Generation and Characterization of Mouse Aneuploid Cells

2664 Words6 Pages

Alterations in a cell's chromosomal content from normal is known as polyploidy or aneuploidy. Polyploidy is a change that is a multiple of the haploid chromosome content while aneuploidy is a change in the chromosome content that is not a multiple of the haploid number. There are many instances demonstrating that polyploidy is reasonably well tolerated at the organismal level, and whole genome duplications likely have served to promote the evolution of species (1). However, this is not the case for aneuploidy where the gain or loss of individual chromosomes has been demonstrated to result in lethality and the development of disease (1). Mitosis is a highly regulated process with various surveillance mechanisms in place to coordinate the proper segregation of genetic material between the daughter cells. Nevertheless, even in the presence of these checkpoints aneuploidy can occur, as chromosome mis-segregation has been estimated to happen at a rate of once in every 104 to 105 cell divisions in mammalian cells (2).

Aneuploidy has long been known to be a characteristic of cancer cells (3), and changes in chromosome number have been proposed to be a mechanism by which cancer cells acquire additional copies of oncogenes or lose the expression of tumor suppressor genes, thereby driving the tumorigenic process. Interestingly, individuals with Down syndrome (DS) are at an increased risk to develop leukemia, retinoblastoma, and germ cell tumors, but are less likely to develop other solid tumors (4, 5). As I develop my own research group, I am seeking to further define how the presence of an extra chromosome influences the fitness of mammalian cells, and how these differences might lend insight into the role of aneuploidy in cancer...

... middle of paper ...

...ncer.

References

1. E. M. Torres, B. R. Williams, A. Amon, Genetics 179, 737 (Jun, 2008).

2. M. J. Rosenstraus, L. A. Chasin, Genetics 90, 735 (Dec, 1978).

3. T. Boveri, Neu Folge 35, 67 (1902).

4. H. Hasle, I. H. Clemmensen, M. Mikkelsen, Lancet 355, 165 (Jan 15, 2000).

5. D. Satge, A. J. Sasco, B. Lacour, Int J Cancer 106, 297 (Aug 20, 2003).

6. B. R. Williams et al., Science 322, 703 (Oct 31, 2008).

7. D. J. Burgess et al., Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 105, 9053 (Jul 1, 2008).

8. R. J. DeBerardinis et al., Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 104, 19345 (Dec 4, 2007).

9. Z. Kovacevic, J. D. McGivan, Physiol Rev 63, 547 (Apr, 1983).

10. J. K. Hitzler, A. Zipursky, Nat Rev Cancer 5, 11 (Jan, 2005).

11. D. Bercovich et al., Lancet 372, 1484 (Oct 25, 2008).

12. L. Kearney et al., Blood 113, 646 (Jan 15, 2009).

13. A. Mensah et al., BMC Dev Biol 7, 131 (2007).

Open Document