Skip to main content
Biology logoLink to Biology
. 2026 Jul 9;15(14):1105. doi: 10.3390/biology15141105

New Roles of Chk1 in Spindle Formation and Genome Integrity

Sofia Balafouti 1, George Zachos 1, Eleni Petsalaki 1,*
Editors: Helena Soares1, Bruno Carmona1, Antonio Currais1
PMCID: PMC13405366  PMID: 42510653

Simple Summary

Chk1, a Serine Threonine kinase, is a key regulator of DNA damage response. In the presence of replication stress or DNA damage, ATR phosphorylates and activates Chk1, promoting cell cycle arrest, whereas Chk1 is also implicated in unperturbed mitosis. In the absence of DNA damage, Chk1 ensures proper mitosis onset and monitors defects in kinetochore–microtubule attachments. This review summarizes the roles of Chk1 in cell division and demonstrates its emerging functions in mitotic spindle formation and genome integrity.

Keywords: mitosis, microtubules, mitotic spindle, centrosomes, Chk1, β-tubulin, genome integrity

Abstract

During mitosis sister chromatids are accurately segregated into two daughter cells through a microtubule-based structure known as the mitotic spindle. Errors in mitotic spindle formation have been associated with human diseases and tumorigenesis. Chk1 has well established roles in DNA damage response and replication checkpoints. Recently, new roles have emerged in the onset of mitosis, chromosome segregation and cytokinesis. In this review, we recapitulate the known roles of Chk1 in cell division and highlight new roles of Chk1 in mitotic spindle assembly and its contribution to genome stability. Specifically, it was recently reported that, during the first stages of mitosis, ATRIP and its interacting partners, ATR and TopBP1, are recruited to centrosomes, where they activate Chk1. Then, Chk1 phosphorylates β-tubulin at Threonine 285 (T285), promoting microtubule nucleation and mitotic spindle formation. β-tubulin phosphorylation by Chk1 is required for proper mitotic progression, cytokinesis with equal-sized daughter cells and cell proliferation. This novel ATR-Chk1 signaling pathway reinforces the crosstalk between the cell cycle regulation and DNA damage response.

1. Introduction

Mitosis is a crucial stage of the cell cycle in which duplicated chromosomes are accurately segregated into two daughter cells and this segregation is mediated by a microtubule-based structure called the mitotic spindle [1,2,3]. Mitotic spindle assembly is a principal key of cell proliferation that ensures the maintenance of genome integrity in eukaryotic cells. Defects in mitotic spindle formation can lead to spindle malorientation, chromosome segregation errors and unequal-sized daughter cells, thereby increasing chromosomal instability and contributing to cancer development [4,5,6]. However, the mechanisms underlying mitotic spindle formation remain incompletely understood.

1.1. Microtubule Structure

Microtubules (MTs) are the major components of the mitotic spindle and are characterized by alternating phases of GTP-dependent polymerization and depolymerization [7]. Dynamic α/β-tubulin heterodimers associate head to tail to form linear protofilaments. Every tubulin monomer is composed of 12 α-helices (H1–H12) and 10 β-strands (S1–S10) that are associated through loops [8,9]. A total of 13 protofilaments interact laterally to form hollow cylindrical MTs exhibiting a “minus” (α-tubulin) end and a “plus” (β-tubulin) end [10,11].

1.2. Mitotic Spindle Assembly

In animal cells, bipolar spindle microtubules are divided into three categories: kinetochore, astral and interpolar MTs. First, kinetochore microtubules extend from the spindle poles toward the chromosomes until their plus ends become attached to the kinetochores of sister chromatids [1]. Microtubules employ a search and capture mechanism by polymerizing and depolymerizing and exploring the inner space of the cell until their plus (+) ends attach to sister kinetochores. These attachments are called spindle kinetochore microtubule attachments [12,13,14]. Approximately 20–30 kinetochore microtubules bundle together to form kinetochore fibers (K-fibers) [15]. When all kinetochores are attached with spindle microtubules emanating from opposite poles and are aligned in the metaphase plate, the cell is ready to move to the next phase called anaphase [16,17,18]. Second, astral microtubules extend from the poles towards the cell cortex and are implicated in spindle positioning, whereas interpolar microtubules extend from the opposite poles towards the spindle midzone where they overlap and contribute to spindle stability [1,15] (Figure 1). In anaphase, kinetochore microtubules become shorter and move to the spindle poles leading to chromosome segregation [19,20,21]. The last phase of mitosis, which is called cytokinesis, divides the cell into two identical daughter cells [22].

Figure 1.

Figure 1

Mitotic spindle assembly. At the beginning of mitosis, γ-tubulin accumulates at centrosomes and forms a complex with GCP2 and GCP3, known as the γ-tubulin small complex (γTuSC). Multiple γTuSCs together with GCP4, GCP5 and GCP6 form the γ-tubulin ring complex (γTuRC), which acts as a template for microtubule nucleation. α/β-tubulin heterodimers are added to the plus (+) end of elongating microtubules, promoting their polymerization. The bipolar spindle microtubules, which extend from the centrosomes towards the cell cortex and spindle midzone, are categorized into astral microtubules, interpolar microtubules and kinetochore microtubules (K-fibers).

To ensure effective interaction between kinetochores and the “+” ends of spindle microtubules, centromere-localized proteins, such as CENP-A recruit subunits of the Constitutive Centromere-Associated Network (CCAN) [23]. In turn, CCAN connects to the KNL1/Mis12 complex/Ndc80 complex (KMN) network, which binds directly to microtubules [24,25]. Proteins of the CENP family play important roles in the mitotic regulation. CENP-A localizes to the centromeres and contributes to the recruitment of kinetochore proteins [23,26]. CENP-E and CENP-F localize to the outer kinetochores in a BUB-dependent manner and are required for initial microtubule–kinetochore attachment [27]. CENP-B localizes to the inner centromere and it has DNA-binding ability [23]. CENP-C is a subunit of CCAN and localizes to the inner kinetochores [28,29]. CENP-C binds both chromatin and kinetochore components, thereby linking the centromeric chromatin to the outer kinetochore and mediating microtubule attachment [30,31,32].

Bipolar attachment of replicated chromosomes to K-fibers is essential for faithful chromosome segregation during mitosis [33,34]. A lack of bipolar microtubule–kinetochore attachment activates the spindle assembly checkpoint (SAC) (also known as the mitotic spindle checkpoint), which prevents anaphase onset [35,36]. The SAC signaling inhibits the activation of anaphase-promoting complex/cyclosome (APC/C), an E3 ubiquitin ligase, that is required for chromosome segregation and mitotic exit [35,37,38,39]. In the presence of unattached kinetochores, SAC components such as Bub1, BubR1, Bub3, Mps1, Mad1, Mad2 and Cdc20 are recruited to kinetochores to block the activity of APC/CCdc20 complex [40,41,42,43,44]. Mad2, BubR1, Bub3 and Cdc20 are components of a tetrameric complex called the mitotic checkpoint complex (MCC) [45]. Cdc20 has a dual role in SAC. During mitosis, APC/C binds to its co-activator, Cdc20, forming the APC/CCdc20 complex that ubiquitinates downstream effectors to promote mitosis exit [46,47]. However, during SAC signaling, Cdc20, as a subunit of MCC, binds to APC/CCdc20 complex and inhibits its activity [48]. Dysfunction of the SAC leads to premature segregation of sister chromatids, lagging chromosomes, chromosome bridges and formation of micronuclei, which are associated with increased chromosomal instability and cancer [49,50].

In eukaryotic cells, the organizing centers of microtubules are called centrosomes and are formed around the centrioles [51]. During interphase, γ-tubulin localizes at centrosomes in low levels. But, at the onset of mitosis, γ-tubulin accumulates at centrosomes rapidly, where it forms a complex with γ-tubulin complex proteins (GCPs) [1,52,53]. Two copies of γ-tubulin and one of GCP2 and GCP3 form the γ-tubulin small complex (γTuSC), which has a limited capacity for microtubule nucleation. Numerous copies of γTuSC together with GCP4, GCP5 and GCP6 form the γ-tubulin ring complex (γTuRC), which acts as a template for the positioning of α/β-tubulin heterodimers and promote microtubule polymerization [53] (Figure 1). Aurora A and polo-like kinase 1 (Plk1) recruit γ-tubulin to the centrosome, promoting centrosome maturation and microtubule nucleation [54,55]. At centrosomes, DNA damage response (DDR) proteins, checkpoint kinase 2 (Chk2) and breast cancer type 1 susceptibility protein (BRCA1), regulate Aurora A catalytic activity, whereas MRN (Mre11-Rad50-Nbs1) protein complex supports Plk1 activity to promote mitotic spindle formation (reviewed in [56]). Alterations at the localization and expression pattern of γ-tubulin have been observed in many tumors, including breast and lung cancer [57,58,59]. In vertebrates, additional centrosome-independent mechanisms of the spindle assembly have been demonstrated, which increase the microtubule density around the kinetochores, including microtubule nucleation from chromosomes, kinetochores or within the spindle (reviewed in [2]).

1.3. Other Regulators of Mitotic Spindle Assembly

Apart from microtubule nucleation, MT-associated proteins (MAPs) are essential for spindle assembly. More than 200 MAPs have been described to participate in microtubule nucleation, stabilization, crosslinking and stable kinetochore–microtubule attachments [2,60]. Through these functions, MAPs prevent errors in chromosome alignment and segregation during mitosis [60]. MAPs that regulate microtubules dynamics can be classified into stabilizers and destabilizers. Stabilizers promote microtubule growth, whereas destabilizers increase microtubule catastrophe [61,62]. The α/β-tubulin heterodimers undergo post-translation modifications (PTMs), including acetylation, polyglycylation, polyglutamilation, and tyrosination [63,64,65,66]. Most PTMs occur after microtubule polymerization and their biological roles remain incompletely understood. One exception is phosphorylation of β-tubulin by Cdk1 in mitosis. Anne Fourest-Lieuvin et al. showed that Cdk1 phosphorylates soluble β-tubulin at Serine 172 (S172) (Table 1), thereby impairing its incorporation into growing microtubules in mitotic cells [67].

