BiomoleculesBiomoleculesbiomoleculesBiomolecules2218-273XMDPI26287259459876910.3390/biom5031652biomolecules-05-01652ReviewInhibition of Topoisomerase (DNA) I (TOP1): DNA Damage Repair and Anticancer TherapyXuYangHerChengtao*HeyerWolf-DietrichAcademic EditorHelledayThomasAcademic EditorHanaokaFumioAcademic EditorSchool of Molecular Biosciences, College of Veterinary Medicine, Washington State University, Mail Drop 64-7520, Pullman, WA 99164, USA; E-Mail: davidxy22@vetmed.wsu.eduAuthor to whom correspondence should be addressed; E-Mail: cher@wsu.edu; Tel.: +1-509-335-7537; Fax: +1-509-335-4159.227201592015531652167022520151472015© 2015 by the authors; licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.2015This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

Most chemotherapy regimens contain at least one DNA-damaging agent that preferentially affects the growth of cancer cells. This strategy takes advantage of the differences in cell proliferation between normal and cancer cells. Chemotherapeutic drugs are usually designed to target rapid-dividing cells because sustained proliferation is a common feature of cancer [1,2]. Rapid DNA replication is essential for highly proliferative cells, thus blocking of DNA replication will create numerous mutations and/or chromosome rearrangements—ultimately triggering cell death [3]. Along these lines, DNA topoisomerase inhibitors are of great interest because they help to maintain strand breaks generated by topoisomerases during replication. In this article, we discuss the characteristics of topoisomerase (DNA) I (TOP1) and its inhibitors, as well as the underlying DNA repair pathways and the use of TOP1 inhibitors in cancer therapy.

topoisomerase (DNA) I (TOP1)anticancer therapyDNA replicationtopoisomerase inhibitorDNA double-strand break (DSB)DSB repairhomologous recombination (HR)non-homologous end joiningsingle-strand break (SSB) repairone-ended DSB
1. Type IB Topoisomerases and Inhibitors1.1. TOP1

DNA topoisomerases resolve topological constraints that may arise from DNA strand separation and are therefore important for transcription and replication [4]. There are six topoisomerases in humans, classified as Type IA, IB and IIA. Type IA topoisomerases TOP3α and TOP3β cleave one DNA strand to relax only negative supercoiling. In addition, TOP3α forms the BTR complex with BLM and RMI1/2, which plays a role in the dissolution of double-Holliday junctions [5]. Type IIA topoisomerases TOP2α and TOP2β generate double-strand breaks on one DNA molecule to allow the passing of other DNA strands [6]. Topoisomerases are attractive drug targets in cancer therapy. For example, the commonly used anticancer agents doxorubicin and etoposide (VP-16) are TOP2 inhibitors [7]. Type IB topoisomerases include the nuclear TOP1 and mitochondrial TOP1mt [4]. TOP1 initiates the DNA relaxation by nicking one DNA strand. It then forms a TOP1-DNA cleavage complex (TOP1cc) by covalently linked to the 3'-phosphate end via its tyrosine residue Y723 (3'-P-Y). Following the resolution of topological entanglements and the removal of TOP1, the 5'-hydroxyl end is realigned with the 3'-end for religation. Each nicking-closing cycle enables the relaxation of one DNA supercoiling (Figure 1).

A schematic representation of strand passages catalyzed by three types of topoisomerases (adapted from ref. [8]).

TOP1 is essential for embryonic development in mammals [9]. Although TOP1 plays an important role in the deconvolution of supercoils arising amid DNA replication, the precise steps involved with the recruitment of TOP1 to topological constraints remains to be revealed. It appears that in yeast TOP1 travels at a distance of 600 bp ahead of the replication fork [10] and remains associated with the GINS-MCM complex [11]. However, the yeast TOP1 is distinct from its human counterpart in that it has little effect on fork progression or the firing of replication origin [12]. In humans, TOP1 binds to the regions of the pre-replicative complex in cells during the M, early G1, and G1/S phases of the cell cycle to control the firing of replication origins [12]. This difference may explain why yeast cells are viable in the absence of TOP1. In addition, TOP1 also has functions in transcription that are independent of its role in resolving DNA topological entanglements. First, TOP1 is known to repress transcription by binding to TFIID [13]. Second, inhibition of TOP1 can cause the induction of c-Jun in leukemia cells, suggesting its additional role in the control of transcription [14]. Furthermore, TOP1 interacts with the splicing factor ASF/SF2 by which it promotes the maturation of RNA—through suppressing the formation of R-loops (RNA-DNA hybrids)—and prevents collision between transcription bubble and replication fork [15,16]. It appears that the levels of TOP1 have to be dynamically regulated. In B cells, TOP1 is reduced by activation-induced cytidine deaminase (AID) to facilitate class-switch recombination (CSR) and somatic hypermutation (SHM) [17,18]. Although TOP1mt is important for mitochondrial integrity and metabolism, mice lacking mitochondrial TOP1mt are viable and fertile but they are associated with increased negative supercoiling of mtDNA [19,20].

1.2. TOP1 Inhibitors

Stabilization of TOP1cc by topoisomerase poison is detrimental to cells due to the disruption of DNA uncoiling, increased strand breaks, and unstable RNA transcripts as well as incomplete DNA replication [21]. The TOP1 inhibitor camptothecin (CPT), first isolated from the Chinese tree Camptotheca acuminate, was clinically used for cancer treatment long before it was identified as a TOP1 inhibitor [22]. Due to side effects, CPT is no longer used clinically and it has been replaced by more effective and safer TOP1 inhibitors [23]. Currently, CPT derivatives topotecan (trade name: Hycamtin) and irinotecan (CPT-11, trade name: Camptosar) are routinely used to treat colorectal, ovarian and lung cancers, while a few other TOP1 inhibitors are being tested in clinical trials.

CPT is a 5-ring alkaloid that is active in its closed E-ring (lactone) form but it is inactive with an open E-ring (carboxylate) at physiological and alkaline pH [24]. Therefore, CPT is not effective for inhibiting TOP1mt due to a higher pH mitochondrial environment. The inactive form of CPT tends to bind to serum albumin, which might be a reason for its side effects. CPT is highly specific for TOP1 and the binding is of relatively low affinity and can be reversed after drug removal. These features make the action of CPT controllable [24], and in fact CPT is widely used in studies of replication-associated DNA damage response. There are a few CPT derivatives and non-CPT TOP1 inhibitors [4,8,24]. For example, CPT derivatives Diflomotecan and S39625 were designed to stabilize the E-ring. Irinotecan has the bis-piperidine side chain to increase its water solubility, but it also contributes to some side effects. Non-CPTs—such as indolocarbazoles, phenanthrolines (e.g., ARC-111) and indenoisoquinolines—refer to drugs that have no typical CPT E-ring structures but they can still specifically target TOP1 and bind irreversibly to TOP1cc. Some of the CPT derivatives (i.e., Gimatecan and Belotecan) and non-CPTs (i.e., NSC 725776 and NSC 724998) are presently tested in clinical trials [23].

How does CPT trap TOP1cc? Analysis of the crystal structure and modeling suggest that CPT-TOP1-DNA forms a ternary complex to prevent the two DNA ends from religation [25,26,27]. Although it is still controversial on how CPT is intercalated into DNA, it seems that CPT traps TOP1cc with a thymine (T) at the −1 position and a guanine (G) at the +1 position on the scissile strand, and it is therefore sequence-specific [28]. Three amino acid residues of the TOP1 enzyme, R364, D533 and N722, combined with DNA bases, contribute to the stabilization of the ternary complex by forming hydrogen bonds and hydrophobic interactions. It is of note that several point mutations, including N722S, in Camptotheca acuminata TOP1 confer resistance to CPT [29]. Interestingly, the same amino acids also contribute to the inhibition of TOP1 by non-CPT drugs [24].

