본문 바로가기 주메뉴 바로가기
국회도서관 홈으로 정보검색 소장정보 검색

결과 내 검색

동의어 포함

목차보기

Title Page 2

Contents 5

ABBREVIATION 11

ABSTRACT 13

Ⅰ. INTRODUCTION 15

Ⅱ. MATERIALS AND METHODS 26

1. Cell culture and treatment 26

2. Cell viability assay 26

3. Immunoblots 27

4. Flow cytometry 28

5. HR and NHEJ quantification 28

6. Knockout of CHEK2 in A549 cells 29

7. Live cell analysis 30

8. Statistical analysis 30

Ⅲ. RESULTS 31

1. Validation of Chk1 and Chk2's selective inhibitors, Rabusertib and BML-277 31

2. Rabusertib induced both DNA damage response and cell cycle changes by itself 37

3. Rabusertib induced both apoptosis and cell cycle arrest 58

4. Rabusertib showed synergistic effects with other DNA-damaging agents 62

5. BML-277 showed no significant impact on DNA damage response and cell cycle by itself 81

6. BML-277 did not show synergy with various DNA-damaging agents 92

7. The essentiality of CHEK1 and CHEK2 is different across cell lines 111

Ⅳ. DISCUSSION 117

Ⅴ. CONCLUSION 121

Ⅵ. REFERENCES 123

ABSTRACT IN KOREAN 131

List of Tables 7

Table 1. Current status of DDR inhibitor in clinical trials 19

Table 2. Current status of Chk1 and Chk2 inhibitor in clinical trials approved in FDA 25

Table 3. Summary of Chk1 and Chk2 inhibition results by other researchers 120

List of Figures 8

Figure 1. Summary of DDR 18

Figure 2. Statistical graph of the current status of DDR inhibitor types in clinical trials 20

Figure 3. DDR signaling pathway 21

Figure 4. Summary of Chk1 and Chk2 24

Figure 5. Selective inhibition of Chk1 and Chk2 by Rabusertib and BML-277, respectively 34

Figure 6. Cytotoxic and cytostatic effects of Rabusertib and BML-277 36

Figure 7. Changes in expression of DDR signaling pathway components induced by Rabusertib 40

Figure 8. Changes in cell cycle distribution induced by Rabusertib 41

Figure 9. Changes in expressions of cyclins induced by Rabusertib 43

Figure 10. Changes in cell cycle progression from G1 to G2/M Phase induced by Rabusertib 48

Figure 11. Changes in cell cycle progression from late S and G2 to G1 phase induced by Rabusertib 51

Figure 12. Changes in cell cycle progression from M to G1 phase induced by Rabusertib 53

Figure 13. Changes in expression of DNA damage after release of synchronization induced by Rabusertib 56

Figure 14. Changes in sub-G1 population induced by Rabusertib 59

Figure 15. Changes in expression of apoptosis markers induced by Rabusertib 60

Figure 16. Changes in expression of cell cycle arrest markers induced by Rabusertib 61

Figure 17. Synergy score of Rabusertib and DNA-damaging agents 67

Figure 18. Changes in DNA repair efficacy of double strand break affected by Rabusertib 69

Figure 19. Changes in expression of DDR signaling pathway components induced by Bleomycin 70

Figure 20. Changes in expression of DDR signaling pathway components and apoptosis markers induced by Bleomycin and... 72

Figure 21. Changes in sub-G1 population induced by Bleomycin and Rabusertib 73

Figure 22. Changes in cell cycle distribution induced by Bleomycin 74

Figure 23. Changes in cell cycle distribution induced by Bleomycin and Rabusertib 75

Figure 24. Changes in expressions of cyclins induced by Bleomycin and Rabusertib 77

Figure 25. Changes in cell cycle distribution induced by Bleomycin and Rabusertib in a time dependent manner 78

Figure 26. Changes in cell cycle distribution induced by Bleomycin and Rabusertib at low concentrations 79

