4.8 Article

Loss of CDK4/6 activity in S/G2 phase leads to cell cycle reversal

期刊

NATURE
卷 -, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

NATURE PORTFOLIO
DOI: 10.1038/s41586-023-06274-3

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In mammalian cells, the decision to proliferate is thought to be irreversible at the restriction point, but this study shows that it is actually fully reversible. All cycling cells will exit the cell cycle without mitogens unless they reach mitosis and divide first. This is because cyclin A2/CDK2 activity depends on CDK4/6 activity throughout the cell cycle, and cells require mitogens and CDK4/6 activity to maintain CDK2 activity.
In mammalian cells, the decision to proliferate is thought to be irreversibly made at the restriction point of the cell cycle(1,2), when mitogen signalling engages a positive feedback loop between cyclin A2/cyclin-dependent kinase 2 (CDK2) and the retinoblastoma protein(3-5). Contrary to this textbook model, here we show that the decision to proliferate is actually fully reversible. Instead, we find that all cycling cells will exit the cell cycle in the absence of mitogens unless they make it to mitosis and divide first. This temporal competition between two fates, mitosis and cell cycle exit, arises because cyclin A2/CDK2 activity depends upon CDK4/6 activity throughout the cell cycle, not just in G1 phase. Without mitogens, mitosis is only observed when the half-life of cyclin A2 protein is long enough to sustain CDK2 activity throughout G2/M. Thus, cells are dependent on mitogens and CDK4/6 activity to maintain CDK2 activity and retinoblastoma protein phosphorylation throughout interphase. Consequently, even a 2-h delay in a cell's progression towards mitosis can induce cell cycle exit if mitogen signalling is lost. Our results uncover the molecular mechanism underlying the restriction point phenomenon, reveal an unexpected role for CDK4/6 activity in S and G2 phases and explain the behaviour of all cells following loss of mitogen signalling.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据