2. Repair of TOP1 Poison-Induced DNA Lesions

As aforementioned, CPT-induced trapping of TOP1cc creates a single strand break with a free 5'-hydroxyl group, whereas the 3'-phosphate is connected to Y723 of TOP1 (3'-P-Y). At least two pathways contribute to the repair of DNA lesions created by TOP1 poison [30]. The tyrosyl-DNA-phosphodiesterase (TDP1) pathway starts with the ubiquitination and proteasome-mediated degradation of TOP1 in the CPT-TOP1-DNA complex to generate a 3'-P end linked to a short peptide [31]. TDP1 then cleaves the P-Y bond to release the 3'-P end; however, the 3'-P end cannot be directly ligated to the 5'-OH end because of the requirements of DNA ligases. The human polynucleotide kinase (PNKP) can process the DNA ends by functioning as both a 3'-phosphatase and a kinase to generate the required 3'-OH and 5'-P termini for direct ligation. The rest of the repair events can be best described by the single-strand break (SSB) repair pathway, which will be discussed below. Indeed, TDP1 and PNKP are tightly associated with the SSB repair machinery [32,33].

The endonuclease pathway requires multiple endonucleases to excise the DNA—usually at a few nucleotides away from the 3'-P-TOP1 end – on the scissile strand to release the DNA-TOP1 complex [30]. Initial studies were carried out to identify genes that functioned in CPT repair in the absence of TDP1 in yeast [34,35]. These studies led to the identification of RAD1-RAD10, SLX1-SLX4, MUS81-MMS4, MRE11-SAE2 as well as genes involved in recombination. The RAD1-RAD10 (human XPF/ERCC4-ERCC1) complex is a DNA structure-specific endonuclease that can act on 5' overhang structures [36]. Interestingly, the cleavage site of XPF-ERCC1 is in the non-protruding DNA strand, about 3–4 nucleotides away from the 3' end [36]. Therefore, trapped TOP1ccs can be removed by this endonuclease activity. Likewise, MUS81-MMS4 (human MUS81-EME1) can also cleave nicked duplex at the 5' of the nick [37]. The SLX1-SLX4 endonuclease, although not tested on nicked duplexes, is able to process 3' flap and other DNA structures [38,39]. In human cells, SLX4 also associates with XPF-ERCC1 and MUS81-EME1 endonucleases to process specific DNA intermediates [39,40]. Moreover, MRE11-RAD50 cleaves the 3'-P-Y bond and resects DNA to produce a 3'-OH end [41]. A direct role of SAE2 (human CtIP) in processing 3'-P-TOP1 is unknown, and its endonuclease activity appears to be limited to the 5' flap or DNA “hairpin” structures [42,43]. Nonetheless, the endonuclease activity of CtIP is essential for processing CPT adducts [42]. In addition, like CtIP, the 5' flap endonuclease RAD27 (human FEN1) seems to be unable to directly process 3'-P-TOP1 ends [44]. However, the gap endonuclease activity of FEN1 is important for processing stalled replication forks and CPT-induced adducts [45]. The role of FEN1 in SSB repair will be discussed further in the next section.

During DNA replication, SSBs created by CPT are most likely converted to double-strand breaks (DSBs) by replication fork runoff. This conversion appears to be dependent on the proteolysis of TOP1 [46]. The repair of one-ended DSBs, as will be discussed in the next section, is largely dependent on homologous recombination (HR). However, low doses of CPT may also induce PARP1 and/or RAD51 dependent replication fork regression—generating no or few DSBs [47,48]. The regressed fork leads to the formation of a “chicken foot” DNA structure by newly synthesized strands [3,49,50]. The formation of regressed fork can be largely suppressed by ATR, EXO1, and DNA2 [51,52,53]. However, fork reversal can also be beneficial as it provides time for the repair of TOP1-induced DNA lesions by TDP1, thereby preventing DSB formation and the activation of error-prone non-homologous end-joining (NHEJ) [30].

3. Pathways Involved in the Repair of CPT-Induced DNA Lesions

Normal cells use DNA damage response (DDR) pathways to maintain genomic stability [54]. As aforementioned, SSB and DSB repair mechanisms are the two major DDR pathways that repair TOP1-induced DNA lesions. Paradoxically, cancer cells exploit DDR pathways to accumulate necessary genomic alterations for promoting proliferation. Furthermore, altered DDR and apoptotic responses in cancer cells are the major obstacles to successful chemotherapy. Thus, the delineation of TOP1-related SSB and DSB repair mechanisms is of great importance for identifying drug targets that can selectively affect cancer cell survival.

3.1. Single-Strand Break (SSB) Repair

Trapping of TOP1cc results in a 3'-P-TOP1 end and a 5'-OH terminus. Because the two ends cannot be directly religated, the persisting SSB is likely to be detected by PARP1 in which activated PARP1 catalyzes the synthesis of poly(ADP-ribose) (PAR) chains for recruiting repair proteins [55]. This reaction can be rapidly reversed by PARG, which hydrolyzes the PAR chains. The PAR chains at the SSB sites are important for the recruitment of XRCC1 that functions as a loading dock for other SSB repair proteins including TDP1 and PNKP. TDP1 generates 3'-P and PNKP converts 3'-P to 3'-OH, and PNKP also converts 5'-OH to 5'-P, making ends compatible for religation with no base loss. The rejoining of the 3'-OH and 5'-P ends is mainly mediated by LIG3, in which XRCC1 mediates the recruitment of LIG3.

If the trapped TOP1cc intermediates are processed by endonucleases, the initial SSBs will be converted to 3'-OH and 5'-OH ends with a gap over a few nucleotides (in the case of XPF-ERCC1, the loss is in the range of 3–4 nt), leading to the activation of PARP1 and XRCC1 recruitment. Consequentially, Polβ recruited by XRCC1 can catalyze the gap filling, and PCNA-Polδ/ε also plays a role in this process [55]. If the 5'-OH is not processed by PNKP, the 5'-flap resulted from gap filling is likely to be removed by FEN1, which explains why FEN1 deficiency also leads to an increased CPT sensitivity. The final ligation is catalyzed by LIG1 because of the presence of PCNA.

3.2. Double-Strand Break (DSB) Repair

Successful DSB repair requires concerted actions of proteins involved in DNA damage signaling and repair [54]. To repair TOP1 poison-induced DNA lesions, ATR signaling is required due to the runoff of replication fork and the presence of long single-strand DNA (ssDNA) [56]. The full activation of ATR follows a “two-man” rule—the ssDNA-ATRIP-dependent recruitment of ATR kinase and the RAD17 clamp loader/9-1-1/TOPBP1 mediator loading at the ssDNA-dsDNA junction. ATR phosphorylates CHEK1 to harness cell cycle arrest. If one-ended DSB is formed, ATM will be activated through the action of the MRE11-RAD50-NBS1 (MRN) complex. ATM mainly phosphorylates CHEK2 to mediate cell cycle arrest. Both ATM and ATR are able to phosphorylate hundreds of proteins in response to DSB formation [57]. One remarkable substrate is the histone H2AX, which can be phosphorylated by both kinases to yield γ-H2AX. It is conceived that the propagation of γ-H2AX signaling along the chromatin facilitates MDC1 recruitment and BRCA1 signaling via the MDC1-RNF8-RNF168-RAP80 ubiquitin cascade—events that are essential for HR [58].

