Cited by 806Cancer-related Molecular PathwaysDNA Repair MechanismsProtein Kinase Regulation and GTPase Signaling

Chk2/hCds1 functions as a DNA damage checkpoint in G1by stabilizing p53

Open access
Chehab, Nabil H., Malikzay, Asra, Appel, Michael, Halazonetis, Thanos D.·2000·Genes & Development

Abstract

Chk2/hcds1, the human homolog of the Saccharomyces cerevisiae RAD53/SPK1 and Schizosaccharomyces pombe cds1 DNA damage checkpoint genes, encodes a protein kinase that is post-translationally modified after DNA damage. Like its yeast homologs, the Chk2/hCds1 protein phosphorylates Cdc25C in vitro, suggesting that it arrests cells in G 2 in response to DNA damage. We expressed Chk2/hCds1 in human cells and analyzed their cell cycle profile. Wild-type, but not catalytically inactive, Chk2/hCds1 led to G 1 arrest after DNA damage. The arrest was inhibited by cotransfection of a dominant-negative p53 mutant, indicating that Chk2/hCds1 acted upstream of p53. In vitro, Chk2/hCds1 phosphorylated p53 on Ser-20 and dissociated preformed complexes of p53 with Mdm2, a protein that targets p53 for degradation. In vivo, ectopic expression of wild-type Chk2/hCds1 led to increased p53 stabilization after DNA damage, whereas expression of a dominant-negative Chk2/hCds1 mutant abrogated both phosphorylation of p53 on Ser-20 and p53 stabilization. Thus, in response to DNA damage, Chk2/hCds1 stabilizes the p53 tumor suppressor protein leading to cell cycle arrest in G 1.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1101/gad.14.3.278

Cites

78 of 78 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • hChk2 phosphorylates p53 at Ser20.

    “and hChk2, in turn, phosphorylates yet another amino-terminal Ser residue (Ser 20) in p53”

    From Cell cycle checkpoint signaling through the ATM and ATR kinases (2001) · cites this paper as Chehab et al. 2000

  • These phosphorylation events disrupt p53-Mdm2 and Mdm2-DAXX interactions and promote degradation of Mdm2 and Mdm4.

    “These phosphorylation events contribute to disrupting the p53-Mdm2 (Chehab et al., 2000; Shieh et al., 2000), and Mdm2-DAXX (Tang et al., 2013) interactions, as well as to the degradation of Mdm2 and Mdm4 (Stommel and Wahl, 2004; Chen et al., 2005; Pereg et al., 2005, 2006; LeBron et al., 2006).”

    From USP7 Is a Master Regulator of Genome Stability (2020) · cites this paper as Chehab et al., 2000

  • ATM activates Chk2, which phosphorylates p53 on serine 20 and inhibits MDM2 binding.

    “ATM also activates Chk2, which in turn phosphorylates p53 on serine 20 and inhibits MDM2 binding (Shieh et al, 1997;Banin et al, 1998;Chehab et al, 2000;Shieh et al, 2000).”
  • Different conclusions have emerged from work with Chk2-null mice, Chk2-null HCT116 cells, and Chk2 small interfering RNA.

    “Studies using Chk2-null mice, Chk2-null HCT116 cells, and Chk2 siRNA resulted in different conclusions (Zhang et al, 1998;Chehab et al, 2000;Shieh et al, 2000;Ahn et al, 2003; Jallepalli et al, 2003).”
  • The role of ATM in p53 response is well established, but the significance of Chk2 is debated.

    “Although a role of ATM in p53 response is well established, the significance of Chk2 is still a matter of debate.”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

8 of the 86 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Chehab, N. H., Malikzay, A., Appel, M., & Halazonetis, T. D.
Affiliations
The Wistar Institute (US)
Venue
Genes & Development
Published
2000-02-01
Volume
14
Issue
3
Pages
278-288
ISSN
  • 0890-9369 (ISSN-L)
  • 1549-5477
OpenAlex
W2131833681
Cited by
805
References
86
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 19 · 2021: 17 · 2020: 18 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 11 · 2017: 10 · 2016: 25 · 2015: 16 · 2014: 28 · 2013: 27 · 2012: 29
Type
posted content
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Genes & Development (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • American Cancer Society
  • National Institutes of Health (CA-25874)
  • National Cancer Institute (CA09171, CA-25874, CA-76367, R01CA076367, P01CA025874, T32CA009171)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Cancer-related Molecular Pathways
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › DNA Repair Mechanisms
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Protein Kinase Regulation and GTPase Signaling
Keywords
Chk2, DNA damage checkpoint, p53 stabilization, MDM2, G1 cell cycle arrest, Cdc25C phosphorylation, post-translational modification, tumor suppressor proteins, dominant-negative mutant
MeSH terms
DNA Damage, Humans, Nuclear Proteins, Phosphorylation, Protein Kinases, Proto-Oncogene Proteins, Tumor Cells, Cultured, Tumor Suppressor Protein p53, G1 Phase, Protein Serine-Threonine Kinases, Schizosaccharomyces pombe Proteins, Proto-Oncogene Proteins c-mdm2, Checkpoint Kinase 2

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review