Andrew L. Paek
University of Arizona
Network
Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.
Publication
Featured researches published by Andrew L. Paek.
Cell | 2016
Andrew L. Paek; Julia C. Liu; Alexander Loewer; William Forrester; Galit Lahav
Many chemotherapeutic drugs kill only a fraction of cancer cells, limiting their efficacy. We used live-cell imaging to investigate the role of p53 dynamics in fractional killing of colon cancer cells in response to chemotherapy. We found that both surviving and dying cells reach similar levels of p53, indicating that cell death is not determined by a fixed p53 threshold. Instead, a cells probability of death depends on the time and levels of p53. Cells must reach a threshold level of p53 to execute apoptosis, and this threshold increases with time. The increase in p53 apoptotic threshold is due to drug-dependent induction of anti-apoptotic genes, predominantly in the inhibitors of apoptosis (IAP) family. Our study underlines the importance of measuring the dynamics of key players in response to chemotherapy to determine mechanisms of resistance and optimize the timing of combination therapy.
Nucleic Acids Research | 2006
Swetha Bolusani; Chien Hui Ma; Andrew L. Paek; Jay H. Konieczka; Makkuni Jayaram; Yuri Voziyanov
As a tool in directed genome manipulations, site-specific recombination is a double-edged sword. Exquisite specificity, while highly desirable, makes it imperative that the target site be first inserted at the desired genomic locale before it can be manipulated. We describe a combination of computational and experimental strategies, based on the tyrosine recombinase Flp and its target site FRT, to overcome this impediment. We document the systematic evolution of Flp variants that can utilize, in a bacterial assay, two sites from the human interleukin 10 gene, IL10, as recombination substrates. Recombination competence on an end target site is acquired via chimeric sites containing mixed sequences from FRT and the genomic locus. This is the first time that a tyrosine site-specific recombinase has been coaxed successfully to perform DNA exchange within naturally occurring sequences derived from a foreign genomic context. We demonstrate the ability of an Flp variant to mediate integration of a reporter cassette in Escherichia coli via recombination at one of the IL10-derived sites.
Seminars in Cell & Developmental Biology | 2011
Antony M. Carr; Andrew L. Paek; Ted Weinert
DNA replication normally follows the rules passed down from Watson and Crick: the chromosome duplicates as dictated by its antiparallel strands, base-pairing and leading and lagging strand differences. Real-life replication is more complicated, fraught with perils posed by chromosome damage for one, and by transcription of genes and by other perils that disrupt progress of the DNA replication machinery. Understanding the replication fork, including DNA structures, associated replisome and its regulators, is key to understanding how cells overcome perils and minimize error. Replication fork error leads to genome rearrangements and, potentially, cell death. Interest in the replication fork and its errors has recently gained added interest by the results of deep sequencing studies of human genomes. Several pathologies are associated with sometimes-bizarre genome rearrangements suggestive of elaborate replication fork failures. To try and understand the links between the replication fork, its failure and genome rearrangements, we discuss here phases of fork behavior (stall, collapse, restart and fork failures leading to rearrangements) and analyze two examples of instability from our own studies; one in fission yeast and the other in budding yeast.
Current Opinion in Cell Biology | 2009
Ted Weinert; Salma Kaochar; Hope Jones; Andrew L. Paek; Aj J. Clark
Genome rearrangements are important in pathology and evolution. The thesis of this review is that the genome is in peril when replication forks stall, and stalled forks are normally rescued by error-free mechanisms. Failure of error-free mechanisms results in large-scale chromosome changes called gross chromosomal rearrangements, GCRs, by the aficionados. In this review we discuss five error-free mechanisms a replication fork may use to overcome blockage, mechanisms that are still poorly understood. We then speculate on how genome rearrangements may occur when such mechanisms fail. Replication fork recovery failure may be an important feature of the oncogenic process. (Feedback to the authors on topics discussed herein is welcome.).