The repair of TOP1 poison-induced DNA lesions is in essence the repair of one-ended DSBs, which facilitates the restoration of replication forks to restart DNA replication. It is important to note that one-ended DSB repair occurs in the S phase and relies on HR rather than NHEJ [59]. The first step in HR is end resection to generate a 3'-overhang for homology searching. A TOP1 cleavage in the leading strand may require end resection by the MRN-CtIP-BRCA1 and BLM-EXO1-DNA2 complexes [60], whereas a cleavage in the lagging strand automatically forms a 3'-overhang. Rad51 then associates with the 3'-ssDNA to form a nucleofilament for strand invasion, which leads to the formation of a D-loop structure [61]. This process continues with DNA synthesis, branch migration and the resolution of Holliday junction structures to reconstitute a functional replication fork [62]. TOP1 poisons can also lead to the formation of two-ended DSB if two replication forks collide into each other at the site of SSB. The repair of this type of DSBs is not aimed for fork restoration and can be accomplished by the classical DSB repair mechanisms [61].

3.3. Genes Involved in CPT-Induced Damage Repair

A long list of genes, in which mutations confer sensitivity to CPT in yeast, chicken or mammalian cells, has been compiled [24,30,63]. With no surprise, many genes involved in SSB and DSB repair are on the list, such as PARP1, XRCC1, PNKP, TDP1 for SSB repair; MRN, ATM-CHK2, ATR-CHK1 for DSB signaling; BRCA1/2, XRCC2, XRCC3 for HR. Most recently, the hMSH5-FANCJ complex has also been implicated to play a role in CPT-induced DNA damage response and repair [64]. Mutations in the binding partners of these repair factors are also likely to sensitize cells to CPT treatment. For example, depletion of the MRN-binding partner hnRNPUL increases the sensitivity to CPT [65]; and deficiencies in ZRANB3 and SPIDR, binding partners of PCNA and RAD51, cause CPT hypersensitivity in cancer cells [66,67,68]. In addition, the two DNA helicases BLM and WRN have also been implicated in the repair of CPT-induced DNA lesions [69,70]. Early studies revealed that chicken BLM knockout cells and human BLM-deficient fibroblasts showed increased sensitivity to CPT [71,72]. On the contrary, mouse BLM knockout embryonic stem cells showed mild resistance to CPT [73]. This discrepancy is likely attributable to the complexity of CPT-induced DNA lesion repair as well as different treatment conditions and experimental systems.

Interstrand crosslinks (ICLs) resemble CPT-induced lesions in that they block both replication and transcription [74]. They may induce replication fork reversal and fork collapse, which require DNA incision for lesion processing and HR for repair. ICL repair is accomplished by the coordinated actions of 17 Fanconi anemia (FA) genes whose mutations contribute to FA in patients [75]. Depletion of FANCP/SLX4 or FANCQ/XPF causes cellular sensitivity to CPT because they form an endonuclease complex involved in the repair of trapped TOP1cc [38]. Likewise, depletion of FANCS/BRCA1, FANCD1/BRCA2, FANCN/PALB2 or FANCO/RAD51C sensitizes cells to CPT because of their involvement in HR [76]. Accordingly, depletion of the FA core complex except FANCM—involved in fork reversal—is not expected to increase CPT sensitivity because they are unable to recognize the trapped TOP1cc [76]. However, the roles of FANCI, D2, J and FAN1 in the process are elusive due to conflicting reports presumably reflecting different experimental systems [76,77,78]. For example, in a multicolor competition assay, loss of FANCI or FAN1 rendered cells sensitive to CPT treatment [77]. However, this observation could not be recapitulated in studies performed with FANCI-deficient lymphoblasts and FAN1-depleted HEK293 cells [76,79], indicating that the involvement of these two genes in CTP sensitivity might be cell type specific.

It is interesting to note that the MMS22L-TONSL complex plays a prominent role in mediating CPT sensitivity [80,81,82,83]. Depletion of this complex impairs RAD51 foci formation and triggers G2/M arrest, indicating that the MMS22L-TONSL complex participates in HR repair. Furthermore, this complex associates with MCM, FACT, ASF1 and histones. FACT and ASF1 are histone chaperones that function in H2A/H2B and H3/H4 chromatin assembly and disassembly, respectively [84]. They recycle parental histones from old DNA strands unwound by MCM and incorporate them into newly synthesized DNA strands. FACT and ASF1 also function in checkpoint signaling; therefore the involvement of MMS22L-TONSL in CPT response implies the existence of a close association between HR, DNA damage signaling and replication restart.

4. TOP1 Inhibition in Cancer Treatment

The understanding of the function of TOP1 and the cellular effects of TOP1 inhibition has been a stepping-stone for the development of effective CPT derivatives in cancer therapy. Since TOP1 functions in normal and cancer cells, the use of low doses of TOP1 inhibitors are actively sought to treat cancers that heavily rely on the function of TOP1 for survival (e.g., highly malignant, rapid-dividing tumor cells). In fact, the FDA-approved CPT derivatives topotecan and irinotecan are currently used to treat ovarian and colorectal cancers, respectively [24].

Furthermore, the promising results from a Phase I trial have warranted further evaluation of the CPT derivative Diflomotecan in Phase II trials [85]. Other derivatives like Gimatecan, Lurtotecan and Exatecan are also being tested in clinical trials (Table 1). The non-CPT indolocarbazole BMS-250749 showed great anti-tumor activity against preclinical xenograft models [86], but no further evaluation beyond Phase I trials is presently available (Table 2). Another indolocarbazole compound Edotecarin has shown promising anti-tumor activity in xenograft models and it is now advanced to Phase II studies of patients with advanced solid tumors [87]. By contrast, Phenanthroline ARC-111 (topovale) was potently against human tumor xenografts and displayed anti-cancer activity in colon and Wilms’ tumors [88]; however, no result from Phase I clinical trials is available owing to profound bone marrow toxicity [89]. To date, indenoisoquinolines are the most promising non-CPT inhibitors in clinical trials. LMP400 (NSC 743400, indotecan) and LMP776 (NSC 725776, indimitecan) show significant anti-tumor activities in animal models and both are being evaluated in Phase I clinical trials for relapsed solid tumors and lymphomas [8,90].

biomolecules-05-01652-t001_Table 1

CPT derivatives in clinical trials [91].

NameStructureClinical TrialMalignancyReference
CamptothecinDiscontinued[24]
Topotecan(Hycamtin)FDA approvedOvarian cancer, SCLC[24]
Irinotecan(Camptosar/CPT-11)FDA approvedColorectal[24]
Belotecan(CKD-602)Approved(South Korea)[4]
Diflomotecan(BN80915)Phase II(Ipsen)Advanced metastatic cancer, SCLC[84]
Gimatecan(ST-1481, LBQ707)Phase I/II(Sigma-Tau, Novartis)Advanced solid tumors[24]
Lurtotecan(Liposomal OSI-211, NX 211)Phase II(Astellas, NCLC)SCLC, Ovarian[24]
Exatecan mesylate(DX-8951f)Phase II/III(Daiichi)Sarcoma, Pancreatic, Gastric, Liver[24]

Given the observation that CPT-mediated TOP1 inhibition provokes DNA repair activities, a synergistic effect is then anticipated on cancer cells by inhibition of TOP1 and downregulation of DNA repair activities. The rationale for this approach is to accelerate the accumulation of DNA breaks and trigger cellular apoptosis, probably through mitotic catastrophe [92]. Which DNA repair pathways can we exploit? Currently, the major interests are in SSB and DSB repair mechanisms. Indeed, PARP inhibitors can enhance the cytotoxicity of TOP1 inhibitors in cancer cell lines as well as in mouse models [93,94,95,96]. Phase I studies of combination therapy using PARP inhibitors veliparib or olaparib (FDA-approved) together with topotecan were carried out in patients with advanced solid tumors but showed some dose-dependent side effects [97,98]. TDP1 can be another potential target because it functions directly downstream of PARP1 in the repair of TOP1 poison-induced DNA lesions [99]. TDP1 inhibitors sensitize cells to CPT treatment in vitro [100,101], however in vivo evaluation is presently unavailable due to unsuitable properties of the compounds [102].

biomolecules-05-01652-t002_Table 2

Non-CPT derivatives in preclinical and clinical trials [91].

