Regulation of cell cycle and stress responses to hydrostatic pressure in fission yeast

We have investigated the cellular responses to hydrostatic pressure by using the fission yeast Schizosaccharomyces pombe as a model system. Exposure to sublethal levels of hydrostatic pressure resulted in G2 cell cycle delay. This delay resulted from Cdc2 tyrosine-15 (Y-15) phosphorylation, and it was abrogated by simultaneous disruption of the Cdc2 kinase regulators Cdc25 and Wee1. However, cell cycle delay was independent of the DNA damage, cytokinesis, and cell size checkpoints, suggesting a novel mechanism of Cdc2-Y15 phosphorylation in response to hydrostatic pressure. Spc1/Sty1 mitogen-activated protein (MAP) kinase, a conserved member of the eukaryotic stress-activated p38, mitogen-activated protein (MAP) kinase family, was rapidly activated after pressure stress, and it was required for cell cycle recovery under these conditions, in part through promoting polo kinase (Plo1) phosphorylation on serine 402. Moreover, the Spc1 MAP kinase pathway played a key role in maintaining cell viability under hydrostatic pressure stress through the bZip transcription factor, Atf1. Further analysis revealed that prestressing cells with heat increased barotolerance, suggesting adaptational cross-talk between these stress responses. These findings provide new insight into eukaryotic homeostasis after exposure to pressure stress.

Can the cardiomyocyte cell cycle be reprogrammed?

Cardiac repair following myocardial injury is restricted due to the limited proliferative potential of adult cardiomyocytes. The ability of mammalian cardiomyocytes to proliferate is lost shortly after birth as cardiomyocytes withdraw from the cell cycle and differentiate. We do not fully understand the molecular and cellular mechanisms that regulate this cell cycle withdrawal, although if we could it might lead to the discovery of novel therapeutic targets for improving cardiac repair following myocardial injury. For the last decade, researchers have investigated cardiomyocyte cell cycle control, commonly using transgenic mouse models or recombinant adenoviruses to manipulate cell cycle regulators in vivo or in vitro. This review discusses cardiomyocyte cell cycle regulation and summarises recent data from studies manipulating the expressions and activities of cell cycle regulators in cardiomyocytes. The validity of therapeutic strategies that aim to reinstate the proliferative potential of cardiomyocytes to improve myocardial repair following injury will be discussed. (c) 2007 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Reprogramming the cell cycle machinery to treat cardiovascular disease

Coronary artery disease is one of the most common heart pathologies. Restriction of blood flow to the heart by atherosclerotic lesions, leading to angina pectoris and myocardial infarction, damages the heart, resulting in impaired cardiac function. Damaged myocardium is replaced by scar tissue since surviving cardiomyocytes are unable to proliferate to replace lost heart tissue. Although narrowing of the coronary arteries can be treated successfully using coronary revascularisation procedures, re-occlusion of the treated vessels remains a significant clinical problem. Cell cycle control mechanisms are key in both the impaired cardiac repair by surviving cardiomyocytes and re-narrowing of treated vessels by maladaptive proliferation of vascular smooth muscle cells. Strategies targeting the cell cycle machinery in the heart and vasculature offer promise both for the improvement of cardiac repair following MI and the prevention of restenosis and bypass graft failure following revascularisation procedures.

The cell cycle and drug discovery: The promise and the hope

In recent years, there have been major developments in the understanding of the cell cycle. It is now known that normal cellular proliferation is tightly regulated by the activation and deactivation of a series of proteins that constitute the cell cycle machinery. The expression and activity of components of the cell cycle can be altered during the development of a variety of diseases where aberrant proliferation contributes to the pathology of the illness. Apart from yielding a new source of untapped therapeutic targets, it is likely that manipulating the activity of such proteins in diseased states will provide an important route for treating proliferative disorders, and the opportunity to develop a novel class of future medicines.

Arresting developments in the cardiac myocyte cell cycle: Role of cyclin-dependent kinase inhibitors

Like most other cells in the body, foetal and neonatal cardiac myocytes are able to divide and proliferate. However, the ability of these cells to undergo cell division decreases progressively during development such that adult myocytes are unable to divide. A major problem arising from this inability of adult cardiac myocytes to proliferate is that the mature heart is unable to regenerate new myocardial tissue following severe injury, e.g. infarction, which can lead to compromised cardiac pump function and even death. Studies in proliferating cells have identified a group of genes and proteins that controls cell division. These proteins include cyclins, cyclin-dependent kinases (CDKs) and CDK inhibitors (CDKIs), which interact with each other to form complexes that are essential for controlling normal cell cycle progression. A variety of other proteins, e.g. the retinoblastoma protein (pRb) and members of the E2F family of transcription factors, also can interact with, and modulate the activities of, these complexes. Despite the major role that these proteins play in other cell types, little was known until recently about their existence and activities in immature (proliferating) or mature (non-proliferating) cardiac myocytes. The reason(s) why cardiac myocytes lose their ability to divide during development remains unknown, but if strategies were developed to understand the mechanisms underlying cardiac myocyte growth, it could open up new avenues for the treatment of cardiovascular disease. In this article, we shall review the function of the cell cycle machinery and outline some of our recent findings pertaining to the involvement of the cell cycle in modulating cardiac myocyte growth and hypertrophy.