Genetics | 2010
Andrew L. Paek; Hope Jones; Salma Kaochar; Ted Weinert
Gross chromosomal rearrangements (GCRs) are large scale changes to chromosome structure and can lead to human disease. We previously showed in Saccharomyces cerevisiae that nearby inverted repeat sequences (∼20–200 bp of homology, separated by ∼1–5 kb) frequently fuse to form unstable dicentric and acentric chromosomes. Here we analyzed inverted repeat fusion in mutants of three sets of genes. First, we show that genes in the error-free postreplication repair (PRR) pathway prevent fusion of inverted repeats, while genes in the translesion branch have no detectable role. Second, we found that siz1 mutants, which are defective for Srs2 recruitment to replication forks, and srs2 mutants had opposite effects on instability. This may reflect separate roles for Srs2 in different phases of the cell cycle. Third, we provide evidence for a faulty template switch model by studying mutants of DNA polymerases; defects in DNA pol delta (lagging strand polymerase) and Mgs1 (a pol delta interacting protein) lead to a defect in fusion events as well as allelic recombination. Pol delta and Mgs1 may collaborate either in strand annealing and/or DNA replication involved in fusion and allelic recombination events. Fourth, by studying genes implicated in suppression of GCRs in other studies, we found that inverted repeat fusion has a profile of genetic regulation distinct from these other major forms of GCR formation.
Genome Announcements | 2015
Jana M. U’Ren; Jennifer H. Wisecaver; Andrew L. Paek; Barbara L. Dunn; Bonnie L. Hurwitz
ABSTRACT Saccharomyces cerevisiae strain GSY2239 is derived from an industrial yeast strain used to ferment ale-style beer. We present here the 11.5-Mb draft genome sequence for this organism.
Science | 2010
Salma Kaochar; Andrew L. Paek; Ted Weinert
Yeast offers insight into how lifting controls on DNA re-replication can cause cells to make extra copies of a gene. Cells have a seemingly endless array of regulators to provide for fast and accurate DNA replication. Most cells succeed in doing it right, each and every time they divide, which is testimony to the powers of evolution. Failure to limit DNA replication to just once every cell cycle can lead to genome rearrangements, in particular to “amplification,” or an increase in the number of copies of some genes. Amplification can drive abnormal cell growth, and cancer cells often have amplified oncogenes (1). How gene amplification occurs, however, is unclear. One mechanism involves the breaking and fusion of aberrant chromosomes, a process first discovered by Nobel Laureate Barbara McClintock in the 1950s (2), which leads to extra copies of genes that are joined together (3). Another proposed mechanism involves defects in the “re-replication” controls that shut down the DNA-copying process after a single duplication, but this idea had not been testable (4). On page 943 of this issue, Green et al. overcome that hurdle with an extravagant experimental system in budding yeast that demonstrates that re-replication is indeed a potent mechanism of gene amplification (5).
Molecular Cell | 2010
Andrew L. Paek; Ted Weinert
Checkpoint proteins respond to DNA damage by halting the cell cycle until the damage is repaired. In this issue of Molecular Cell, Furuya et al. (2010) provide evidence that checkpoint proteins need to be removed from sites of damage in order to properly repair it.
Scientific Reports | 2017
Richard Ballweg; Andrew L. Paek; Tongli Zhang
When chemotherapy drugs are applied to tumor cells with the same or similar genotypes, some cells are killed, while others survive. This fractional killing contributes to drug resistance in cancer. Through an incoherent feedforward loop, chemotherapy drugs not only activate p53 to induce cell death, but also promote the expression of apoptosis inhibitors which inhibit cell death. Consequently, cells in which p53 is activated early undergo apoptosis while cells in which p53 is activated late survive. The incoherent feedforward loop and the essential role of p53 activation timing makes fractional killing a complex dynamical challenge, which is hard to understand with intuition alone. To better understand this process, we have constructed a representative model by integrating the control of apoptosis with the relevant signaling pathways. After the model was trained to recapture the observed properties of fractional killing, it was analyzed with nonlinear dynamical tools. The analysis suggested a simple dynamical framework for fractional killing, which predicts that cell fate can be altered in three possible ways: alteration of bifurcation geometry, alteration of cell trajectories, or both. These predicted categories can explain existing strategies known to combat fractional killing and facilitate the design of novel strategies.
Annual Review of Biochemistry | 2006
Santanu Kumar Ghosh; Sujata Hajra; Andrew L. Paek; Makkuni Jayaram