Volume 29, Issue 4 p. 308-316
Research Article

5-Fluorouracil and its active metabolite FdUMP cause DNA damage in human SW620 colon adenocarcinoma cell line

Renata Matuo

Renata Matuo

Departamento de Biofísica/Centro de Biotecnologia Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, UFRGS Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil.

Search for more papers by this author
Fabrício Garmus Sousa

Fabrício Garmus Sousa

Departamento de Biofísica/Centro de Biotecnologia Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, UFRGS Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil.

Search for more papers by this author
Alexandre E. Escargueil

Alexandre E. Escargueil

Laboratory of Cancer Biology and Therapeutics Centre de Recherche Saint-Antoine, France

Institut National de la Santé et de la Recherche Médicale U893, France

Université Pierre et Marie Curie, UMPC06, France

Instituto de Biotecnologia/Departamento de Ciências Biomédicas Universidade de Caxias do Sul, UCS Caxias do Sul, RS, Brazil

Search for more papers by this author
Ivana Grivicich

Ivana Grivicich

Laboratório de Marcadores de Estresse Celular/Centro Pesquisas em Ciências Médicas Universidade Luterana do Brasil, Ulbra Canoas, RS, Brazil.

Search for more papers by this author
Daniel Garcia-Santos

Daniel Garcia-Santos

Laboratório de Imunogenética/Departamento de Genética Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, UFRGS Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil

Search for more papers by this author
José Artur Bogo Chies

José Artur Bogo Chies

Laboratório de Imunogenética/Departamento de Genética Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, UFRGS Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil

Search for more papers by this author
Jenifer Saffi

Jenifer Saffi

Departamento de Biofísica/Centro de Biotecnologia Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, UFRGS Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil.

Laboratório de Genética Toxicológica Universidade Luterana Brasileira, Ulbra Canoas, RS Brazil

Search for more papers by this author
Annette K. Larsen

Annette K. Larsen

Laboratory of Cancer Biology and Therapeutics Centre de Recherche Saint-Antoine, France

Institut National de la Santé et de la Recherche Médicale U893, France

Université Pierre et Marie Curie, UMPC06, France

Search for more papers by this author
João Antonio Pêgas Henriques

Corresponding Author

João Antonio Pêgas Henriques

Departamento de Biofísica/Centro de Biotecnologia Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, UFRGS Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil.

Instituto de Biotecnologia/Departamento de Ciências Biomédicas Universidade de Caxias do Sul, UCS Caxias do Sul, RS, Brazil

Laboratório de Genética Toxicológica Universidade Luterana Brasileira, Ulbra Canoas, RS Brazil

Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul — UFRGS / Centro de Biotecnologia, Av. Bento Gonçalves, 9500 Prédio 43421, Caixa Postal 15005, Agronomia CEP: 91501-970, Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil.Search for more papers by this author
First published: 29 December 2008
Citations: 51

Abstract

5-Fluorouracil (5-FU) is an antineoplasic drug widely used to treat cancer. Its cytotoxic effect has been principally ascribed to the misincorporation of fluoronucleotides into DNA and RNA during their synthesis, and the inhibition of thymidylate synthase (TS) by FdUMP (one of the 5-FU active metabolites), which leads to nucleotide pool imbalance. In the present study, we compared the ability of 5-FU and FdUMP to induce apoptosis and to influence the cell cycle progression in human colon SW620 adenocarcinoma cells in regards to their genotoxic and clastogenic activities. Our study demonstrates that 5-FU induces SSB, DSB and apoptosis earlier than FdUMP. Interestingly, while both drugs are able to induce apoptosis, their effect on the cell cycle progression differed. Indeed, 5-FU induces an arrest in G1/S while FdUMP causes an arrest in G2/M. Independently of the temporal difference in strand breaks and apoptosis induction, as well as the differential cell cycle modulation, both drugs presented similar clastogenic effects. The different pattern of cell cycle arrest suggests that the two drugs induce different types of primary DNA lesions that could lead to the activation of different checkpoints and recruit different DNA repair pathways. Copyright © 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.