NameStructureClinical TrialMalignancyReference
Indolocarbazoles(Edotecarin, BMS-250749)Phase II(Edotecarin, Pfizer)Preclinical(BMS-250749)Stomach, breast neoplasmsAnti-tumor activity in preclinical xenograft models[86,87,103]
Phenanthridines(ARC-111/topovale)PreclinicalAnti-tumor activity in preclinical xenograft models[88,89,103]
Indenoisoquinolines (LMP400, LMP776)Phase ILymphomas[8,90,103]

DSB repair can be targeted by either inhibition of DSB signaling or inhibition of HR. ATM and ATR inhibitors can largely increase the sensitivity to CPT in cancer cells [104,105]. This can be explained by the fact that abrogation of the cell cycle arrest will allow cells with unreplicated or unrepaired chromosomes to enter mitosis thereby triggering mitotic catastrophe and cell death. Similarly, CHEK1 and CHEK2 inhibitors are tested in Phase I studies in combination with irinotecan [106,107]. Inhibitors that can directly block HR proteins are very limited [108]. This is partially attributed to the fact that HR genes are often mutated in cancer cells, thus diminishing the enthusiasm for developing HR inhibitors. One diterpenoid compound, however, was found to be able to inhibit the function of BRCA1 and render cytotoxicity in human prostate cancer cells [109]. Several RAD51 inhibitors have also been identified but have not been tested in cell lines [110]. Inhibition of BRCA1 and RAD51 can be also achieved indirectly by harnessing corresponding kinases [106]. Clearly, defective hMRE11 sensitizes colon cancer cells to CPT treatment [111]. Although MRE11-deficeint tumor xenografts failed to display significant growth inhibition by irinotecan alone, combining thymidine with irinotecan caused a dramatic growth delay [112].

TOP1 inhibitors might be also useful for treating cancers with BRCA1/2 mutations. The successful use of PARP inhibitors in treating BRCA1/2-deficient tumors has ignited a broad interest in searching for synthetic lethality among DNA damage response and repair genes [113,114]. In the PARP-BRCA1/2 example, the accumulation of SSBs by PARP inhibition would lead to the formation of DSBs during replication. In HR-deficient cells, DSBs can only be repaired by illegitimate (toxic) NHEJ—joining one-ended DSBs from different locations—leading to cell death [115,116]. However, resistance to PARP inhibitors can arise in BRCA1-deficient tumors during treatment from either genetic reversion of BRCA1 mutations or the loss of NHEJ [117,118,119,120,121,122]. Therefore, it would be beneficial to explore the possibility of developing a similar synthetic lethal strategy to use TOP1 inhibitors in the treatment of BRCA1/2-deficient tumors.

An overview of the effects of TOP1 inhibition is provided. Inhibitors and key DNA repair factors are highlighted.

5. Conclusions

Trapping of TOP1 by inhibitors generates SSBs and DSBs that are repaired by their corresponding repair pathways (Figure 2). Therefore, developing effective TOP1 inhibitors not only provides powerful tools to study DNA replication and repair but also establishes a foundation to devise new synthetic lethal strategies for efficient cancer treatments. The accumulation of DNA strand breaks (SSBs and DSBs) by TOP1 inhibition in HR-deficient tumor cells is expected to enhance cytotoxicity. However, increased DNA repair activities in cancer cells can make TOP1 inhibitors less effective, so silencing of repair pathways in conjunction with the use of TOP1 inhibitors offers an attractive new means for cancer control. Since each tumor is unique, it would be advantageous to identify the individualities of DNA repair pathways or biomarkers reflecting the changes of DNA repair activities in tumor cells [92,123]. This will make it possible to achieve better and predictable prognosis through tailored therapeutic regimens. Given that TOP1 is essential for transcription and DNA replication, future design of novel TOP1 inhibitors and combinational therapy strategies should aim to increase therapeutic efficacy of the inhibitors, thus reducing side effects.

Acknowledgments

The work in the Her laboratory is supported by the NIH grant GM084353.

Author Contributions

Yang Xu and Chengtao Her wrote and revised the article.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest with the contents of this article.

