fact that 15 times more adducts per plasmid are required for cis-DDP than for complex 1 to lead to similar UvrB binding and explains the fact that no cross-linked UvrB protein was observed after the analysis by SDS/PAGE (Fig. 9). Actually, once the noncovalent nucleoprotein complex is formed, covalent cross-linking appears to be comparable for both the monoadducts of complex 1 and cis-DDP. However, since the UvrB protein has a greater affinity for complex 1-DNA adducts than for those of cis-DDP, more UvrB-platinum-DNA cross-links are formed with complex 1 than with cis-DDP. Therefore, complex 1-DNA monoadducts appear as a good tool to study the biological consequences of protein-DNA cross-linking.

In this work, bacterial UvrAB proteins were used for their ability to recognize DNA lesions induced by platinum monoadducts and diadducts. In mammalian cells, the specificity of the recognition and incision steps as well as the nature of the proteins are less characterized. Several proteins involved in repair or in transcription processes have been isolated for their ability to recognize platinum DNA adducts(2, 47, 48) . Analogues of cis-DDP able to react quickly with DNA, to give long-lived monoadducts able to cross-link repair proteins may be good candidates to overcome the repair-mediated cis-DDP resistance(2) .


FOOTNOTES

*
These studies were supported by the Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, the Institut National de la Santé et de la Recherche Médicale, the Association pour la Recherche sur le Cancer (ARC Villejuif, 896123 and 2042), Universities Pierre et Marie Curie and René Descartes, and the European Community Human Capital and Mobility Programme ``Metal Ion-Nucleic Acid Interactions and Antitumor Drugs'' (ERBCHRCT 920016). The costs of publication of this article were defrayed in part by the payment of page charges. This article must therefore by hereby marked ``advertisement'' in accordance with 18 U.S.C. Section 1734 solely to indicate this fact.

§
To whom correspondence should be addressed: Institut Gustave Roussy, URA 147 CNRS, 39 rue Camilles Desmoulins, 94800 Villejuif, France. Tel.: 33-1-45-59-64-89; Fax: 33-1-46-78-41-20.

Supported by National Science Foundation Grants DMB88-02091, CA 06927, and RR05539.

(^1)
The abbreviations used are: cis-DDP, cis-diamminedichloroplatinum(II); AAS, atomic absorption spectrometry; DACH, trans-1,2 diaminocyclohexane; [GG]Pt and [AG]Pt are, respectively, the intrastrand N7G-N7G and N7A-N7G chelates of the cis-Pt[NH(3)](2) moiety; HMG, high mobility group; PAGE, polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis; SSRP1, structure-specific recognition protein.


ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

M.-C. Bouger and J.-F. Rameau are acknowledged for their technical assistance.