Table 1.

Summary of kinases, their substrates and phosphorylation sites discussed in this review.

Kinase Substrate Phosphorylation Site
ATM Chk2 Threonine 68
ATR Chk1 Serine 317, Serine 345
Aurora A Cdc25B Serine 353
Aurora B Hec1 Serine 44, Serine 55
Aurora B INCENP Thr-Ser-Ser (TSS) motif
Aurora B Auto-phosphorylation Threonine 232
Cdk1 β-tubulin Serine 172
Cdk1 Chk1 Serine 286, Serine 301
Cdk1 Aurora B Threonine 59
Chk1 β-tubulin Threonine 285
Chk1 Cdc25B Serine 230, Serine 563
Chk1 Aurora B Serine 331
Chk1 Myt1 Serine 143
Chk1 Src Serine 51
Chk1 OGT Serine 20
Chk1 BLM Serine 502
Chk2 INCENP Serine 91

2. Role of Chk1 in DNA Damage Response

Errors in chromosome segregation during mitosis can lead to generation of DNA damage [68]. Checkpoint kinase 1 (Chk1), a Serine/Threonine kinase, is a major regulator of DNA damage response. Under conditions of replication stress, for example in the presence of DNA lesions after UV light and chemical mutagens or absence of crucial replication factors, ATR-Chk1 signaling pathway is activated [69]. In these cases, single-stranded DNA (ssDNA) is formed and becomes coated by replication protein A (RPA) [70,71]. Thereafter, RPA associates with ATR-interacting protein (ATRIP), leading to ataxia-telangiectasia mutated- and Rad3-related (ATR) recruitment to the RPA-ssDNA complex [72]. In addition, the Rad17–replication factor C (RFC) complex interacts with the RPA-ssDNA complex and recruits the Rad9-Rad1-Hus1 (9-1-1) complex [73]. Then, phosphorylated Rad9 subunit of 9-1-1 complex is recognized by BRCT domains I and II of DNA topoisomerase II-binding protein 1 (TopBP1) [74,75]. Through its ATR Activating Domain (AAD), TopBP1 binds to ATRIP-ATR complex and activates ATR [76,77]. Moreover, in mammals, ETAA1 binds directly to RPA and, through its AAD domain, interacts with and activates ATR in a TopBP1-independent manner [78] (Figure 2).

Figure 2.

Figure 2

Replication stress or DNA damage response. Upon replication stress or DNA damage, ssDNA is coated by RPA. The RPA-ssDNA complex interacts with the ATRIP-ATR complex, the Rad17-RFC complex and ETAA1. Rad17 recruits the 9-1-1 complex which is recognized by the ATR activator protein, TopBP1, whereas ETAA1 activates ATR in a TopBP1-independent manner. Then, active ATR phosphorylates Chk1 at Serine 317 (S317) and Serine 345 (S345) to fully activate it. Active Chk1 inhibits the family of Cdc25 phosphatases and activates Wee1 kinase, regulating CDKs activity and promoting cell cycle arrest.

Upon activation, ATR phosphorylates Chk1 at Serine 317 (S317) and Serine 345 (S345) (Table 1) within the C-terminal domain [79,80]. Active Chk1 phosphorylates and inhibits the Cdc25 family of phosphatases and promotes the activation of Wee1 kinase, thereby regulating cyclin-dependent kinase (CDK) activity to promote S- and G2-phase arrest [80,81,82,83] (Figure 2). In the presence of other ssDNA structures, such as dsDNA-ssDNA junctions, Nbs1 subunit of MRN complex recognizes RPA-ssDNA and recruits TopBP1 to activate ATR signaling [84,85].

3. Role of Chk1 in Chromosome Segregation

In the absence of DNA damage, human Chk1 localizes at centrosomes and nucleus until the onset of mitosis. Chk1 prevents premature Cdk1 activation by cytoplasmic Cell Division Cycle 25B (Cdc25B) and ensures proper mitotic entry timing [86,87]. During interphase, centrosomal Chk1 phosphorylates Cdc25B at Serine 230 (S230) and at Serine 563 (S563) (Table 1), and it acts as a negative regulator of Cdc25B [88]. Chk1 also localizes to the nucleus, where it suppresses premature activation of Cdk1-Cyclin B [87]. At late G2 phase, Aurora A phosphorylates Cdc25B at Serine 353 (S353) at centrosomes (Table 1), promoting its activation [89,90]. Then, Cdc25B phosphatase promotes activation of Cdk1-Cyclin B complex. Thereafter, Cdk1-Cyclin B complex translocates from the centrosomes to the nucleus, where Cdk1 phosphorylates Chk1 at Serine 286 (S286) and at Serine 301 (S301) (Table 1), promoting Chk1 cytoplasmic release and sustained Cdk1 activity, thereby inducing mitotic entry [87] (Figure 3A).

Figure 3.

Figure 3

Chk1 is required for mitotic entry and faithful chromosome segregation. (A) In the absence of DNA damage in interphase, Chk1 blocks premature mitotic entry by preventing Cdc25B and Cdk1 activation. (B) During mitosis, centromeric R-loops promote ATR activation. ATR activates Chk1, which promotes Aurora B activation directly, through its phosphorylation at Serine 331 (S331), or indirectly, through Myt1 phosphorylation at Serine 143 (S143). Active Aurora B recruits Mps1 and BubR1 to kinetochores in the presence of microtubule–kinetochore misattachment to prevent mitotic exit. To correct merotelic microtubule–kinetochore attachments, Chk1 cooperates with Mps1 to regulate MCAK, Kif2b and Hec1 in an Aurora B-S331-dependent manner.

Also, depletion of Chk1 increases chromosome misalignment, lagging chromosomes and localization of Bub1-related protein 1 (BubR1) to kinetochores during mitosis [91,92]. Furthermore, in the presence of R-loops at centromeres during prometaphase, ATR is activated, Chk1 localizes to kinetochores and phosphorylates Aurora B at Serine 331 (S331) (Table 1), which is required for complete Aurora B activation [93,94]. Aurora B is the catalytic subunit of the Chromosomal Passenger Complex (CPC) also containing INCENP, Survivin and Borealin [95]. INCENP is a scaffold protein of the CPC complex that associates with Borealin and Survivin through its N-terminus to form a three-helix bundle and binds to Aurora B through its C-terminal IN-box [96,97,98]. Upon Aurora B-INCENP binding, Aurora B phosphorylates the IN-box of INCENP on a Thr-Ser-Ser (TSS) motif, while Aurora B also undergoes auto-phosphorylation at Threonine 232 (T232) within its kinase domain, leading to its full activation [99,100,101]. The N-terminus of INCENP is essential for the proper localization of the CPC complex during cell division. At the onset of mitosis, CPC complex localizes to centromeres, whereas on anaphase onset, INCENP binds to Mklp2, promoting CPC relocalization to the spindle midzone and subsequently to the midbody during cytokinesis [102,103,104,105]. In the presence of microtubule–kinetochore attachment defects, active Aurora B promotes BubR1 and Mps1 recruitment to kinetochores hence preventing mitotic exit [92,93,106]. Chk1 also phosphorylates Myt1 kinase at Serine 143 (S143) (Table 1) inhibiting its activity and consequently promoting Cdk1 activation [107]. In turn, Cdk1 could regulate Aurora B localization and activity by phosphorylating INCENP at several residues including Threonine 59 (T59) [107,108] (Figure 3B).

When a single kinetochore is attached with microtubules extending from both spindle poles simultaneously, known as a merotelic attachments, vertebrate cells prevent chromosome missegregation in an Aurora B-mediated manner [109,110,111,112]. Unfortunately, merotelic attachments are common in early mitosis and are not detected by mitotic spindle checkpoint. Their persistence until anaphase onset leads to the formation of lagging chromosomes, promoting chromosomal instability and tumorigenesis [109,113]. Petsalaki et al. showed that active Chk1 phosphorylates Aurora B at Serine 331 (S331) prevents merotelic attachment and lagging chromosomes on the mitotic spindle. This phosphorylation sustains localization of microtubule destabilizers, Kif2b and MCAK, to kinetochores or centromeres, stabilizes the Mps1 binding to kinetochores and is required for phosphorylation of Hec1 at Serine 44 (S44) and at Serine 55 (S55) in metaphase. Also, they showed that inhibition of Mps1 impairs recruitment of Kif2b and MCAK to kinetochores or centromeres, prevents phosphorylation of Hec1 and further increases the percentage of merotelic attachment and lagging chromosomes in Chk1-deficient cells [114]. Furthermore, Mps1 phosphorylates Borealin to regulate Aurora B activity [115] (Figure 3B). These results show that Chk1 promotes faithful chromosomal segregation by enforcing the SAC and by correcting merotelic kinetochore attachments, through Aurora B.

In the absence of tension, as in syntelic or monotelic attachment, the inner centromere-localized Aurora B phosphorylates components of the KMN network at the outer kinetochore, reducing their affinity for MTs and promoting MT-kinetochore reattachment until stable kinetochore–microtubule attachment is re-established [24,33,116,117,118,119,120,121]. Regulation of Aurora B activity has been proposed to involve Chk1 and CPC components, including INCENP and Borealin [25].

4. Roles of Chk1 and Chk2 in Cytokinesis

During cytokinesis, Chk1 localizes to the midbody and is phosphorylated at Serine 137 (S137) [92,122]. Peddibhotla et al. showed that abrogation of Chk1 through single-cell antibody microinjection promotes furrow regression, multinucleation, Aurora B mislocalization at the midbody and genomic instability in mammalian cells [123]. Furthermore, Chk1 phosphorylates the O-linked β-N-acetylglucosamine (O-GlcNAc) transferase (OGT) at Serine 20 (S20), promoting OGT stabilization and localization at the midbody. The Chk1-OGT pathway reduces intermediate filament accumulation at the cytoplasmic canal, thereby promoting faithful cytokinesis [124].