References HelledayT.PetermannE.LundinC.HodgsonB.SharmaR.A. DNA repair pathways as targets for cancer therapy Nat. Rev. Cancer 2008 8 193 204 10.1038/nrc2342 18256616 HanahanD.WeinbergR.A. Hallmarks of cancer: The next generation Cell 2011 144 646 674 10.1016/j.cell.2011.02.013 21376230 BranzeiD.FoianiM. Maintaining genome stability at the replication fork Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 2010 11 208 219 10.1038/nrm2852 20177396 PommierY.LeoE.ZhangH.MarchandC. DNA topoisomerases and their poisoning by anticancer and antibacterial drugs Chem. Biol. 2010 17 421 433 10.1016/j.chembiol.2010.04.012 20534341 ChuW.K.HicksonI.D. RecQ helicases: Multifunctional genome caretakers Nat. Rev. Cancer 2009 9 644 654 10.1038/nrc2682 19657341 NitissJ.L. DNA topoisomerase II and its growing repertoire of biological functions Nat. Rev. Cancer 2009 9 327 337 10.1038/nrc2608 19377505 NitissJ.L. Targeting DNA topoisomerase II in cancer chemotherapy Nat. Rev. Cancer 2009 9 338 350 10.1038/nrc2607 19377506 PommierY. Drugging topoisomerases: Lessons and challenges ACS Chem. Biol. 2013 8 82 95 10.1021/cb300648v 23259582 MorhamS.G.KluckmanK.D.VoulomanosN.SmithiesO. Targeted disruption of the mouse topoisomerase I gene by camptothecin selection Mol. Cell. Biol. 1996 16 6804 6809 8943335 BermejoR.DoksaniY.CapraT.KatouY.M.TanakaH.ShirahigeK.FoianiM. Top1- and Top2-mediated topological transitions at replication forks ensure fork progression and stability and prevent DNA damage checkpoint activation Genes Dev. 2007 21 1921 1936 10.1101/gad.432107 17671091 GambusA.JonesR.C.Sanchez-DiazA.KanemakiM.van DeursenF.EdmondsonR.D.LabibK. GINS maintains association of Cdc45 with MCM in replisome progression complexes at eukaryotic DNA replication forks Nat. Cell Biol. 2006 8 358 366 10.1038/ncb1382 16531994 AbdurashidovaG.RadulescuS.SandovalO.ZaharievS.DanailovM.B.DemidovichA.SantamariaL.BiamontiG.RivaS.FalaschiA. Functional interactions of DNA topoisomerases with a human replication origin EMBO J. 2007 26 998 1009 10.1038/sj.emboj.7601578 17290216 MerinoA.MaddenK.R.LaneW.S.ChampouxJ.J.ReinbergD. DNA topoisomerase I is involved in both repression and activation of transcription Nature 1993 365 227 232 10.1038/365227a0 8396729 KharbandaS.RubinE.GunjiH.HinzH.GiovanellaB.PantazisP.KufeD. Camptothecin and its derivatives induce expression of the c-Jun protooncogene in human myeloid leukemia cells Cancer Res. 1991 51 6636 6642 1742737 TuduriS.CrabbeL.ContiC.TourriereH.Holtgreve-GrezH.JauchA.PantescoV.de VosJ.ThomasA.TheilletC. Topoisomerase I suppresses genomic instability by preventing interference between replication and transcription Nat. Cell Biol. 2009 11 1315 1324 10.1038/ncb1984 19838172 Skourti-StathakiK.ProudfootN.J. A double-edged sword: R loops as threats to genome integrity and powerful regulators of gene expression Genes Dev. 2014 28 1384 1396 10.1101/gad.242990.114 24990962 KobayashiM.AidaM.NagaokaH.BegumN.A.KitawakiY.NakataM.StanlieA.DoiT.KatoL.OkazakiI.M. AID-induced decrease in topoisomerase 1 induces DNA structural alteration and DNA cleavage for class switch recombination Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2009 106 22375 22380 10.1073/pnas.0911879106 20018730 KobayashiM.SabouriZ.SabouriS.KitawakiY.PommierY.AbeT.KiyonariH.HonjoT. Decrease in topoisomerase I is responsible for activation-induced cytidine deaminase (AID)-dependent somatic hypermutation Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2011 108 19305 19310 10.1073/pnas.1114522108 22080610 ZhangH.ZhangY.W.YasukawaT.Dalla RosaI.KhiatiS.PommierY. Increased negative supercoiling of mtDNA in TOP1mt knockout mice and presence of topoisomerases IIalpha and IIbeta in vertebrate mitochondria Nucleic Acids Res. 2014 42 7259 7267 10.1093/nar/gku384 24803675 DouarreC.SourbierC.Dalla RosaI.Brata DasB.RedonC.E.ZhangH.NeckersL.PommierY. Mitochondrial topoisomerase I is critical for mitochondrial integrity and cellular energy metabolism PLoS ONE 2012 7 e41094 10.1371/journal.pone.0041094 22911747 KosterD.A.PalleK.BotE.S.BjornstiM.A.DekkerN.H. Antitumour drugs impede DNA uncoiling by topoisomerase I Nature 2007 448 213 217 10.1038/nature05938 17589503 WallM.E.WaniM.C. Camptothecin and taxol: Discovery to clinic—Thirteenth Bruce F. Cain Memorial Award Lecture Cancer Res. 1995 55 753 760 7850785 PommierY. DNA topoisomerase I inhibitors: Chemistry, biology, and interfacial inhibition Chem. Rev. 2009 109 2894 2902 10.1021/cr900097c 19476377 PommierY. Topoisomerase I inhibitors: Camptothecins and beyond Nat. Rev. Cancer 2006 6 789 802 10.1038/nrc1977 16990856 FanY.WeinsteinJ.N.KohnK.W.ShiL.M.PommierY. Molecular modeling studies of the DNA-topoisomerase I ternary cleavable complex with camptothecin J. Med. Chem. 1998 41 2216 2226 10.1021/jm9605445 9632354 RedinboM.R.StewartL.KuhnP.ChampouxJ.J.HolW.G. Crystal structures of human topoisomerase I in covalent and noncovalent complexes with DNA Science 1998 279 1504 1513 10.1126/science.279.5356.1504 9488644 KerriganJ.E.PilchD.S. A structural model for the ternary cleavable complex formed between human topoisomerase I, DNA, and camptothecin Biochemistry 2001 40 9792 9798 10.1021/bi010913l 11502172 AntonyS.JayaramanM.LacoG.KohlhagenG.KohnK.W.CushmanM.PommierY. Differential induction of topoisomerase I-DNA cleavage complexes by the indenoisoquinoline MJ-III-65 (NSC 706744) and camptothecin: Base sequence analysis and activity against camptothecin-resistant topoisomerases I Cancer Res. 2003 63 7428 7435 14612542 SirikantaramasS.YamazakiM.SaitoK. Mutations in topoisomerase I as a self-resistance mechanism coevolved with the production of the anticancer alkaloid camptothecin in plants Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2008 105 6782 6786 10.1073/pnas.0801038105 18443285 PommierY.BarceloJ.M.RaoV.A.SordetO.JobsonA.G.ThibautL.MiaoZ.H.SeilerJ.A.ZhangH.MarchandC. Repair of topoisomerase I-mediated DNA damage Prog. Nucleic Acid Res. Mol. Biol. 2006 81 179 229 16891172 DesaiS.D.LiT.K.Rodriguez-BaumanA.RubinE.H.LiuL.F. Ubiquitin/26S proteasome-mediated degradation of topoisomerase I as a resistance mechanism to camptothecin in tumor cells Cancer Res. 2001 61 5926 5932 11479235 PloI.LiaoZ.Y.BarceloJ.M.KohlhagenG.CaldecottK.W.WeinfeldM.PommierY. Association of XRCC1 and tyrosyl DNA phosphodiesterase (Tdp1) for the repair of topoisomerase I-mediated DNA lesions DNA Repair 2003 2 1087 1100 10.1016/S1568-7864(03)00116-2 13679147 WhitehouseC.J.TaylorR.M.ThistlethwaiteA.ZhangH.Karimi-BusheriF.LaskoD.D.WeinfeldM.CaldecottK.W. XRCC1 stimulates human polynucleotide kinase activity at damaged DNA termini and accelerates DNA single-strand break repair Cell 2001 104 107 117 10.1016/S0092-8674(01)00195-7 11163244 VanceJ.R.WilsonT.E. Yeast Tdp1 and Rad1-Rad10 function as redundant pathways for repairing Top1 