Figure 27. Changes in expression of DDR signaling pathway components induced by Carboplatin and Rabusertib 80

Figure 28. Changes in expression of DDR signaling pathway components induced by BML-277 83

Figure 29. Changes in cell cycle distribution induced by BML-277 84

Figure 30. Changes in cyclins expressions induced by BML-277 86

Figure 31. Changes in expressions of proliferation, survival, and cell cycle arrest markers by BML-277 87

Figure 32. Comparison of cell growth in WT and CHEK2 KO A549 cells 89

Figure 33. Comparison of CHEK2 KO and WT cell cycle distribution 91

Figure 34. Synergy score of BML-277 and DNA-damaging agents 96

Figure 35. Changes in DNA repair efficacy of double strand break affected by BML-277 98

Figure 36. Changes in expression of DDR signaling pathway components induced by Bleomycin and BML-277 99

Figure 37. Changes in expression of DDR signaling pathway components induced by Carboplatin and BML-277 100

Figure 38. Synergy score of BML-277 and Olaparib 101

Figure 39. Changes in cell cycle distribution induced by Bleomycin and BML-277 102

Figure 40. Changes in expressions of cyclins induced by Bleomycin and BML-277 104

Figure 41. Changes in cell cycle distribution induced by Bleomycin and BML-277 in a time dependent manner 105

Figure 42. Changes in cell cycle distribution induced by Bleomycin and low concentration of BML-277 106

Figure 43. Comparison of cell growth inhibition by DNA damaging agents in WT and CHEK2 KO A549 cells 110

Figure 44. Depamap data across 423 cell lines 113

Figure 45. Cell viability assay across different NSCLC cell lines 116

초록보기

 DNA 손상 반응(DNA damage response, DDR)은 DNA의 온전성(integrity)을 유지하는 중요한 기능이나, 항암 치료의 저항성을 부여할 수 있어 DDR 구성요소를 표적으로 하는 항암제의 개발이 활발히 진행되고 있다. DDR 관련 단백질인 체크포인트 키나제 1(Chk1)과 체크포인트 키나제 2(Chk2)는 잠재적인 항암 표적으로 주목받았으나, 각각의 억제제는 전임상 실험에서 상이한 효과를 보였다. 폐암은 암 사망의 주요 원인 중 하나이므로 폐암에서 Chk1과 Chk2의 역할을 명확히 하고, 각각의 억제제의 상이한 효과 메커니즘을 분석해 맞춤화된 치료가 필요하다. 이를 위해 각각의 특이적 억제제를 사용해 해당 약물이 비소포성 폐암 세포에 미치는 영향을 조사하였다. Chk1 특이적 억제제인 Rabusertib은 독립적으로 DNA 손상과 세포 주기 변화를 유도하며, 다른 DNA 손상 유발제와 시너지 효과를 보였다. 특히 Rabusertib은 p53 야생형 세포주에서 높은 민감성을 나타냈다. Depmap 데이터를 통해 다양한 세포 주에서도 CHEK1이 생존에 필수적인 것을 확인했다. 반면, Chk2 특이적 억제제인 BML-277은 단독으로 DNA 손상과 세포주기 변화를 일으키지 못하고, 다른 DNA 손상 유발제와 상가효과만을 보였다. 상동재조합(Homologous Recombination)을 감소시키지만, DNA 손상 유발제에 의한 DNA 손상을 증가시키지 못했고, 제한된 세포 주기 변화를 보였다. 야생형 세포와 CHEK2 KO 세포에서 성장 차이는 없었고, 다른 DNA 손상 유발제의 민감도 차이도 없었다. 세포주의 p53 유무에 따른 BML-277 민감도 차이는 없었으며, Depmap 데이터를 통해 다양한 세포주에서 CHEK2가 전반적으로 생존에 필수적이지 않음을 확인하였다. 따라서 Chk1과 Chk2 억제제 사용에 있어 이러한 차별화된 반응은 DDR 경로의 복잡성을 강조하며, 맞춤형 접근이 필요함을 시사한다.