Discordance between phosphorylation and recruitment of 53BP1 in response to DNA double-strand breaks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
During the DNA damage response (DDR), chromatin modifications contribute to localization of 53BP1 to sites of DNA double-strand breaks (DSBs). 53BP1 is phosphorylated during the DDR, but it is unclear whether phosphorylation is directly coupled to chromatin binding. In this study, we used human diploid fibroblasts and HCT116 tumor cells to study 53BP1 phosphorylation at Serine-25 and Serine-1778 during endogenous and exogenous DSBs (DNA replication and whole-cell or sub-nuclear microbeam irradiation, respectively). In non-stressed conditions, endogenous DSBs in S-phase cells led to accumulation of 53BP1 and γH2AX into discrete nuclear foci. Only the frank collapse of DNA replication forks following hydroxyurea treatment initiated 53BP1(Ser25) and 53BP1(Ser1778) phosphorylation. In response to exogenous DSBs, 53BP1(Ser25) and 53BP1(Ser1778) phosphoforms localized to sites of initial DSBs in a cell cycle-independent manner. 53BP1 phosphoforms also localized to late residual foci and associated with PML-NBs during IR-induced senescence. Using isogenic cell lines and small-molecule inhibitors, we observed that DDR-induced 53BP1 phosphorylation was dependent on ATM and DNA-PKcs kinase activity but independent of MRE11 sensing or RNF168 chromatin remodeling. However, loss of RNF168 blocked recruitment of phosphorylated 53BP1 to sites of DNA damage. Our results uncouple 53BP1 phosphorylation from DSB localization and support parallel pathways for 53BP1 biology during the DDR. As relative 53BP1 expression may be a biomarker of DNA repair capacity in solid tumors, the tracking of 53BP1 phosphoforms in situ may give unique information regarding different cancer phenotypes or response to cancer treatment.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".