replicative damage Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2002 99 13669 13674 10.1073/pnas.202242599 12368472 DengC.BrownJ.A.YouD.BrownJ.M. Multiple endonucleases function to repair covalent topoisomerase I complexes in Saccharomyces cerevisiae Genetics 2005 170 591 600 10.1534/genetics.104.028795 15834151 De LaatW.L.AppeldoornE.JaspersN.G.HoeijmakersJ.H. DNA structural elements required for ERCC1-XPF endonuclease activity J. Biol. Chem. 1998 273 7835 7842 10.1074/jbc.273.14.7835 9525876 OsmanF.WhitbyM.C. Exploring the roles of Mus81-Eme1/Mms4 at perturbed replication forks DNA Repair 2007 6 1004 1017 10.1016/j.dnarep.2007.02.019 17409028 SvendsenJ.M.SmogorzewskaA.SowaM.E.O’ConnellB.C.GygiS.P.ElledgeS.J.HarperJ.W. Mammalian BTBD12/SLX4 assembles a Holliday junction resolvase and is required for DNA repair Cell 2009 138 63 77 10.1016/j.cell.2009.06.030 19596235 MunozI.M.HainK.DeclaisA.C.GardinerM.TohG.W.Sanchez-PulidoL.HeuckmannJ.M.TothR.MacartneyT.EppinkB. Coordination of structure-specific nucleases by human SLX4/BTBD12 is required for DNA repair Mol. Cell 2009 35 116 127 10.1016/j.molcel.2009.06.020 19595721 FekairiS.ScaglioneS.ChahwanC.TaylorE.R.TissierA.CoulonS.DongM.Q.RuseC.YatesJ.R.3rdRussellP. Human SLX4 is a Holliday junction resolvase subunit that binds multiple DNA repair/recombination endonucleases Cell 2009 138 78 89 10.1016/j.cell.2009.06.029 19596236 SachoE.J.MaizelsN. DNA repair factor MRE11/RAD50 cleaves 3'-phosphotyrosyl bonds and resects DNA to repair damage caused by topoisomerase 1 poisons J. Biol. Chem. 2011 286 44945 44951 10.1074/jbc.M111.299347 22039049 MakharashviliN.TubbsA.T.YangS.H.WangH.BartonO.ZhouY.DeshpandeR.A.LeeJ.H.LobrichM.SleckmanB.P. Catalytic and noncatalytic roles of the CtIP endonuclease in double-strand break end resection Mol. Cell 2014 54 1022 1033 10.1016/j.molcel.2014.04.011 24837676 WangH.LiY.TruongL.N.ShiL.Z.HwangP.Y.HeJ.DoJ.ChoM.J.LiH.NegreteA. CtIP maintains stability at common fragile sites and inverted repeats by end resection-independent endonuclease activity Mol. Cell 2014 54 1012 1021 10.1016/j.molcel.2014.04.012 24837675 HiraokaL.R.HarringtonJ.J.GerhardD.S.LieberM.R.HsiehC.L. Sequence of human FEN-1, a structure-specific endonuclease, and chromosomal localization of the gene (FEN1) in mouse and human Genomics 1995 25 220 225 10.1016/0888-7543(95)80129-A 7774922 ZhengL.ZhouM.ChaiQ.ParrishJ.XueD.PatrickS.M.TurchiJ.J.YannoneS.M.ChenD.ShenB. Novel function of the flap endonuclease 1 complex in processing stalled DNA replication forks EMBO Rep. 2005 6 83 89 10.1038/sj.embor.7400313 15592449 LinC.P.BanY.LyuY.L.LiuL.F. Proteasome-dependent processing of topoisomerase I-DNA adducts into DNA double strand breaks at arrested replication forks J. Biol. Chem. 2009 284 28084 28092 10.1074/jbc.M109.030601 19666469 Ray ChaudhuriA.HashimotoY.HerradorR.NeelsenK.J.FachinettiD.BermejoR.CocitoA.CostanzoV.LopesM. Topoisomerase I poisoning results in PARP-mediated replication fork reversal Nat. Struct. Mol. Biol. 2012 19 417 423 10.1038/nsmb.2258 22388737 ZellwegerR.DalcherD.MutrejaK.BertiM.SchmidJ.A.HerradorR.VindigniA.LopesM. Rad51-mediated replication fork reversal is a global response to genotoxic treatments in human cells J. Cell Biol. 2015 208 563 579 10.1083/jcb.201406099 25733714 BranzeiD.FoianiM. Regulation of DNA repair throughout the cell cycle Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 2008 9 297 308 10.1038/nrm2351 18285803 NeelsenK.J.LopesM. Replication fork reversal in eukaryotes: From dead end to dynamic response Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 2015 16 207 220 10.1038/nrm3935 25714681 SogoJ.M.LopesM.FoianiM. Fork reversal and ssDNA accumulation at stalled replication forks owing to checkpoint defects Science 2002 297 599 602 10.1126/science.1074023 12142537 Cotta-RamusinoC.FachinettiD.LuccaC.DoksaniY.LopesM.SogoJ.FoianiM. Exo1 processes stalled replication forks and counteracts fork reversal in checkpoint-defective cells Mol. Cell 2005 17 153 159 10.1016/j.molcel.2004.11.032 15629726 ThangavelS.BertiM.LevikovaM.PintoC.GomathinayagamS.VujanovicM.ZellwegerR.MooreH.LeeE.H.HendricksonE.A. DNA2 drives processing and restart of reversed replication forks in human cells J. Cell Biol. 2015 208 545 562 10.1083/jcb.201406100 25733713 CicciaA.ElledgeS.J. The DNA damage response: Making it safe to play with knives Mol. Cell 2010 40 179 204 10.1016/j.molcel.2010.09.019 20965415 CaldecottK.W. Single-strand break repair and genetic disease Nat. Rev. Genet. 2008 9 619 631 18626472 CimprichK.A.CortezD. ATR: An essential regulator of genome integrity Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 2008 9 616 627 10.1038/nrm2450 18594563 MatsuokaS.BallifB.A.SmogorzewskaA.McDonaldE.R.3rdHurovK.E.LuoJ.BakalarskiC.E.ZhaoZ.SoliminiN.LerenthalY. ATM and ATR substrate analysis reveals extensive protein networks responsive to DNA damage Science 2007 316 1160 1166 10.1126/science.1140321 17525332 HuenM.S.SyS.M.ChenJ. BRCA1 and its toolbox for the maintenance of genome integrity Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 2010 11 138 148 10.1038/nrm2831 20029420 ChapmanJ.R.TaylorM.R.BoultonS.J. Playing the end game: DNA double-strand break repair pathway choice Mol. Cell 2012 47 497 510 10.1016/j.molcel.2012.07.029 22920291 SymingtonL.S.GautierJ. Double-strand break end resection and repair pathway choice Annu. Rev. Genet. 2011 45 247 271 10.1146/annurev-genet-110410-132435 21910633 MoynahanM.E.JasinM. Mitotic homologous recombination maintains genomic stability and suppresses tumorigenesis Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 2010 11 196 207 10.1038/nrm2851 20177395 KowalczykowskiS.C. Initiation of genetic recombination and recombination-dependent replication Trends Biochem. Sci. 2000 25 156 165 10.1016/S0968-0004(00)01569-3 10754547 MaedeY.ShimizuH.FukushimaT.KogameT.NakamuraT.MikiT.TakedaS.PommierY.MuraiJ. Differential and common DNA repair pathways for topoisomerase I- and II-targeted drugs in a genetic DT40 repair cell screen panel Mol. Cancer Ther. 2014 13 214 220 10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-13-0551 24130054 XuY.WuX.HerC. hMSH5 facilitates the repair of camptothecin-induced double-strand breaks through an interaction with FANCJ J. Biol. Chem. 2015 10.1074/jbc.M115.642884 26055704 PoloS.E.BlackfordA.N.ChapmanJ.R.BaskcombL.GravelS.RuschA.ThomasA.BlundredR.SmithP.KzhyshkowskaJ. Regulation of DNA-end resection by hnRNPU-like proteins promotes DNA double-strand break signaling and repair Mol. Cell 2012 45 505 516 10.1016/j.molcel.2011.12.035 22365830 YuanJ.GhosalG.ChenJ. The HARP-like domain-containing protein AH2/ZRANB3 binds to PCNA and participates in cellular response to replication stress Mol. Cell 2012 47 410 421 10.1016/j.molcel.2012.05.025 22705370 CicciaA.NimonkarA.V.HuY.HajduI.AcharY.J.IzharL.PetitS.A.AdamsonB.YoonJ.C.KowalczykowskiS.C. Polyubiquitinated PCNA recruits the ZRANB3 translocase to maintain genomic integrity after replication stress Mol. Cell 2012 47 396 409 10.1016/j.molcel.2012.05.024 22704558 WanL.HanJ.LiuT.DongS.XieF.ChenH.HuangJ. Scaffolding protein SPIDR/KIAA0146 connects the Bloom syndrome helicase with homologous recombination repair Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2013 110 10646 10651 10.1073/pnas.1220921110 23509288 BernsteinK.A.GangloffS.RothsteinR. The RecQ DNA helicases in DNA repair Annu. Rev. Genet. 