The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Labelling DNA strand breaks with BrdUTP. Detection of apoptosis and cell proliferation
Abstract
In situ presence of numerous DNA strand breaks is a typical feature of apoptotic cells. Selective DNA strand break induction by photolysis (SBIP) at sites that contain incorporated halogenated DNA precursors has recently been proposed as a method of analysing DNA replication. Detection of DNA strand breaks, thus, enables one to identify apoptotic and/or DNA replicating cells. The current methods for DNA strand break labelling rely on the use of exogenous terminal deoxynucleotidyl transferase which either directly attaches the fluorochrome conjugated triphosphodeoxynucleotides to 3′OH ends in the breaks, or indirectly labels 3′OH ends with digoxygenin or biotin conjugated triphosphodeoxynucleotides. A limitation of these methodologies, especially restricting their routine application in the clinic, is high cost of reagents. In the present study we have tested whether relatively simple compound BrdUTP, which is approximately three orders of magnitude less expensive than dUTP conjugated to digoxygenin, can be used as marker of DNA strand breaks. Apoptosis of HL‐60 cells was induced by DNA topoisomerase I inhibitor camptothecin. The incorporated BrdUTP was detected by fluoresceinated anti‐BrdUrd MoAb. Cellular fluorescence was measured by flow cytometry as well as by Laser Scanning Cytometer (LSC). The data show that intensity of DNA strand break labelling with BrdUTP was nearly four‐ and two‐fold higher than that obtained with the indirect labelling using biotin‐ or digoxygenin‐conjugated dUTP, respectively, and over eight‐fold higher than in the case of direct labelling with the fluorochrome (fluorescein or BODIPY)‐conjugated deoxynucleotides. The increased labelling of DNA strand breaks with BrdUTP may reflect more efficient incorporation of this precursor by terminal transferase, compared to the nucleotides with bulky fluorochrome conjugates. DNA strand break labelling with BrdUTP, thus, offers a possibility of more sensitive (and at lower cost) detection of apoptotic or DNA replicating cells, compared to the alternative methods of DNA strand break labelling.
Overview
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
A simple technique for quantifying apoptosis in 96-well plates
Ribble, D., Goldstein, N. B., Norris, D. A., & Shellman, Y. G. (2005) · BMC Biotechnology · doi:10.1186/1472-6750-5-12 · Cited by 850
In situ visualization of DNA double-strand break repair in human fibroblasts
Nelms, B. E., Maser, R. S., MacKay, J. F., Lagally, M. G., & Petrini, J. H. J. (1998) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.280.5363.590 · Cited by 500
Apoptosis and Beyond: Cytometry in Studies of Programmed Cell Death
Wlodkowic, D., Telford, W., Skommer, J., & Darzynkiewicz, Z. (2011) · Methods in Cell Biology · doi:10.1016/b978-0-12-385493-3.00004-8 · Cited by 465
Self-citationAnalytical methods to assess nanoparticle toxicity
Marquis, B. J., Love, S. A., Braun, K. L., & Haynes, C. L. (2009) · The Analyst · doi:10.1039/b818082b · Cited by 406
Modulation of p53, ErbB1, ErbB2, and Raf-1 Expression in Lung Cancer Cells by Depsipeptide FR901228
Yu, X. (2002) · CancerSpectrum Knowledge Environment · doi:10.1093/jnci/94.7.504 · Cited by 360
Metadata
- Authors
- Li, X., & Darzynkiewicz, Z.
- Venue
- Cell Proliferation
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 1995-11
- Volume
- 28
- Issue
- 11
- Pages
- 571-579
- ISSN
- 0960-7722 (ISSN-L)
- 1365-2184
- OpenAlex
- W2165436746
- Cited by
- 207
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 3.32
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Labelling DNA strand breaks with BrdUTP. Detection of apoptosis and cell proliferation. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1365-2184.1995.tb00045.x
- The paper
- Li, X., & Darzynkiewicz, Z. (1995). Labelling DNA strand breaks with BrdUTP. Detection of apoptosis and cell proliferation. Cell Proliferation. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2184.1995.tb00045.x
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.