Moreover, Chk1 kinase has a role in cytokinesis with chromatin bridges. Chromatin bridges are strands of incompletely segregated chromatin that connect the anaphase poles or daughter nuclei in cytokinesis and have been implicated in tumorigenesis [125,126,127]. Cells harboring chromatin bridge during cytokinesis, delay abscission, the final cut of the intercellular canal, and form structures of polymerized actin, called actin patches, at the bases of the intercellular canal to prevent chromatin breakage [128]. In mammals, this abscission delay is called the “abscission checkpoint” and is dependent on the Aurora B activity [128,129]. Chk1 phosphorylates the Bloom’s syndrome protein helicase (BLM) at Serine 502 (S502) (Table 1) and this phosphorylation stabilizes BLM protein. Depletion of Chk1 or BLM by siRNAs increases the formation of anaphase bridges. However, expression of constitutively phosphorylated BLM-S502D reduces the number of anaphase bridges in Chk1-deficient cells. These results suggest that Chk1 prevents formation of chromatin bridges by phosphorylating BLM and inhibiting its degradation [130].

Dandoulaki et al. showed that Src, a nonreceptor tyrosine kinase, localizes to actin patches and is phosphorylated by Chk1 at Serine 51 (S51) to induce full activation of Src kinase. A non-phosphorylatable mutant of Serine 51 to Alanine reduces Src catalytic activity and impairs actin patch formation. These results show a new role of Chk1 in the formation of actin patches and genome stability during cytokinesis [131]. A recent study showed that, in cytokinesis with chromatin bridges, traction forces exerted on daughter nuclei by intact DNA bridges generate nuclear tension. Cells convert this mechanical signal into biochemical signaling, through tension-induced activation of a LINC–PDZ RhoGEF–RhoA signaling pathway, thereby promoting actin patch formation and stabilizing chromatin bridges. RhoA acts upstream of Src signaling in actin patch formation [132] (Figure 4A).

Figure 4.

Figure 4

Chk1 and Chk2 prevent chromatin bridge breakage during cytokinesis. (A) Nuclear tension activates the LINC-PDZ-RhoA signaling pathway to promote actin patch formation at the bases of the intercellular canal. Chk1 phosphorylates Src at Serine 51 (S51), which functions downstream of RhoA in actin patch formation chromatin bridge stabilization. (B) At the midbody, the MRN complex activates ATM. In turn, ATM phosphorylates Chk2 at Threonine 68 (T68) and activate it. Active Chk2 phosphorylates INCENP at Serine 91 (S91) and promotes the localization of the CPC complex to the Flemming body, thereby activating abscission checkpoint and preventing chromatin bridge breakage.

Chk2, a paralogue of Chk1, is implicated in the activation of abscission checkpoint. In cytokinesis with chromatin bridges, the MRN complex localizes to the midbody and is required for ATM activation. Active ATM phosphorylates Chk2 at Threonine 68 (T68) (Table 1), thereby activating Chk2. In turn, active Chk2 phosphorylates INCENP at Serine 91 (S91) (Table 1) promoting localization of CPC components INCENP and Aurora B at the midbody. This delay abscission and prevent chromatin bridge breakage [105] (Figure 4B).

5. Novel Role of Chk1 in Mitotic Spindle Formation

5.1. Chk1 Is Required for Nucleation and Optimal Formation of Spindle MTs

In a recent study, using confocal or time-lapse microscopy to analyze different cell lines in mitosis, Boutakoglou et al. demonstrated that, in normally segregating cells without drug treatment, Chk1 is required for optimal formation of mitotic spindle during vertebrate cell division by phosphorylating β-tubulin [133]. The researchers showed that inhibition of Chk1, although it does not completely impair mitotic spindle formation, results in diminished spindle microtubule density during prometaphase in diverse vertebrate cell lines. They indicated that the reduction of mitotic spindle density is not caused by early entry into mitosis or DNA damage response, but Chk1 promotes spindle MT density specifically during mitosis in an Aurora B or Cdk1 independent manner. Also, using a microtubule cold recovery assay, the authors showed that inhibition of Chk1 in prometaphase reduces the re-growth capacity of microtubules [133]. These results, together with the localization of active Chk1 at centrosomes from prophase to metaphase, suggest a role for Chk1 in spindle microtubule nucleation and formation.

5.2. Chk1 Phosphorylates β-Tubulin at Centrosomes in Prometaphase and Metaphase

Boutakoglou et al. demonstrated that Chk1 interacts with β-tubulin in cell extracts and phosphorylates β-tubulin in vitro. Liquid chromatography–mass spectrometry analysis presented four novel and conserved phosphorylation sites on β-tubulin by Chk1, Threonine 274, Serine 278, Threonine 285 and Threonine 290 [133]. Thereafter, the authors investigated the biological role of these phosphorylation sites in cells and showed that the expression of a non-phosphorylatable β-tubulin mutated at 285 to Alanine (T285A) construct, resistant to β-tubulin siRNA, impairs robust spindle MT density in Chk1 or β-tubulin deficient cells. On the contrary, expression of phosphomimetic β-tubulin mutated at 285 to Glutamic Acid (T285E) rescues the mitotic spindle density despite depletion of Chk1 or β-tubulin [133]. These results suggest that phosphorylation of β-tubulin at Threonine 285 is necessary for optimal spindle microtubule formation.

To further investigate the phosphorylation of β-tubulin at Threonine 285 in mitosis, a phospho-specific antibody (anti-phospho β1-tubulin T285) for the human protein sequence was raised. Impaired localization of phosphorylated β-tubulin at Threonine 285 at the centrosomes, after depletion of Chk1 or β-tubulin, reveals that Chk1 phosphorylates β-tubulin at T285 at centrosomes in prometaphase and metaphase [133].

5.3. Role of Phosphorylation of β-Tubulin at Threonine 285 in the Progression of Cell Division

The authors also investigated the role of β-tubulin phosphorylation at Threonine 285 in spindle microtubule nucleation. Using MT re-growth assays and experiments of in vitro tubulin phosphorylation by Chk1 during microtubule polymerization, they showed that Chk1 phosphorylates tubulin at Threonine 285 to promote MT nucleation. Also, they confirmed that Chk1 directly interacts with microtubules in cell extracts and in vitro [133]. Moreover, they showed that lack of phosphorylation of β-tubulin at Threonine 285 disrupts stable attachment between microtubules and kinetochores, resulting in chromosome misalignment, missegregation and delayed anaphase onset due to activation of the spindle checkpoint in human cells [134,135].

The authors also observed that cells lacking phosphorylation of β-tubulin at Threonine 285 exhibit non-centered mitotic spindles in metaphase and produce daughter cells with uneven sizes in cytokinesis. This is interesting because they showed that phosphorylation of β-tubulin at Threonine 285 is implicated in effective cell proliferation [133]. These results suggest that Chk1 phosphorylation at Threonine 285 on β-tubulin promotes spindle formation, thereby ensuring accurate cell proliferation and division.

5.4. Upstream Effectors of Chk1 at Centrosomes

To investigate Chk1 activation at mitotic centrosomes, Boutakoglou et al. focused on the implication of ATR, ATRIP and TopBP1 in spindle formation, which are known to activate Chk1 in response to DNA damage. First, they showed that ATR, ATRIP and TopBP1 localize to centrosomes in prometaphase, indicating a direct role of these proteins in mitosis. Second, depletion of ATR, ATRIP and TopBP1 reduced the relative intensity of active Chk1 (pS345) and phosphorylation of β-tubulin at Threonine 285 at centrosomes and impaired the formation of robust spindle microtubules. However, expression of the phosphomimetic β-tubulin-T285E exhibited optimal spindle microtubule density [133]. These results suggest that ATR, ATRIP and TopBP1 are responsible for Chk1 activation at centrosomes during mitosis.

With siRNA-mediated depletion of ATR, ATRIP or TopBP1, the authors showed that ATRIP recruits ATR and TopBP1 to centrosomes in prometaphase. To verify whether the interaction among ATR, ATRIP and TopBP1 is required for Chk1 activation, they engineered two ATRIP variants: the truncated ATRIP del (Δ658–690) and the mutant ATRIP top (LLSS 332 to AAAA), which are incapable of binding to ATR and TopBP1, respectively [76,136]. They found that ATRIP interacts with ATR and TopBP1 to activate Chk1 at mitotic centrosomes leading to phosphorylation of β-tubulin at T285 and promoting optimal polymerization of mitotic spindle microtubules [133].

6. Conclusions

The findings of Boutakoglou et al. describe a new role of Chk1 in mitotic spindle formation during cell division [133]. They show that, during mitosis, ATRIP localizes to mitotic centrosomes and promotes the recruitment of ATR and TopBP1. The association of ATRIP with ATR and TopBP1 is required for Chk1 phosphorylation (pS345) and activation by ATR. Thereafter, Chk1 phosphorylates β-tubulin at Threonine 285, a conserved residue in vertebrate cells, in prometaphase and metaphase, thereby promoting spindle microtubule nucleation and optimal mitotic spindle formation. This signaling pathway is important for anaphase onset, accurate chromosome alignment and segregation, formation of equal-sized daughter cells and cell proliferation (Figure 5). These results are consistent with emerging studies demonstrating the role of DNA damage response proteins in unperturbed mitosis in order to preserve genome integrity and highlight novel relationships between mitotic cell division and the DDR [56].

Figure 5.

Figure 5

Role of Chk1 in mitotic spindle formation and genome stability. In prometaphase and metaphase, ATRIP localizes at centrosomes and associates with ATR and TopBP1. ATR phosphorylates and activates Chk1, which phosphorylates β-tubulin at Threonine 285 (T285) to promote optimal mitotic spindle formation. Through this mechanism, ATR-Chk1 signaling preserves genome integrity.