2010 44 393 417 10.1146/annurev-genet-102209-163602 21047263 CroteauD.L.PopuriV.OpreskoP.L.BohrV.A. Human RecQ helicases in DNA repair, recombination, and replication Annu. Rev. Biochem. 2014 83 519 552 10.1146/annurev-biochem-060713-035428 24606147 ImamuraO.FujitaK.ItohC.TakedaS.FuruichiY.MatsumotoT. Werner and Bloom helicases are involved in DNA repair in a complementary fashion Oncogene 2002 21 954 963 10.1038/sj.onc.1205143 11840341 RaoV.A.FanA.M.MengL.DoeC.F.NorthP.S.HicksonI.D.PommierY. Phosphorylation of BLM, dissociation from topoisomerase IIIalpha, and colocalization with gamma-H2AX after topoisomerase I-induced replication damage Mol. Cell Biol. 2005 25 8925 8937 10.1128/MCB.25.20.8925-8937.2005 16199871 MarpleT.KimT.M.HastyP. Embryonic stem cells deficient for BRCA2 or Blm exhibit divergent genotoxic profiles that support opposing activities during homologous recombination Mutat. Res. 2006 602 110 120 10.1016/j.mrfmmm.2006.08.005 16997331 DeansA.J.WestS.C. DNA interstrand crosslink repair and cancer Nat. Rev. Cancer 2011 11 467 480 10.1038/nrc3088 21701511 WangA.T.SmogorzewskaA. SnapShot: Fanconi anemia and associated proteins Cell 2015 160 354 354 10.1016/j.cell.2014.12.031 25594185 SinghT.R.BakkerS.T.AgarwalS.JansenM.GrassmanE.GodthelpB.C.AliA.M.DuC.H.RooimansM.A.FanQ. Impaired FANCD2 monoubiquitination and hypersensitivity to camptothecin uniquely characterize Fanconi anemia complementation group M Blood 2009 114 174 180 10.1182/blood-2009-02-207811 19423727 SmogorzewskaA.DesettyR.SaitoT.T.SchlabachM.LachF.P.SowaM.E.ClarkA.B.KunkelT.A.HarperJ.W.ColaiacovoM.P. A genetic screen identifies FAN1, a Fanconi anemia-associated nuclease necessary for DNA interstrand crosslink repair Mol. Cell 2010 39 36 47 10.1016/j.molcel.2010.06.023 20603073 SchwabR.A.NieminuszczyJ.Shin-YaK.NiedzwiedzW. FANCJ couples replication past natural fork barriers with maintenance of chromatin structure J. Cell Biol. 2013 201 33 48 10.1083/jcb.201208009 23530069 KratzK.SchopfB.KadenS.SendoelA.EberhardR.LademannC.CannavoE.SartoriA.A.HengartnerM.O.JiricnyJ. Deficiency of FANCD2-associated nuclease KIAA1018/FAN1 sensitizes cells to interstrand crosslinking agents Cell 2010 142 77 88 10.1016/j.cell.2010.06.022 20603016 DuroE.LundinC.AskK.Sanchez-PulidoL.MacArtneyT.J.TothR.PontingC.P.GrothA.HelledayT.RouseJ. Identification of the MMS22L-TONSL complex that promotes homologous recombination Mol. Cell 2010 40 632 644 10.1016/j.molcel.2010.10.023 21055984 O’ConnellB.C.AdamsonB.LydeardJ.R.SowaM.E.CicciaA.BredemeyerA.L.SchlabachM.GygiS.P.ElledgeS.J.HarperJ.W. A genome-wide camptothecin sensitivity screen identifies a mammalian MMS22L-NFKBIL2 complex required for genomic stability Mol. Cell 2010 40 645 657 10.1016/j.molcel.2010.10.022 21055985 O’DonnellL.PanierS.WildenhainJ.TkachJ.M.Al-HakimA.LandryM.C.Escribano-DiazC.SzilardR.K.YoungJ.T.MunroM. The MMS22L-TONSL complex mediates recovery from replication stress and homologous recombination Mol Cell 2010 40 619 631 10.1016/j.molcel.2010.10.024 21055983 PiwkoW.OlmaM.H.HeldM.BiancoJ.N.PedrioliP.G.HofmannK.PaseroP.GerlichD.W.PeterM. RNAi-based screening identifies the Mms22L-Nfkbil2 complex as a novel regulator of DNA replication in human cells EMBO J. 2010 29 4210 4222 10.1038/emboj.2010.304 21113133 RansomM.DenneheyB.K.TylerJ.K. Chaperoning histones during DNA replication and repair Cell 2010 140 183 195 10.1016/j.cell.2010.01.004 20141833 KroepJ.R.GelderblomH. Diflomotecan, a promising homocamptothecin for cancer therapy Expert Opin. Investig. Drugs 2009 18 69 75 10.1517/13543780802571674 19053883 SaulnierM.G.BalasubramanianB.N.LongB.H.FrennessonD.B.RuedigerE.ZimmermannK.EummerJ.T.St. LaurentD.R.StoffanK.M.NaiduB.N. Discovery of a fluoroindolo[2,3-a]carbazole clinical candidate with broad spectrum antitumor activity in preclinical tumor models superior to the marketed oncology drug, CPT-11 J. Med. Chem. 2005 48 2258 2261 10.1021/jm049090z 15801816 CiomeiM.CrociV.CiavolellaA.BallinariD.PesentiE. Antitumor efficacy of edotecarin as a single agent and in combination with chemotherapy agents in a xenograft model Clin. Cancer Res. 2006 12 2856 2861 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-05-1859 16675581 LiT.K.HoughtonP.J.DesaiS.D.DarouiP.LiuA.A.HarsE.S.RuchelmanA.L.LaVoieE.J.LiuL.F. Characterization of ARC-111 as a novel topoisomerase I-targeting anticancer drug Cancer Res. 2003 63 8400 8407 14679002 KurtzbergL.S.BattleT.RouleauC.BagleyR.G.AgataN.YaoM.SchmidS.RothS.CrawfordJ.KrumbholzR. Bone marrow and tumor cell colony-forming units and human tumor xenograft efficacy of noncamptothecin and camptothecin topoisomerase I inhibitors Mol. Cancer Ther. 2008 7 3212 3222 10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-08-0568 18852125 PommierY.CushmanM. The indenoisoquinoline noncamptothecin topoisomerase I inhibitors: Update and perspectives Mol. Cancer Ther. 2009 8 1008 1014 10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-08-0706 19383846 ClinicalTrials.gov: A service of the U.S. National Institutes of Health Available online: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov (accessed on 20 June 2015) BouwmanP.JonkersJ. The effects of deregulated DNA damage signalling on cancer chemotherapy response and resistance Nat. Rev. Cancer 2012 12 587 598 10.1038/nrc3342 22918414 DelaneyC.A.WangL.Z.KyleS.WhiteA.W.CalvertA.H.CurtinN.J.DurkaczB.W.HostomskyZ.NewellD.R. Potentiation of temozolomide and topotecan growth inhibition and cytotoxicity by novel poly(adenosine diphosphoribose) polymerase inhibitors in a panel of human tumor cell lines Clin. Cancer Res. 2000 6 2860 2867 10914735 ThomasH.D.CalabreseC.R.BateyM.A.CananS.HostomskyZ.KyleS.MaegleyK.A.NewellD.R.SkalitzkyD.WangL.Z. Preclinical selection of a novel poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor for clinical trial Mol. Cancer Ther. 2007 6 945 956 10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-06-0552 17363489 PatelA.G.FlattenK.S.SchneiderP.A.DaiN.T.McDonaldJ.S.PoirierG.G.KaufmannS.H. Enhanced killing of cancer cells by poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors and topoisomerase I inhibitors reflects poisoning of both enzymes J. Biol. Chem. 2012 287 4198 4210 10.1074/jbc.M111.296475 