Modelling acidosis and the cell cycle in multicellular tumour spheroids

A partial differential equation model is developed to understand the effect that nutrient and acidosis have on the distribution of proliferating and quiescent cells and dead cell material (necrotic and apopotic) within a multicellular tumour spheroid. The rates of cell quiescence and necrosis depend upon the local nutrient and acid concentrations and quiescent cells are assumed to consume less nutrient and produce less acid than proliferating cells. Analysis of the differences in nutrient consumption and acid production by quiescent and proliferating cells shows low nutrient levels do not necessarily lead to increased acid concentration via anaerobic metabolism. Rather, it is the balance between proliferating and quiescent cells within the tumour which is important; decreased nutrient levels lead to more quiescent cells, which produce less acid than proliferating cells. We examine this effect via a sensitivity analysis which also includes a quantification of the effect that nutrient and acid concentrations have on the rates of cell quiescence and necrosis.

Inhibition of vascular smooth muscle cell proliferation by non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs

Abnormal vascular smooth muscle cell (VSMC) proliferation is known to play an important role in the pathogenesis of atherosclerosis, restenosis and instent stenosis. Recent studies suggest that salicylates, in addition to inhibiting cyclooxygenase activity, exert an antiproliferative effect on VSMC growth both in vitro and in vivo. However, whether all non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAID) exert similar antiproliferative effects on VSMCs, and do so via a common mechanism of action, remains unknown. In the present study, we demonstrated that the NSAIDs, aspirin, ibuprofen and sulindac induced a dose-dependent inhibition of proliferation in rat A10 VSMCs (IC50 = 1666 mumol/L, 937 mumol/L and 520 mumol/L, respectively). These drugs did not show significant cytotoxic effects as determined by LDH release assay, even at the highest concentrations tested (aspirin, 5000 mumol/L; ibuprofen, 2500 mumol/L; and sulindac, 1000 mumol/L). Flow cytometric analyses showed that a 48 h exposure of A10 VSMCs to ibuprofen (1000 mumol/L) and sulindac (750 mumol/L) led to a significant G1 arrest (from 68.7 +/- 2.0% of cells in G1 to 76.6 +/- 2.2% and 75.8 +/- 2.2%, respectively, p < 0.05). In contrast, aspirin (2500 mumol/L) failed to induce a significant G1 arrest (68.1 +/- 5.2%). Clearer evidence of a G1 block was obtained by treatment of cells with the mitotic inhibitor, nocodazole (40 ng/ml), for the final 24 h of the experiment. Under these conditions, aspirin still failed to induce a G1 arrest (from 25.9 +/- 10.9% of cells in G1 to 19.6 +/- 2.3%) whereas ibuprofen and sulindac led to a significant accumulation of cells in G1(51.8% +/- 17.2% and 54.1% +/- 10.6%, respectively, p < 0.05). These results indicate that ibuprofen and sulindac inhibit VSMC proliferation by arresting the cell cycle in the G1 phase whereas the effect of aspirin appears to be independent of any special phase of the cell cycle. Irrespective of mechanism, our results suggest that NSAIDs might be of benefit to the treatment of vascular proliferative disorders.

Localization to the nucleolus is a common feature of coronavirus nucleoproteins and the protein may disrupt host cell division

The subcellular localization of transmissible gastroenteritis virus (TGEV) and mouse hepatitis virus (MHV) (group I and group II coronaviruses, respectively) nucleoproteins (N proteins) were examined by confocal microscopy. The proteins were shown to localize either to the cytoplasm alone or to the cytoplasm and a structure in the nucleus. This feature was confirmed to be the nucleolus by using specific antibodies to nucleolin, a major component of the nucleolus, and by confocal microscopy to image sections through a cell expressing N protein. These findings are consistent with our previous report for infectious bronchitis virus (group III coronavirus) (J. A. Hiscox et al., J. Virol. 75:506-512, 2001), indicating that nucleolar localization of the N protein is a common feature of the coronavirus family and is possibly of functional significance. Nucleolar localization signals were identified in the domain III region of the N protein from all three coronavirus groups, and this suggested that transport of N protein to the nucleus might be an active process. In addition, our results suggest that the N protein might function to disrupt cell division. Thus, we observed that approximately 30% of cells transfected with the N protein appeared to be undergoing cell division. The most likely explanation for this is that the N protein induced a cell cycle delay or arrest, most likely in the G2/M phase. In a fraction of transfected cells expressing coronavirus N proteins, we observed multinucleate cells and dividing cells with nucleoli (which are only present during interphase). These findings are consistent with the possible inhibition of cytokinesis in these cells.

Role of G1 phase cyclins and cyclin dependent kinases during hypertrophic growth of adult rat cardiomyocytes

Cell cycle regulatory molecules are implicated in cardiomyocyte hypertrophy. We have investigated protein expression of cyclins A, D1–3, and E and cyclin-dependent kinases (CDKs) 2, 4, 5, and 6 in left ventricular (LV) tissues during the development of LV hypertrophy in rats following aortic constriction (AC). Compared with their expression in sham-operated controls (SH), expression of cyclins D2 and D3 and of CDK4 and CDK6 increased significantly fromday 3 to day 21 after AC concomitant with increased LV mass. However, no significant difference was observed for CDK2 or CDK5. Cyclins A, D1, and E were undetectable. In vitro kinase activities of CDK4 and CDK6 increased ∼70% from day 7 to day 14 in AC myocytes compared with SH myocytes (P< 0.03). Fluorescence-activated cell sorter analysis revealed a G0/G1to G2/M phase progression in AC myocyte nuclei (22.0 ± 1.1% in G2/M) by day 7 postoperation compared with progression in SH myocyte nuclei (14.0 ± 0.8% in G2/M;P < 0.01). Thus an upregulation of certain cell cycle regulators is associated with cardiomyocyte hypertrophy.