7. Open Questions

7.1. How Is ATR Recruited to Centrosomes During Mitosis?

The novel role of ATRIP, ATR, TopBP1 and Chk1 in normal mitotic spindle formation raises several questions. First, the mechanism underlying the ATRIP-ATR complex recruitment to centrosomes in prometaphase and metaphase remains to be further investigated. Could ATRIP be recruited to spindle poles by factors such as ETAA1 or Rad17, which are known to promote ATR-Chk1 signaling in response to DNA damage [137]? Furthermore, the interaction of ATR and ATRIP with kinases that localize to centrosomes, such as NIMA-related kinase 1 (Nek1), could activate ATR-Chk1 signaling in the absence of DNA damage [138].

The phosphorylation of β-tubulin at Threonine 285 by Chk1 is the first described post-translational modification of tubulin, which promotes microtubule polymerization and regulates mitotic spindle maturation, contributing to generation of genomically identical daughter cells. Errors in signaling pathways that ensure accurate chromosome segregation and cell proliferation can lead to genetic disorders and birth defects in humans [139,140,141,142]. So, ATR and Chk1 are suggested to function protectively against human diseases and tumorigenesis through their newly identified role in mitotic spindle assembly.

7.2. How Does Phosphorylation of β-Tubulin T285 Promote Optimal Microtubule Spindle Density?

M-loops are essential parts of α-/β-tubulins, which are located between B7 strand and H9 helix and are involved in lateral interaction between protofilaments [143,144]. In β-tubulin, the N terminal end of the M-loop is also important for binding with taxol and taxol-like compounds [8]. Threonine 285 of β-tubulin is located within the M-loop (Figure 6). Perhaps phosphorylation of β-tubulin at Threonine 285 enhances interactions between neighboring protofilaments and increases curvature tolerance promoting microtubule polymerization [145]. Also, T285 phosphorylation of β-tubulin could accommodate interactions between microtubules with MAPs and motor proteins, promoting microtubule assembly [146]. It remains unknown whether another kinase phosphorylates α-tubulin within its M-loop during mitosis, cooperating with β-tubulin phosphorylation at Threonine 285 to promote mitotic spindle formation [9,143].

Figure 6.

Figure 6

Structural model of the αβ-tubulin dimer highlighting critical assembly elements. The hetero-dimer consists of α-tubulin (light grey) and β-tubulin (light blue). The M-loop (microtubule loop) of β-tubulin, spanning residues 270–290, is highlighted in red. The critical Threonine residue at position 285 (T285), located within the M-loop, is depicted as green spheres to illustrate its spatial positioning. Adjacent structural motifs involved in microtubule stability are also resolved: β-strand S3 (residues 96–103) is colored yellow, and helix H9 (residues 291–310) is colored orange. Molecular graphics were generated using UCSF ChimeraX based on the high-resolution coordinates of PDB ID: 1JFF.

It is interesting that phosphorylated β-tubulin at T285 localizes to and around centrosomes only during prometaphase and metaphase. One possible explanation is that, following β-tubulin incorporation to the microtubule lattice, the phospho-specific antibody cannot approach the M-loop because of polymerized microtubule conformational changes [147]. In contrast, both wild-type and phosphomimetic β-tubulin-T285E localized along the mitotic spindle. Furthermore, increased levels of γ-tubulin are observed at centrosomes during prometaphase, compared with interphase [52]. At the onset of mitosis, γ-tubulin promotes microtubule nucleation by recruiting α/β-tubulin heterodimers and accommodating their lateral interactions [148]. So, phosphorylation of β-tubulin at Threonine 285 by Chk1 could be required for γ-tubulin-mediated microtubule nucleation in mitosis.

7.3. Phosphorylation of β-Tubulin at T285 as a Target for Cancer Therapy

Microtubules are a key target of anticancer therapy. Nevertheless, their implication in many normal cellular functions limits the efficiency of microtubule targeting agents (MTAs) in clinical applications [149]. Researchers have focused on novel agents that are less toxic to non-cancerous cells and overcome chemotherapy resistance in cancer cells [150]. Preclinical trials have demonstrated decreased cancer cell survival by treatment with drugs that simultaneously disrupt microtubule dynamics and inhibit kinases-dependent oncogenic pathways [151,152]. In recent years, new therapeutic agents, with significant potential, have been developed to target the already well-characterized MTA-binding sites (e.g., taxane binding site) and act as microtubule stabilizers or destabilizers [150,153].

A better understanding of microtubule assembly pathways and their roles in cellular processes could contribute to development of novel anticancer drugs with improved effects towards normal cells. Phosphorylation of β-tubulin at Threonine 285 by Chk1 impairs cancer cell proliferation. Because DNA damage response proteins, such as Chk1 or ATR, are implicated in cell survival and proliferation, they represent crucial targets for cancer therapy [154,155,156,157]. It would be interesting to investigate whether impaired tubulin phosphorylation after Chk1 inhibition sensitizes tumor cells to antiproliferative effect of MTA, such as taxanes and alkaloids.

ATR, Chk1 and β-tubulin-T285 are conserved from yeast to higher eukaryotes, raising the possibility that the ATR-β-tubulin signaling axis is evolutionary conserved across different cell types and organisms [133]. Because T285 phosphorylation is important for cell physiology in vertebrate cell lines, dysregulated β-tubulin-T285 phosphorylation may contribute to human genetic disorders and cancer [133]. For example, it will be interesting to examine whether β-tubulin-T285 is hyper-phosphorylated in human cancers, or whether inhibition of T285 phosphorylation has potential therapeutic implications by selectively inhibiting proliferation of cancer cells.

Abbreviations

The following abbreviations are used in this manuscript:

9-1-1 Rad9-Rad1-Hus1
APC/C Anaphase-promoting complex/cyclosome
ATM Ataxia-telangiectasia mutated
ATR Ataxia-telangiectasia mutated- and Rad3-related
ATRIP ATR-interacting protein
Aurora A Aurora kinase A
Aurora B Aurora kinase B
BLM Bloom’s syndrome protein helicase
BRCA1 Breast cancer type 1 susceptibility protein
Bub1 Budding Uninhibited by Benzimidazoles 1
Bub3 Budding Uninhibited by Benzimidazoles 3
BubR1 BUB1-related protein 1
CCAN Constitutive Centromere-Associated Network
Cdc20 Cell division cycle protein 20 homolog
Cdc25B Cell Division Cycle 25B
Cdk1 Cyclin-dependent kinase 1
CENP-A Centromere protein A
CENP-B Centromere protein B
CENP-C Centromere protein C
CENP-E Centromere protein E
CENP-F Centromere protein F
Chk1 Checkpoint kinase 1
Chk2 Checkpoint kinase 2
CPC Chromosomal Passenger Complex
DDR DNA Damage Response
ETAA1 Ewing tumor-associated antigen 1
GCPs γ-tubulin complex proteins
Hec1 Highly expressed in cancer 1
Hus1 Hydroxyurea sensitive 1
INCENP Inner Centromere Protein
K-fibers Kinetochore fibers
Kif2b Kinesin family member 2B
KMN KNL1/Mis12 complex/Ndc80 complex
LINC Linker of nucleoskeleton and cytoskeleton
Mad1 Mitotic arrest deficient 1
Mad2 Mitotic arrest deficient 2
MAPs MT-associated proteins
MCAK Mitotic centromere-associated kinesin
MCC mitotic checkpoint complex
Mklp2 Mitotic Kinesin-like protein 2
Mps1 Monopolar spindle 1
Mre11 Meiotic recombination 11
MRN Mre11-Rad50-Nbs1
MTAs Microtubule targeting agents
MTs Microtubules
Myt1 Membrane-associated tyrosine- and Threonine-specific cdc2-inhibitory kinase
Nbs1 Nibrin
Nek1 NIMA-related kinase 1
OGT O-linked β-N-acetylglucosamine (O-GlcNAc) transferase
PDZ RhoGEF Rho guanine nucleotide exchange factor 11
Plk1 Polo-like kinase 1
PTMs Post-translational modifications
Rad1 Radiation sensitive 1
Rad17 Radiation sensitive 17
Rad50 Radiation sensitive 50
Rad9 Radiation sensitive 9
RFC Replication factor C
RhoA Ras homology family member A
RPA Replication protein A
SAC Spindle assembly checkpoint
ssDNA Single-stranded DNA
TopBP1 DNA topoisomerase II-binding protein 1
TSS Thr-Ser-Ser
Wee1 Wee1-like protein kinase
γTuRC γ-tubulin ring complex
γTuSC γ-tubulin small complex

Author Contributions

S.B.: writing original draft, writing and review. G.Z.: writing original draft, writing, review and editing. E.P.: conceptualization, writing original draft, writing, review and editing. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

No new data were created or analyzed in this study. Data sharing is not applicable to this article.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Funding Statement

This research was funded by Worldwide Cancer Research (Project 25-0103) and by Fondation Santé.

Footnotes

Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

References

  • 1.Prosser S.L., Pelletier L. Mitotic spindle assembly in animal cells: A fine balancing act. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 2017;18:187–201. doi: 10.1038/nrm.2016.162. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Petry S. Mechanisms of Mitotic Spindle Assembly. Annu. Rev. Biochem. 2016;85:659–683. doi: 10.1146/annurev-biochem-060815-014528. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Walczak C.E., Heald R. Mechanisms of mitotic spindle assembly and function. Int. Rev. Cytol. 2008;265:111–158. doi: 10.1016/S0074-7696(07)65003-7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Knoblich J.A. Asymmetric cell division: Recent developments and their implications for tumour biology. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 2010;11:849–860. doi: 10.1038/nrm3010. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Silkworth W.T., Cimini D. Transient defects of mitotic spindle geometry and chromosome segregation errors. Cell Div. 2012;7:19. doi: 10.1186/1747-1028-7-19. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Noatynska A., Gotta M., Meraldi P. Mitotic spindle (DIS)orientation and DISease: Cause or consequence? J. Cell Biol. 2012;199:1025–1035. doi: 10.1083/jcb.201209015. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Kline-Smith S.L., Walczak C.E. Mitotic spindle assembly and chromosome segregation: Refocusing on microtubule dynamics. Mol. Cell. 2004;15:317–327. doi: 10.1016/j.molcel.2004.07.012. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Nogales E., Wolf S.G., Downing K.H. Structure of the alpha beta tubulin dimer by electron crystallography. Nature. 1998;391:199–203. doi: 10.1038/34465. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Wloga D., Joachimiak E., Fabczak H. Tubulin Post-Translational Modifications and Microtubule Dynamics. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2017;18:2207. doi: 10.3390/ijms18102207. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Knossow M., Campanacci V., Khodja L.A., Gigant B. The Mechanism of Tubulin Assembly into Microtubules: Insights from Structural Studies. iScience. 2020;23:101511. doi: 10.1016/j.isci.2020.101511. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Etienne-Manneville S. From signaling pathways to microtubule dynamics: The key players. Curr. Opin. Cell Biol. 2010;22:104–111. doi: 10.1016/j.ceb.2009.11.008. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Mimori-Kiyosue Y., Tsukita S. “Search-and-capture” of microtubules through plus-end-binding proteins (+TIPs) J. Biochem. 2003;134:321–326. doi: 10.1093/jb/mvg148. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Magidson V., O’Connell C.B., Loncarek J., Paul R., Mogilner A., Khodjakov A. The spatial arrangement of chromosomes during prometaphase facilitates spindle assembly. Cell. 2011;146:555–567. doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2011.07.012. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Wollman R., Cytrynbaum E.N., Jones J.T., Meyer T., Scholey J.M., Mogilner A. Efficient chromosome capture requires a bias in the ‘search-and-capture’ process during mitotic-spindle assembly. Curr. Biol. 2005;15:828–832. doi: 10.1016/j.cub.2005.03.019. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Tolic I.M. Mitotic spindle: Kinetochore fibers hold on tight to interpolar bundles. Eur. Biophys. J. 2018;47:191–203. doi: 10.1007/s00249-017-1244-4. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Steblyanko Y., Rajendraprasad G., Osswald M., Eibes S., Jacome A., Geley S., Pereira A.J., Maiato H., Barisic M. Microtubule poleward flux in human cells is driven by the coordinated action of four kinesins. EMBO J. 2020;39:e105432. doi: 10.15252/embj.2020105432. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Antonio C., Ferby I., Wilhelm H., Jones M., Karsenti E., Nebreda A.R., Vernos I. Xkid, a chromokinesin required for chromosome alignment on the metaphase plate. Cell. 2000;102:425–435. doi: 10.1016/s0092-8674(00)00048-9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Guo Y., Kim C., Mao Y. New insights into the mechanism for chromosome alignment in metaphase. Int. Rev. Cell Mol. Biol. 2013;303:237–262. doi: 10.1016/B978-0-12-407697-6.00006-4. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Rogers G.C., Rogers S.L., Schwimmer T.A., Ems-McClung S.C., Walczak C.E., Vale R.D., Scholey J.M., Sharp D.J. Two mitotic kinesins cooperate to drive sister chromatid separation during anaphase. Nature. 2004;427:364–370. doi: 10.1038/nature02256. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Bunning A.R., Gupta M.L., Jr. The importance of microtubule-dependent tension in accurate chromosome segregation. Front. Cell Dev. Biol. 2023;11:1096333. doi: 10.3389/fcell.2023.1096333. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Desai A., Maddox P.S., Mitchison T.J., Salmon E.D. Anaphase A chromosome movement and poleward spindle microtubule flux occur At similar rates in Xenopus extract spindles. J. Cell Biol. 1998;141:703–713. doi: 10.1083/jcb.141.3.703. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Barr F.A., Gruneberg U. Cytokinesis: Placing and making the final cut. Cell. 2007;131:847–860. doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2007.11.011. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Perpelescu M., Fukagawa T. The ABCs of CENPs. Chromosoma. 2011;120:425–446. doi: 10.1007/s00412-011-0330-0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Cheeseman I.M., Chappie J.S., Wilson-Kubalek E.M., Desai A. The conserved KMN network constitutes the core microtubule-binding site of the kinetochore. Cell. 2006;127:983–997. doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2006.09.039. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Krenn V., Musacchio A. The Aurora B Kinase in Chromosome Bi-Orientation and Spindle Checkpoint Signaling. Front. Oncol. 2015;5:225. doi: 10.3389/fonc.2015.00225. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Bodor D.L., Mata J.F., Sergeev M., David A.F., Salimian K.J., Panchenko T., Cleveland D.W., Black B.E., Shah J.V., Jansen L.E. The quantitative architecture of centromeric chromatin. eLife. 2014;3:e02137. doi: 10.7554/eLife.02137. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Ciossani G., Overlack K., Petrovic A., Huis In’t Veld P.J., Koerner C., Wohlgemuth S., Maffini S., Musacchio A. The kinetochore proteins CENP-E and CENP-F directly and specifically interact with distinct BUB mitotic checkpoint Ser/Thr kinases. J. Biol. Chem. 2018;293:10084–10101. doi: 10.1074/jbc.RA118.003154. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Ando S., Yang H., Nozaki N., Okazaki T., Yoda K. CENP-A, -B, and -C chromatin complex that contains the I-type alpha-satellite array constitutes the prekinetochore in HeLa cells. Mol. Cell Biol. 2002;22:2229–2241. doi: 10.1128/MCB.22.7.2229-2241.2002. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Hori T., Amano M., Suzuki A., Backer C.B., Welburn J.P., Dong Y., McEwen B.F., Shang W.H., Suzuki E., Okawa K., et al. CCAN makes multiple contacts with centromeric DNA to provide distinct pathways to the outer kinetochore. Cell. 2008;135:1039–1052. doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2008.10.019. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Kwon M.S., Hori T., Okada M., Fukagawa T. CENP-C is involved in chromosome segregation, mitotic checkpoint function, and kinetochore assembly. Mol. Biol. Cell. 2007;18:2155–2168. doi: 10.1091/mbc.e07-01-0045. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Przewloka M.R., Venkei Z., Bolanos-Garcia V.M., Debski J., Dadlez M., Glover D.M. CENP-C is a structural platform for kinetochore assembly. Curr. Biol. 2011;21:399–405. doi: 10.1016/j.cub.2011.02.005. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Screpanti E., De Antoni A., Alushin G.M., Petrovic A., Melis T., Nogales E., Musacchio A. Direct binding of Cenp-C to the Mis12 complex joins the inner and outer kinetochore. Curr. Biol. 2011;21:391–398. doi: 10.1016/j.cub.2010.12.039. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Godek K.M., Kabeche L., Compton D.A. Regulation of kinetochore-microtubule attachments through homeostatic control during mitosis. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 2015;16:57–64. doi: 10.1038/nrm3916. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Gemble S., Simon A., Pennetier C., Dumont M., Herve S., Meitinger F., Oegema K., Rodriguez R., Almouzni G., Fachinetti D., et al. Centromere Dysfunction Compromises Mitotic Spindle Pole Integrity. Curr. Biol. 2019;29:3072–3080 e3075. doi: 10.1016/j.cub.2019.07.052. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 35.Lara-Gonzalez P., Pines J., Desai A. Spindle assembly checkpoint activation and silencing at kinetochores. Semin. Cell Dev. Biol. 2021;117:86–98. doi: 10.1016/j.semcdb.2021.06.009. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 36.McAinsh A.D., Kops G. Principles and dynamics of spindle assembly checkpoint signalling. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 2023;24:543–559. doi: 10.1038/s41580-023-00593-z. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 37.Watson E.R., Brown N.G., Peters J.M., Stark H., Schulman B.A. Posing the APC/C E3 Ubiquitin Ligase to Orchestrate Cell Division. Trends Cell Biol. 2019;29:117–134. doi: 10.1016/j.tcb.2018.09.007. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 38.Barford D. Structural interconversions of the anaphase-promoting complex/cyclosome (APC/C) regulate cell cycle transitions. Curr. Opin. Struct. Biol. 2020;61:86–97. doi: 10.1016/j.sbi.2019.11.010. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 39.Musacchio A. The Molecular Biology of Spindle Assembly Checkpoint Signaling Dynamics. Curr. Biol. 2015;25:R1002–R1018. doi: 10.1016/j.cub.2015.08.051. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 40.Sudakin V., Chan G.K., Yen T.J. Checkpoint inhibition of the APC/C in HeLa cells is mediated by a complex of BUBR1, BUB3, CDC20, and MAD2. J. Cell Biol. 2001;154:925–936. doi: 10.1083/jcb.200102093. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 41.Pachis S.T., Kops G. Leader of the SAC: Molecular mechanisms of Mps1/TTK regulation in mitosis. Open Biol. 2018;8:180109. doi: 10.1098/rsob.180109. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 42.Moyle M.W., Kim T., Hattersley N., Espeut J., Cheerambathur D.K., Oegema K., Desai A. A Bub1-Mad1 interaction targets the Mad1-Mad2 complex to unattached kinetochores to initiate the spindle checkpoint. J. Cell Biol. 2014;204:647–657. doi: 10.1083/jcb.201311015. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 43.Hewitt L., Tighe A., Santaguida S., White A.M., Jones C.D., Musacchio A., Green S., Taylor S.S. Sustained Mps1 activity is required in mitosis to recruit O-Mad2 to the Mad1-C-Mad2 core complex. J. Cell Biol. 2010;190:25–34. doi: 10.1083/jcb.201002133. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 44.Overlack K., Bange T., Weissmann F., Faesen A.C., Maffini S., Primorac I., Muller F., Peters J.M., Musacchio A. BubR1 Promotes Bub3-Dependent APC/C Inhibition during Spindle Assembly Checkpoint Signaling. Curr. Biol. 2017;27:2915–2927.E7. doi: 10.1016/j.cub.2017.08.033. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 45.Chao W.C., Kulkarni K., Zhang Z., Kong E.H., Barford D. Structure of the mitotic checkpoint complex. Nature. 2012;484:208–213. doi: 10.1038/nature10896. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 46.Hagting A., Den Elzen N., Vodermaier H.C., Waizenegger I.C., Peters J.M., Pines J. Human securin proteolysis is controlled by the spindle checkpoint and reveals when the APC/C switches from activation by Cdc20 to Cdh1. J. Cell Biol. 2002;157:1125–1137. doi: 10.1083/jcb.200111001. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 47.Thornton B.R., Toczyski D.P. Securin and B-cyclin/CDK are the only essential targets of the APC. Nat. Cell Biol. 2003;5:1090–1094. doi: 10.1038/ncb1066. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 48.Izawa D., Pines J. The mitotic checkpoint complex binds a second CDC20 to inhibit active APC/C. Nature. 2015;517:631–634. doi: 10.1038/nature13911. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 49.Foley E.A., Kapoor T.M. Microtubule attachment and spindle assembly checkpoint signalling at the kinetochore. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 2013;14:25–37. doi: 10.1038/nrm3494. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 50.Hosea R., Hillary S., Naqvi S., Wu S., Kasim V. The two sides of chromosomal instability: Drivers and brakes in cancer. Signal Transduct. Target. Ther. 2024;9:75. doi: 10.1038/s41392-024-01767-7. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 51.Fuller S.D., Gowen B.E., Reinsch S., Sawyer A., Buendia B., Wepf R., Karsenti E. The core of the mammalian centriole contains gamma-tubulin. Curr. Biol. 1995;5:1384–1393. doi: 10.1016/s0960-9822(95)00276-4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 52.Khodjakov A., Rieder C.L. The sudden recruitment of gamma-tubulin to the centrosome at the onset of mitosis and its dynamic exchange throughout the cell cycle, do not require microtubules. J. Cell Biol. 1999;146:585–596. doi: 10.1083/jcb.146.3.585. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 53.Kollman J.M., Merdes A., Mourey L., Agard D.A. Microtubule nucleation by gamma-tubulin complexes. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 2011;12:709–721. doi: 10.1038/nrm3209. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 54.Haren L., Stearns T., Luders J. Plk1-dependent recruitment of gamma-tubulin complexes to mitotic centrosomes involves multiple PCM components. PLoS ONE. 2009;4:e5976. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0005976. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 55.Magnaghi-Jaulin L., Eot-Houllier G., Gallaud E., Giet R. Aurora A Protein Kinase: To the Centrosome and Beyond. Biomolecules. 2019;9:28. doi: 10.3390/biom9010028. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 56.Petsalaki E., Zachos G. DNA damage response proteins regulating mitotic cell division: Double agents preserving genome stability. FEBS J. 2020;287:1700–1721. doi: 10.1111/febs.15240. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 57.Alvarado-Kristensson M. gamma-tubulin as a signal-transducing molecule and meshwork with therapeutic potential. Signal Transduct. Target. Ther. 2018;3:24. doi: 10.1038/s41392-018-0021-x. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 58.Maounis N.F., Draberova E., Mahera E., Chorti M., Caracciolo V., Sulimenko T., Riga D., Trakas N., Emmanouilidou A., Giordano A., et al. Overexpression of gamma-tubulin in non-small cell lung cancer. Histol. Histopathol. 2012;27:1183–1194. doi: 10.14670/HH-27.1183. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 59.Niu Y., Liu T., Tse G.M., Sun B., Niu R., Li H.M., Wang H., Yang Y., Ye X., Wang Y., et al. Increased expression of centrosomal alpha, gamma-tubulin in atypical ductal hyperplasia and carcinoma of the breast. Cancer Sci. 2009;100:580–587. doi: 10.1111/j.1349-7006.2008.01075.x. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 60.Amin M.A., Agarwal S., Varma D. Mapping the kinetochore MAP functions required for stabilizing microtubule attachments to chromosomes during metaphase. Cytoskeleton. 2019;76:398–412. doi: 10.1002/cm.21559. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 61.Bowne-Anderson H., Hibbel A., Howard J. Regulation of Microtubule Growth and Catastrophe: Unifying Theory and Experiment. Trends Cell Biol. 2015;25:769–779. doi: 10.1016/j.tcb.2015.08.009. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 62.Shigematsu H., Imasaki T., Doki C., Sumi T., Aoki M., Uchikubo-Kamo T., Sakamoto A., Tokuraku K., Shirouzu M., Nitta R. Structural insight into microtubule stabilization and kinesin inhibition by Tau family MAPs. J. Cell Biol. 2018;217:4155–4163. doi: 10.1083/jcb.201711182. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 63.Wloga D., Gaertig J. Post-translational modifications of microtubules. J. Cell Sci. 2010;123:3447–3455. doi: 10.1242/jcs.063727. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 64.Song Y., Brady S.T. Post-translational modifications of tubulin: Pathways to functional diversity of microtubules. Trends Cell Biol. 2015;25:125–136. doi: 10.1016/j.tcb.2014.10.004. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 65.Magiera M.M., Janke C. Post-translational modifications of tubulin. Curr. Biol. 2014;24:R351–R354. doi: 10.1016/j.cub.2014.03.032. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 66.Westermann S., Weber K. Post-translational modifications regulate microtubule function. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 2003;4:938–947. doi: 10.1038/nrm1260. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 67.Fourest-Lieuvin A., Peris L., Gache V., Garcia-Saez I., Juillan-Binard C., Lantez V., Job D. Microtubule regulation in mitosis: Tubulin phosphorylation by the cyclin-dependent kinase Cdk1. Mol. Biol. Cell. 2006;17:1041–1050. doi: 10.1091/mbc.e05-07-0621. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 68.Levine M.S., Holland A.J. The impact of mitotic errors on cell proliferation and tumorigenesis. Genes. Dev. 2018;32:620–638. doi: 10.1101/gad.314351.118. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 69.Zeman M.K., Cimprich K.A. Causes and consequences of replication stress. Nat. Cell Biol. 2014;16:2–9. doi: 10.1038/ncb2897. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 70.Chadda R., Kaushik V., Ahmad I.M., Deveryshetty J., Holehouse A.S., Sigurdsson S.T., Biswas G., Levy Y., Bothner B., Cooley R.B., et al. Partial wrapping of single-stranded DNA by replication protein A and modulation through phosphorylation. Nucleic Acids Res. 2024;52:11626–11640. doi: 10.1093/nar/gkae584. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 71.Chen R., Wold M.S. Replication protein A: Single-stranded DNA’s first responder: Dynamic DNA-interactions allow replication protein A to direct single-strand DNA intermediates into different pathways for synthesis or repair. Bioessays. 2014;36:1156–1161. doi: 10.1002/bies.201400107. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 72.Namiki Y., Zou L. ATRIP associates with replication protein A-coated ssDNA through multiple interactions. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA. 2006;103:580–585. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0510223103. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 73.Day M., Oliver A.W., Pearl L.H. Structure of the human RAD17-RFC clamp loader and 9-1-1 checkpoint clamp bound to a dsDNA-ssDNA junction. Nucleic Acids Res. 2022;50:8279–8289. doi: 10.1093/nar/gkac588. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 74.Delacroix S., Wagner J.M., Kobayashi M., Yamamoto K., Karnitz L.M. The Rad9-Hus1-Rad1 (9-1-1) clamp activates checkpoint signaling via TopBP1. Genes. Dev. 2007;21:1472–1477. doi: 10.1101/gad.1547007. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 75.Rappas M., Oliver A.W., Pearl L.H. Structure and function of the Rad9-binding region of the DNA-damage checkpoint adaptor TopBP1. Nucleic Acids Res. 2011;39:313–324. doi: 10.1093/nar/gkq743. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 76.Mordes D.A., Glick G.G., Zhao R., Cortez D. TopBP1 activates ATR through ATRIP and a PIKK regulatory domain. Genes. Dev. 2008;22:1478–1489. doi: 10.1101/gad.1666208. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 77.Kumagai A., Lee J., Yoo H.Y., Dunphy W.G. TopBP1 activates the ATR-ATRIP complex. Cell. 2006;124:943–955. doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2005.12.041. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 78.Lee Y.C., Zhou Q., Chen J., Yuan J. RPA-Binding Protein ETAA1 Is an ATR Activator Involved in DNA Replication Stress Response. Curr. Biol. 2016;26:3257–3268. doi: 10.1016/j.cub.2016.10.030. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 79.Zhao H., Piwnica-Worms H. ATR-mediated checkpoint pathways regulate phosphorylation and activation of human Chk1. Mol. Cell Biol. 2001;21:4129–4139. doi: 10.1128/MCB.21.13.4129-4139.2001. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 80.Liu Q., Guntuku S., Cui X.S., Matsuoka S., Cortez D., Tamai K., Luo G., Carattini-Rivera S., DeMayo F., Bradley A., et al. Chk1 is an essential kinase that is regulated by Atr and required for the G(2)/M DNA damage checkpoint. Genes. Dev. 2000;14:1448–1459. doi: 10.1101/gad.14.12.1448. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 81.Xiao Z., Chen Z., Gunasekera A.H., Sowin T.J., Rosenberg S.H., Fesik S., Zhang H. Chk1 mediates S and G2 arrests through Cdc25A degradation in response to DNA-damaging agents. J. Biol. Chem. 2003;278:21767–21773. doi: 10.1074/jbc.M300229200. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 82.Saldanha J., Rageul J., Patel J.A., Kim H. The Adaptive Mechanisms and Checkpoint Responses to a Stressed DNA Replication Fork. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2023;24:10488. doi: 10.3390/ijms241310488. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 83.Gorecki L., Andrs M., Korabecny J. Clinical Candidates Targeting the ATR-CHK1-WEE1 Axis in Cancer. Cancers. 2021;13:795. doi: 10.3390/cancers13040795. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 84.Duursma A.M., Driscoll R., Elias J.E., Cimprich K.A. A role for the MRN complex in ATR activation via TOPBP1 recruitment. Mol. Cell. 2013;50:116–122. doi: 10.1016/j.molcel.2013.03.006. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 85.Shiotani B., Nguyen H.D., Hakansson P., Marechal A., Tse A., Tahara H., Zou L. Two distinct modes of ATR activation orchestrated by Rad17 and Nbs1. Cell Rep. 2013;3:1651–1662. doi: 10.1016/j.celrep.2013.04.018. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 86.Kramer A., Mailand N., Lukas C., Syljuasen R.G., Wilkinson C.J., Nigg E.A., Bartek J., Lukas J. Centrosome-associated Chk1 prevents premature activation of cyclin-B-Cdk1 kinase. Nat. Cell Biol. 2004;6:884–891. doi: 10.1038/ncb1165. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 87.Enomoto M., Goto H., Tomono Y., Kasahara K., Tsujimura K., Kiyono T., Inagaki M. Novel positive feedback loop between Cdk1 and Chk1 in the nucleus during G2/M transition. J. Biol. Chem. 2009;284:34223–34230. doi: 10.1074/jbc.C109.051540. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 88.Schmitt E., Boutros R., Froment C., Monsarrat B., Ducommun B., Dozier C. CHK1 phosphorylates CDC25B during the cell cycle in the absence of DNA damage. J. Cell Sci. 2006;119:4269–4275. doi: 10.1242/jcs.03200. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 89.Cazales M., Schmitt E., Montembault E., Dozier C., Prigent C., Ducommun B. CDC25B phosphorylation by Aurora-A occurs at the G2/M transition and is inhibited by DNA damage. Cell Cycle. 2005;4:1233–1238. doi: 10.4161/cc.4.9.1964. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 90.Dutertre S., Cazales M., Quaranta M., Froment C., Trabut V., Dozier C., Mirey G., Bouche J.P., Theis-Febvre N., Schmitt E., et al. Phosphorylation of CDC25B by Aurora-A at the centrosome contributes to the G2-M transition. J. Cell Sci. 2004;117:2523–2531. doi: 10.1242/jcs.01108. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 91.Tang J., Erikson R.L., Liu X. Checkpoint kinase 1 (Chk1) is required for mitotic progression through negative regulation of polo-like kinase 1 (Plk1) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA. 2006;103:11964–11969. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0604987103. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 92.Zachos G., Black E.J., Walker M., Scott M.T., Vagnarelli P., Earnshaw W.C., Gillespie D.A. Chk1 is required for spindle checkpoint function. Dev. Cell. 2007;12:247–260. doi: 10.1016/j.devcel.2007.01.003. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 93.Petsalaki E., Akoumianaki T., Black E.J., Gillespie D.A., Zachos G. Phosphorylation at serine 331 is required for Aurora B activation. J. Cell Biol. 2011;195:449–466. doi: 10.1083/jcb.201104023. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 94.Kabeche L., Nguyen H.D., Buisson R., Zou L. A mitosis-specific and R loop-driven ATR pathway promotes faithful chromosome segregation. Science. 2018;359:108–114. doi: 10.1126/science.aan6490. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 95.Carmena M., Ruchaud S., Earnshaw W.C. Making the Auroras glow: Regulation of Aurora A and B kinase function by interacting proteins. Curr. Opin. Cell Biol. 2009;21:796–805. doi: 10.1016/j.ceb.2009.09.008. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 96.Carmena M., Wheelock M., Funabiki H., Earnshaw W.C. The chromosomal passenger complex (CPC): From easy rider to the godfather of mitosis. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 2012;13:789–803. doi: 10.1038/nrm3474. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 97.Honda R., Korner R., Nigg E.A. Exploring the functional interactions between Aurora B, INCENP, and survivin in mitosis. Mol. Biol. Cell. 2003;14:3325–3341. doi: 10.1091/mbc.e02-11-0769. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 98.Kitagawa M., Lee S.H. The chromosomal passenger complex (CPC) as a key orchestrator of orderly mitotic exit and cytokinesis. Front. Cell Dev. Biol. 2015;3:14. doi: 10.3389/fcell.2015.00014. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 99.Bishop J.D., Schumacher J.M. Phosphorylation of the carboxyl terminus of inner centromere protein (INCENP) by the Aurora B Kinase stimulates Aurora B kinase activity. J. Biol. Chem. 2002;277:27577–27580. doi: 10.1074/jbc.C200307200. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 100.Sessa F., Mapelli M., Ciferri C., Tarricone C., Areces L.B., Schneider T.R., Stukenberg P.T., Musacchio A. Mechanism of Aurora B activation by INCENP and inhibition by hesperadin. Mol. Cell. 2005;18:379–391. doi: 10.1016/j.molcel.2005.03.031. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 101.Bayliss R., Fry A., Haq T., Yeoh S. On the molecular mechanisms of mitotic kinase activation. Open Biol. 2012;2:120136. doi: 10.1098/rsob.120136. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 102.Hadders M.A., Lens S.M.A. Changing places: Chromosomal Passenger Complex relocation in early anaphase. Trends Cell Biol. 2022;32:165–176. doi: 10.1016/j.tcb.2021.09.008. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 103.Hengeveld R.C.C., Vromans M.J.M., Vleugel M., Hadders M.A., Lens S.M.A. Inner centromere localization of the CPC maintains centromere cohesion and allows mitotic checkpoint silencing. Nat. Commun. 2017;8:15542. doi: 10.1038/ncomms15542. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 104.Matsui S., Nozawa R.S., Hirota T. Organization of the chromosomal passenger complex clusters at inner centromeres in mitosis. Curr. Opin. Cell Biol. 2025;92:102462. doi: 10.1016/j.ceb.2024.102462. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 105.Petsalaki E., Zachos G. An ATM-Chk2-INCENP pathway activates the abscission checkpoint. J. Cell Biol. 2021;220:e202008029. doi: 10.1083/jcb.202008029. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 106.Saurin A.T., van der Waal M.S., Medema R.H., Lens S.M., Kops G.J. Aurora B potentiates Mps1 activation to ensure rapid checkpoint establishment at the onset of mitosis. Nat. Commun. 2011;2:316. doi: 10.1038/ncomms1319. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 107.Joo Y.K., Parrado C.R., Li W., Yang R., Black E., Bleichert F., Liu Y., Kabeche L. The mitotic ATR-Chk1 pathway promotes CDK1 activity for faithful chromosome segregation. Cell Rep. 2025;44:116019. doi: 10.1016/j.celrep.2025.116019. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 108.Goto H., Kiyono T., Tomono Y., Kawajiri A., Urano T., Furukawa K., Nigg E.A., Inagaki M. Complex formation of Plk1 and INCENP required for metaphase-anaphase transition. Nat. Cell Biol. 2006;8:180–187. doi: 10.1038/ncb1350. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 109.Cimini D. Merotelic kinetochore orientation, aneuploidy, and cancer. Biochim. Biophys. Acta. 2008;1786:32–40. doi: 10.1016/j.bbcan.2008.05.003. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 110.Tanaka K. Regulatory mechanisms of kinetochore-microtubule interaction in mitosis. Cell Mol. Life Sci. 2013;70:559–579. doi: 10.1007/s00018-012-1057-7. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 111.Knowlton A.L., Lan W., Stukenberg P.T. Aurora B is enriched at merotelic attachment sites, where it regulates MCAK. Curr. Biol. 2006;16:1705–1710. doi: 10.1016/j.cub.2006.07.057. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 112.Hauf S., Cole R.W., LaTerra S., Zimmer C., Schnapp G., Walter R., Heckel A., van Meel J., Rieder C.L., Peters J.M. The small molecule Hesperadin reveals a role for Aurora B in correcting kinetochore-microtubule attachment and in maintaining the spindle assembly checkpoint. J. Cell Biol. 2003;161:281–294. doi: 10.1083/jcb.200208092. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 113.Gregan J., Polakova S., Zhang L., Tolic-Norrelykke I.M., Cimini D. Merotelic kinetochore attachment: Causes and effects. Trends Cell Biol. 2011;21:374–381. doi: 10.1016/j.tcb.2011.01.003. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 114.Petsalaki E., Zachos G. Chk1 and Mps1 jointly regulate correction of merotelic kinetochore attachments. J. Cell Sci. 2013;126:1235–1246. doi: 10.1242/jcs.119677. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 115.Jelluma N., Brenkman A.B., van den Broek N.J., Cruijsen C.W., van Osch M.H., Lens S.M., Medema R.H., Kops G.J. Mps1 phosphorylates Borealin to control Aurora B activity and chromosome alignment. Cell. 2008;132:233–246. doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2007.11.046. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 116.Welburn J.P., Vleugel M., Liu D., Yates J.R., 3rd, Lampson M.A., Fukagawa T., Cheeseman I.M. Aurora B phosphorylates spatially distinct targets to differentially regulate the kinetochore-microtubule interface. Mol. Cell. 2010;38:383–392. doi: 10.1016/j.molcel.2010.02.034. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 117.McVey S.L., Cosby J.K., Nannas N.J. Aurora B Tension Sensing Mechanisms in the Kinetochore Ensure Accurate Chromosome Segregation. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2021;22:8818. doi: 10.3390/ijms22168818. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 118.Chen G.Y., Renda F., Zhang H., Gokden A., Wu D.Z., Chenoweth D.M., Khodjakov A., Lampson M.A. Tension promotes kinetochore-microtubule release by Aurora B kinase. J. Cell Biol. 2021;220:e202007030. doi: 10.1083/jcb.202007030. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 119.Magidson V., He J., Ault J.G., O’Connell C.B., Yang N., Tikhonenko I., McEwen B.F., Sui H., Khodjakov A. Unattached kinetochores rather than intrakinetochore tension arrest mitosis in taxol-treated cells. J. Cell Biol. 2016;212:307–319. doi: 10.1083/jcb.201412139. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 120.Tauchman E.C., Boehm F.J., DeLuca J.G. Stable kinetochore-microtubule attachment is sufficient to silence the spindle assembly checkpoint in human cells. Nat. Commun. 2015;6:10036. doi: 10.1038/ncomms10036. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 121.Etemad B., Kuijt T.E., Kops G.J. Kinetochore-microtubule attachment is sufficient to satisfy the human spindle assembly checkpoint. Nat. Commun. 2015;6:8987. doi: 10.1038/ncomms9987. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 122.Peddibhotla S., Rosen J.M. Chking and executing cell division to prevent genomic instability. Cell Cycle. 2009;8:2339–2342. doi: 10.4161/cc.8.15.9169. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 123.Peddibhotla S., Lam M.H., Gonzalez-Rimbau M., Rosen J.M. The DNA-damage effector checkpoint kinase 1 is essential for chromosome segregation and cytokinesis. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA. 2009;106:5159–5164. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0806671106. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 124.Li Z., Li X., Nai S., Geng Q., Liao J., Xu X., Li J. Checkpoint kinase 1-induced phosphorylation of O-linked beta-N-acetylglucosamine transferase regulates the intermediate filament network during cytokinesis. J. Biol. Chem. 2017;292:19548–19555. doi: 10.1074/jbc.M117.811646. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 125.Finardi A., Massari L.F., Visintin R. Anaphase Bridges: Not All Natural Fibers Are Healthy. Genes. 2020;11:902. doi: 10.3390/genes11080902. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 126.Hoffelder D.R., Luo L., Burke N.A., Watkins S.C., Gollin S.M., Saunders W.S. Resolution of anaphase bridges in cancer cells. Chromosoma. 2004;112:389–397. doi: 10.1007/s00412-004-0284-6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 127.Ganem N.J., Pellman D. Linking abnormal mitosis to the acquisition of DNA damage. J. Cell Biol. 2012;199:871–881. doi: 10.1083/jcb.201210040. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 128.Steigemann P., Wurzenberger C., Schmitz M.H., Held M., Guizetti J., Maar S., Gerlich D.W. Aurora B-mediated abscission checkpoint protects against tetraploidization. Cell. 2009;136:473–484. doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2008.12.020. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 129.Nahse V., Christ L., Stenmark H., Campsteijn C. The Abscission Checkpoint: Making It to the Final Cut. Trends Cell Biol. 2017;27:1–11. doi: 10.1016/j.tcb.2016.10.001. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 130.Petsalaki E., Dandoulaki M., Morrice N., Zachos G. Chk1 protects against chromatin bridges by constitutively phosphorylating BLM serine 502 to inhibit BLM degradation. J. Cell Sci. 2014;127:3902–3908. doi: 10.1242/jcs.155176. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 131.Dandoulaki M., Petsalaki E., Sumpton D., Zanivan S., Zachos G. Src activation by Chk1 promotes actin patch formation and prevents chromatin bridge breakage in cytokinesis. J. Cell Biol. 2018;217:3071–3089. doi: 10.1083/jcb.201802102. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 132.Balafouti S., Kabouraki M., Zachos G., Petsalaki E. Tension-sensitive LINC-RhoA signaling prevents chromatin bridge breakage in cytokinesis. EMBO J. 2025;44:5834–5859. doi: 10.1038/s44318-025-00565-3. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 133.Boutakoglou N., Petsalaki E., Balafouti S., Efthymiou D., Lilla S., Giatagana E.M., Zanivan S., Zachos G. beta-tubulin phosphorylation by Chk1 is required for normal spindle formation during cell division. Commun. Biol. 2026;9:608. doi: 10.1038/s42003-026-09862-x. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 134.Caldas G.V., Lynch T.R., Anderson R., Afreen S., Varma D., DeLuca J.G. The RZZ complex requires the N-terminus of KNL1 to mediate optimal Mad1 kinetochore localization in human cells. Open Biol. 2015;5:150160. doi: 10.1098/rsob.150160. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 135.Buffin E., Lefebvre C., Huang J., Gagou M.E., Karess R.E. Recruitment of Mad2 to the kinetochore requires the Rod/Zw10 complex. Curr. Biol. 2005;15:856–861. doi: 10.1016/j.cub.2005.03.052. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 136.Ball H.L., Myers J.S., Cortez D. ATRIP binding to replication protein A-single-stranded DNA promotes ATR-ATRIP localization but is dispensable for Chk1 phosphorylation. Mol. Biol. Cell. 2005;16:2372–2381. doi: 10.1091/mbc.e04-11-1006. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 137.Joo Y.K., Ramirez C., Kabeche L. A TRilogy of ATR’s Non-Canonical Roles Throughout the Cell Cycle and Its Relation to Cancer. Cancers. 2024;16:3536. doi: 10.3390/cancers16203536. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 138.Liu S., Ho C.K., Ouyang J., Zou L. Nek1 kinase associates with ATR-ATRIP and primes ATR for efficient DNA damage signaling. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA. 2013;110:2175–2180. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1217781110. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 139.Santaguida S., Amon A. Short- and long-term effects of chromosome mis-segregation and aneuploidy. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 2015;16:473–485. doi: 10.1038/nrm4025. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 140.Sdeor E., Okada H., Saad R., Ben-Yishay T., Ben-David U. Aneuploidy as a driver of human cancer. Nat. Genet. 2024;56:2014–2026. doi: 10.1038/s41588-024-01916-2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 141.Bond J., Woods C.G. Cytoskeletal genes regulating brain size. Curr. Opin. Cell Biol. 2006;18:95–101. doi: 10.1016/j.ceb.2005.11.004. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 142.Pease J.C., Tirnauer J.S. Mitotic spindle misorientation in cancer--out of alignment and into the fire. J. Cell Sci. 2011;124:1007–1016. doi: 10.1242/jcs.081406. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 143.Nogales E., Whittaker M., Milligan R.A., Downing K.H. High-resolution model of the microtubule. Cell. 1999;96:79–88. doi: 10.1016/s0092-8674(00)80961-7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 144.Lowe J., Li H., Downing K.H., Nogales E. Refined structure of alpha beta-tubulin at 3.5 A resolution. J. Mol. Biol. 2001;313:1045–1057. doi: 10.1006/jmbi.2001.5077. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 145.Sui H., Downing K.H. Structural basis of interprotofilament interaction and lateral deformation of microtubules. Structure. 2010;18:1022–1031. doi: 10.1016/j.str.2010.05.010. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 146.Chew Y.M., Cross R.A. Structural switching of tubulin in the microtubule lattice. Biochem. Soc. Trans. 2025;53:161–171. doi: 10.1042/BST20240360. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 147.Zhou J., Wang A., Song Y., Liu N., Wang J., Li Y., Liang X., Li G., Chu H., Wang H.W. Structural insights into the mechanism of GTP initiation of microtubule assembly. Nat. Commun. 2023;14:5980. doi: 10.1038/s41467-023-41615-w. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 148.Sulimenko V., Draberova E., Draber P. gamma-Tubulin in microtubule nucleation and beyond. Front. Cell Dev. Biol. 2022;10:880761. doi: 10.3389/fcell.2022.880761. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 149.Dumontet C., Jordan M.A. Microtubule-binding agents: A dynamic field of cancer therapeutics. Nat. Rev. Drug Discov. 2010;9:790–803. doi: 10.1038/nrd3253. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 150.Assuncao H.C., Silva P.M.A., Bousbaa H., Cidade H. Recent Advances in Microtubule Targeting Agents for Cancer Therapy. Molecules. 2025;30:3314. doi: 10.3390/molecules30163314. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 151.Yu C.C., Liu S.P., Hsu J.L., Hsu J.T., Kudryavtsev K.V., Guh J.H. KUD773, a phenylthiazole derivative, displays anticancer activity in human hormone-refractory prostate cancers through inhibition of tubulin polymerization and anti-Aurora A activity. J. Biomed. Sci. 2015;22:2. doi: 10.1186/s12929-014-0107-x. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 152.Pandey M.K., Gowda K., Sung S.S., Abraham T., Budak-Alpdogan T., Talamo G., Dovat S., Amin S. A novel dual inhibitor of microtubule and Bruton’s tyrosine kinase inhibits survival of multiple myeloma and osteoclastogenesis. Exp. Hematol. 2017;53:31–42. doi: 10.1016/j.exphem.2017.06.003. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 153.Lafanechere L. The microtubule cytoskeleton: An old validated target for novel therapeutic drugs. Front. Pharmacol. 2022;13:969183. doi: 10.3389/fphar.2022.969183. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 154.Groelly F.J., Fawkes M., Dagg R.A., Blackford A.N., Tarsounas M. Targeting DNA damage response pathways in cancer. Nat. Rev. Cancer. 2023;23:78–94. doi: 10.1038/s41568-022-00535-5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 155.Wagner J.M., Kaufmann S.H. Prospects for the Use of ATR Inhibitors to Treat Cancer. Pharmaceuticals. 2010;3:1311–1334. doi: 10.3390/ph3051311. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 156.Gralewska P., Gajek A., Marczak A., Rogalska A. Participation of the ATR/CHK1 pathway in replicative stress targeted therapy of high-grade ovarian cancer. J. Hematol. Oncol. 2020;13:39. doi: 10.1186/s13045-020-00874-6. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 157.Neizer-Ashun F., Bhattacharya R. Reality CHEK: Understanding the biology and clinical potential of CHK1. Cancer Lett. 2021;497:202–211. doi: 10.1016/j.canlet.2020.09.016. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Associated Data

This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

Data Availability Statement

No new data were created or analyzed in this study. Data sharing is not applicable to this article.


Articles from Biology are provided here courtesy of Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute (MDPI)

RESOURCES