22158865 ZanderS.A.KersbergenA.van der BurgE.de WaterN.van TellingenO.GunnarsdottirS.JaspersJ.E.PajicM.NygrenA.O.JonkersJ. Sensitivity and acquired resistance of BRCA1;p53-deficient mouse mammary tumors to the topoisomerase I inhibitor topotecan Cancer Res. 2010 70 1700 1710 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-09-3367 20145144 SamolJ.RansonM.ScottE.MacphersonE.CarmichaelJ.ThomasA.CassidyJ. Safety and tolerability of the poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitor, olaparib (AZD2281) in combination with topotecan for the treatment of patients with advanced solid tumors: A phase I study Investig. New Drugs 2012 30 1493 1500 10.1007/s10637-011-9682-9 21590367 KummarS.ChenA.JiJ.ZhangY.ReidJ.M.AmesM.JiaL.WeilM.SperanzaG.MurgoA.J. Phase I study of PARP inhibitor ABT-888 in combination with topotecan in adults with refractory solid tumors and lymphomas Cancer Res. 2011 71 5626 5634 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-11-1227 21795476 DasB.B.HuangS.Y.MuraiJ.RehmanI.AmeJ.C.SenguptaS.DasS.K.MajumdarP.ZhangH.BiardD. PARP1-TDP1 coupling for the repair of topoisomerase I-induced DNA damage Nucleic Acids Res. 2014 42 4435 4449 10.1093/nar/gku088 24493735 DeanR.A.FamH.K.AnJ.ChoiK.ShimizuY.JonesS.J.BoerkoelC.F.InterthalH.PfeiferT.A. Identification of a putative Tdp1 inhibitor (CD00509) by in vitro and cell-based assays J. Biomol. Screen. 2014 19 1372 1382 10.1177/1087057114546551 25117203 FamH.K.WaltonC.MitraS.A.ChowdhuryM.OsborneN.ChoiK.SunG.WongP.C.O’SullivanM.J.TurashviliG. TDP1 and PARP1 deficiency are cytotoxic to rhabdomyosarcoma cells Mol. Cancer Res. 2013 11 1179 1192 10.1158/1541-7786.MCR-12-0575 23913164 AshourM.E.AtteyaR.El-KhamisyS.F. Topoisomerase-mediated chromosomal break repair: An emerging player in many games Nat. Rev. Cancer 2015 15 137 151 10.1038/nrc3892 25693836 DexheimerT.S.PommierY. DNA cleavage assay for the identification of topoisomerase I inhibitors Nat. Protoc. 2008 3 1736 1750 10.1038/nprot.2008.174 18927559 JosseR.MartinS.E.GuhaR.OrmanogluP.PfisterT.D.ReaperP.M.BarnesC.S.JonesJ.CharltonP.PollardJ.R. ATR inhibitors VE-821 and VX-970 sensitize cancer cells to topoisomerase i inhibitors by disabling DNA replication initiation and fork elongation responses Cancer Res. 2014 74 6968 6979 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-13-3369 25269479 HicksonI.ZhaoY.RichardsonC.J.GreenS.J.MartinN.M.OrrA.I.ReaperP.M.JacksonS.P.CurtinN.J.SmithG.C. Identification and characterization of a novel and specific inhibitor of the ataxia-telangiectasia mutated kinase ATM Cancer Res. 2004 64 9152 9159 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-04-2727 15604286 CurtinN.J. DNA repair dysregulation from cancer driver to therapeutic target Nat. Rev. Cancer 2012 12 801 817 10.1038/nrc3399 23175119 GarrettM.D.CollinsI. Anticancer therapy with checkpoint inhibitors: What, where and when? Trends Pharmacol. Sci. 2011 32 308 316 10.1016/j.tips.2011.02.014 21458083 PearlL.H.SchierzA.C.WardS.E.Al-LazikaniB.PearlF.M. Therapeutic opportunities within the DNA damage response Nat. Rev. Cancer 2015 15 166 180 10.1038/nrc3891 25709118 LinC.Z.ZhaoZ.X.XieS.M.MaoJ.H.ZhuC.C.LiX.H.Zeren-dawaB.Suolang-qimeiK.ZhuD.XiongT.Q. Diterpenoid alkaloids and flavonoids from Delphinium trichophorum Phytochemistry 2014 97 88 95 10.1016/j.phytochem.2013.10.011 24256579 HuangF.MotlekarN.A.BurgwinC.M.NapperA.D.DiamondS.L.MazinA.V. Identification of specific inhibitors of human RAD51 recombinase using high-throughput screening ACS Chem. Biol. 2011 6 628 635 10.1021/cb100428c 21428443 WenQ.ScorahJ.PhearG.RodgersG.RodgersS.MeuthM. A mutant allele of MRE11 found in mismatch repair-deficient tumor cells suppresses the cellular response to DNA replication fork stress in a dominant negative manner Mol. Biol. Cell 2008 19 1693 1705 10.1091/mbc.E07-09-0975 18256278 RodriguezR.HansenL.T.PhearG.ScorahJ.Spang-ThomsenM.CoxA.HelledayT.MeuthM. Thymidine selectively enhances growth suppressive effects of camptothecin/irinotecan in MSI+ cells and tumors containing a mutation of MRE11 Clin. Cancer Res. 2008 14 5476 5483 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-08-0274 18765539 FarmerH.McCabeN.LordC.J.TuttA.N.JohnsonD.A.RichardsonT.B.SantarosaM.DillonK.J.HicksonI.KnightsC. Targeting the DNA repair defect in BRCA mutant cells as a therapeutic strategy Nature 2005 434 917 921 10.1038/nature03445 15829967 BryantH.E.SchultzN.ThomasH.D.ParkerK.M.FlowerD.LopezE.KyleS.MeuthM.CurtinN.J.HelledayT. Specific killing of BRCA2-deficient tumours with inhibitors of poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase Nature 2005 434 913 917 10.1038/nature03443 15829966 BuntingS.F.CallenE.WongN.ChenH.T.PolatoF.GunnA.BothmerA.FeldhahnN.Fernandez-CapetilloO.CaoL. 53BP1 inhibits homologous recombination in BRCA1-deficient cells by blocking resection of DNA breaks Cell 2010 141 243 254 10.1016/j.cell.2010.03.012 20362325 BouwmanP.AlyA.EscandellJ.M.PieterseM.BartkovaJ.van der GuldenH.HiddinghS.ThanasoulaM.KulkarniA.YangQ. 53BP1 loss rescues BRCA1 deficiency and is associated with triple-negative and BRCA-mutated breast cancers Nat. Struct. Mol. Biol. 2010 17 688 695 10.1038/nsmb.1831 20453858 Di VirgilioM.CallenE.YamaneA.ZhangW.JankovicM.GitlinA.D.FeldhahnN.ReschW.OliveiraT.Y.ChaitB.T. Rif1 prevents resection of DNA breaks and promotes immunoglobulin class switching Science 2013 339 711 715 10.1126/science.1230624 23306439 ZimmermannM.LottersbergerF.BuonomoS.B.SfeirA.de LangeT. 53BP1 regulates DSB repair using Rif1 to control 5' end resection Science 2013 339 700 704 10.1126/science.1231573 23306437 ChapmanJ.R.BarralP.VannierJ.B.BorelV.StegerM.Tomas-LobaA.SartoriA.A.AdamsI.R.BatistaF.D.BoultonS.J. RIF1 is essential for 53BP1-dependent nonhomologous end joining and suppression of DNA double-strand break resection Mol. Cell 2013 49 858 871 10.1016/j.molcel.2013.01.002 23333305 Escribano-DiazC.OrthweinA.Fradet-TurcotteA.XingM.YoungJ.T.TkacJ.CookM.A.RosebrockA.P.MunroM.CannyM.D. A cell cycle-dependent regulatory circuit composed of 53BP1-RIF1 and BRCA1-CtIP controls DNA repair pathway choice Mol. Cell 2013 49 872 883 10.1016/j.molcel.2013.01.001 23333306 XuG.ChapmanJ.R.BrandsmaI.YuanJ.MistrikM.BouwmanP.BartkovaJ.GogolaE.WarmerdamD.BarazasM. REV7 counteracts DNA double-strand break resection and affects PARP inhibition Nature 2015 521 541 544 10.1038/nature14328 25799992 BoersmaV.MoattiN.Segura-BayonaS.PeuscherM.H.van der TorreJ.WeversB.A.OrthweinA.DurocherD.JacobsJ.J. MAD2L2 controls DNA repair at telomeres and DNA breaks by inhibiting 5' end resection Nature 2015 521 537 540 10.1038/nature14216 25799990 OginoS.FuchsC.S.GiovannucciE. How many molecular subtypes? Implications of the unique tumor principle in personalized medicine Expert Rev. Mol. Diagn. 2012 12 621 628 10.1586/erm.12.46 22845482