REFERENCES

  1. Eastman, A. (1990) Cancer Cells 2,275-280 [Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  2. Chu, G. (1994) J. Biol. Chem. 269,787-790 [Abstract/Free Full Text]
  3. Toney, J. H., Donahue, B. A., Kellett, P. J., Bruhn, S. L., Essigman, J. M., and Lippard, S. J. (1989) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 86,8328-8332 [Abstract]
  4. Donahue, B. A., Augot, M., Bellon, S. F., Treiber, D. K., Toney, J. H., Lippard, S. J., and Essigman, J. M. (1990) Biochemistry 29,5872-5880 [Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  5. Bruhn, S. L., Pil, P. M., Essigman, J. M., Housman, D. E., and Lippard, S. J. (1992) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 89,2307-2311 [Abstract]
  6. Pil, P. M., and Lippard, S. J. (1992) Science 256,234-237 [Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  7. Hughes, E. N., Engelsberg, B. N., and Billings, P. C. (1992) J. Biol. Chem. 267,13520-13527 [Abstract/Free Full Text]
  8. Hollis, L. S., Admunsen, A. R., and Stern, W. (1989) J. Med. Chem. 32,128-136 [Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  9. Hollis, L. S., Sundquist, W. I., Burstyn, J. N., Heiger-Bernays, W. J., Bellon, S. F., Ahmed, K. J., Amundsen, A. R., Stern, E. W., and Lippard, S. J. (1991) Cancer Res. 51,1866-1875 [Abstract]
  10. Segal-Bendirdjian, E., Brehin, P., Lambert, B., Laoui, A., Kozelka, J., Garrot, J.-M., Mailliet, P., Barreau, M., Lavelle, F., Fichtinger-Schepman, A.-M., Yeung, A., Jacquemin-Sablon, A., Le Pecq, J.-B., and Chottard, J.-C. (1991) in Platinum and Other Metal Coordination Compounds in Cancer Chemotherapy (Howell, S. B., ed) pp. 37-49, Plenum Press, New York
  11. Alazard, R., Germanier, M., and Johnson, N. P. (1982) Mutat. Res. 93,327-337
  12. Beck, D. J., Popoff, S., Sancar, A., and Rupp, W. D. (1985) Nucleic Acids Res. 13,7395-7412 [Abstract]
  13. Husain, I., Chaney, S. G., and Sancar, A. (1985) J. Bacteriol. 163,817-823 [Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  14. Page, J. D., Husain, I., Sancar, A., and Chaney, S. (1990) Biochemistry 29,1016-1024 [Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  15. Hansson, J., Grossman, L., Lindhal, T., and Wood, R. D. (1990) Nucleic Acids Res. 18,35-40 [Abstract]
  16. Hansson, J., and Wood, R. D. (1989) Nucleic Acids Res. 17,8073-8091 [Abstract]
  17. Jones, J. C., Zhen, W., Reed, E., Parker, R. J., Sancar, A., and Bohr, V. A. (1991) J. Biol. Chem. 266,7101-7107 [Abstract/Free Full Text]
  18. Heiger-Bernays, W. J., Essigmann, J. M., and Lippard, S. J. (1990) Biochemistry 29,8461-8466 [Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  19. Van Houten, B. (1990) Microbiol. Rev. 54,18-51
  20. Grossman, L., and Yeung, A. T. (1990) Mutation Res. 236,213-221 [Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  21. Yeung, A. T., Mattes, W. B., Oh, E. Y., Yoakum, G. H., and Grossman, L. (1986) Nucleic Acids Res. 14,8535-8556 [Abstract]
  22. Lambert, B., Jones, B. K., Roques, B. P., Le Pecq, J.-B., and Yeung, A. T. (1989) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 86,6557-6561 [Abstract]
  23. Woodbury, C. P., Jr., and von Hippel, P. H. (1983) Biochemistry 22,4730-4737 [Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  24. Mazur, S. J., and Grossman, L. (1991) Biochemistry 30,4432-4443 [Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  25. Orren, D. K., and Sancar, A. (1989) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 86,5237-5241 [Abstract]
  26. Orren, D. K., and Sancar, A. (1990) J. Biol. Chem. 265,15796-15803 [Abstract/Free Full Text]
  27. Bauer, W., Gonias, S. L., Kam, S. K., Wu, K. C., and Lippard, S. J. (1978) Biochemistry 17,1060-1068 [Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  28. Filipski, J., Kohn, K. W., Prather, R., and Bonner, W. M. (1979) Science 204,181-183 [Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  29. Johnson, N. P., Hoeschele, J. D., and Rahn, R. O. (1980) Chem. Biol. Interact. 30,151-169 [Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  30. Bancroft, D. P., Lepre, C. A., and Lippard, S. J. (1990) J. Am. Chem. Soc. 112,6860-6871
  31. Kozelka, J., Petsko, A., Quigley, G. J., and Lippard, S. J. (1986) Inorg. Chem. 25,1075-1077
  32. Bellon, S. F., and Lippard, S. J. (1990) Biophys. Chem. 35,179-188 [CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  33. Marrot, L., and Leng, M. (1989) Biochemistry 28,1454-1461 [Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  34. Brabec, V., Boudny, V., and Balcarova, Z. (1994) Biochemistry 33,1316-1322 [Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  35. Voigt, J. M., Van Houten, B., Sancar, A., and Topal, M. D. (1989) J. Biol. Chem. 264,5172-5176 [Abstract/Free Full Text]
  36. Visse, R., de Ruijter, M., Brouwer, J., Brandsma, J. A., and Van de Putte, P. (1991) J. Biol. Chem. 266,7609-7617 [Abstract/Free Full Text]
  37. Walter, R. B., Pierce, J., Case, R., and Tang, M.-S. (1988) J. Mol. Biol. 203,939-947 [Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  38. Seeberg, E., and Fuchs, R. P. (1990) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 87,191-194 [Abstract]
  39. Visse, R., van Gool, A. J., Moolenaar, G. F., de Ruijter, M., and van de Putte, P. (1994) Biochemistry 33,1804-1811 [Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  40. Djuran, M. I., Lempers, E. M., and Reedijk, J. (1991) Inorg. Chem. 30,2648-2642
  41. Eastman, A. (1987) Chem. Biol. Interact. 61,241-248 [CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  42. Farrell, N., Kelland, L. R., Roberts, J. D., and Beusichem, M. V. (1992) Cancer Res. 52,5065-5072 [Abstract]
  43. Kelley, S. L., Basu, A., Teicher, B. A., Hacker, M. P., Hamer, D. H., and Lazo, J. S. (1988) Science 241,1813-1815 [Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  44. Arikan, E., Kulkarni, M. S., Thomas, D. C., and Sancar, A. (1986) Nucleic Acids Res. 14,2637-2650 [Abstract]
  45. Lin, J.-J., Phillips, A. M., Hearst, J. E., and Sancar, A. (1992) J. Biol. Chem. 267,17693-17700 [Abstract/Free Full Text]
  46. Bernges, F., and Holler, E. (1991) Nucleic Acids Res. 19,1483-1489 [Abstract]
  47. Chao, C. C. K., Huang, S.-L., Huang, H., and Chao, S. L. (1991) Mol. Cell. Biol. 11,2075-2080 [Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  48. Chu, G., and Chang, E. (1990) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 87,3324-3327 [Abstract]
  49. Mailliet, P., Segal-Bendirdjian, E., Kozelka, J., Barreau, M., Baudoin, B., Bissery, M.-C., Gontier, S., Laoui, A., Lavelle, F., Le Pecq, J.-B., and Chottard, J.-C. (1994) Anticancer Drug Design 10,51-73 [Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]

©1995 by The American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Inc.




This Article
Abstract
Full Text (PDF)
Purchase Article
View Shopping Cart
Alert me when this article is cited
Alert me if a correction is posted
Citation Map
Services
Email this article to a friend
Similar articles in this journal
Similar articles in PubMed
Alert me to new issues of the journal
Download to citation manager
Copyright Permissions
Google Scholar
Articles by Lambert, B.
Articles by Chottard, J.-C.
Articles citing this Article
PubMed
PubMed Citation
Articles by Lambert, B.
Articles by Chottard, J.-C.


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 All ASBMB Journals   Molecular and Cellular Proteomics 
 Journal of Lipid Research   Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Education 
Copyright © 1995 by the American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology.