Next Article in Journal
Osteopontin Splicing Isoforms Contribute to Endometriotic Proliferation, Migration, and Epithelial-Mesenchymal Transition in Endometrial Epithelial Cells
Next Article in Special Issue
Impact of Saccharomyces cerevisiae on the Field of Single-Molecule Biophysics
Previous Article in Journal
Comprehensive Analysis of Betula platyphylla Suk. PIF Gene Family and Their Potential Functions in Growth and Development
Previous Article in Special Issue
The GEM-GECO Calcium Indicator Is Useable in Ogataea parapolymorpha Yeast, but Aggravates Effects of Increased Cytosolic Calcium Levels
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
IJMS
Volume 23
Issue 23
10.3390/ijms232315327
ijms-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Review

The Anaphase-Promoting Complex/Cyclosome Is a Cellular Ageing Regulator

by
Xiangdong Hu
1,
Xuejiao Jin
1,
Xiuling Cao
1,* and
Beidong Liu
1,2,*
1
State Key Laboratory of Subtropical Silviculture, Zhejiang A&F University, Hangzhou 311300, China
2
Department of Chemistry and Molecular Biology, University of Gothenburg, 41390 Gothenburg, Sweden
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2022, 23(23), 15327; https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms232315327
Submission received: 27 October 2022 / Revised: 30 November 2022 / Accepted: 2 December 2022 / Published: 5 December 2022
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Yeast: Molecular and Cell Biology)
Browse Figure
Review Reports Versions Notes

Abstract

:
The anaphase-promoting complex/cyclosome (APC/C) is a complicated cellular component that plays significant roles in regulating the cell cycle process of eukaryotic organisms. The spatiotemporal regulation mechanisms of APC/C in distinct cell cycle transitions are no longer mysterious, and the components of this protein complex are gradually identified and characterized. Given the close relationship between the cell cycle and lifespan, it is urgent to understand the roles of APC/C in lifespan regulation, but this field still seems to have not been systematically summarized. Furthermore, although several reviews have reported the roles of APC/C in cancer, there are still gaps in the summary of its roles in other age-related diseases. In this review, we propose that the APC/C is a novel cellular ageing regulator based on its indispensable role in the regulation of lifespan and its involvement in age-associated diseases. This work provides an extensive review of aspects related to the underlying mechanisms of APC/C in lifespan regulation and how it participates in age-associated diseases. More comprehensive recognition and understanding of the relationship between APC/C and ageing and age-related diseases will increase the development of targeted strategies for human health.

1. Introduction

The ability of cells to replicate themselves accurately is crucial to the life and development of all organisms. One of the most important regulatory factors, the anaphase-promoting complex/cyclosome (APC/C), an E3 ubiquitin ligase that specifically targets cell cycle-related proteins for degradation, exhibits essential functions in the regulation of the eukaryotic cell cycle, particularly during anaphase entry and mitotic exit [1,2,3]. The subunits of APC/C are largely conserved from yeast to humans, principally organized into three subcomplexes: the catalytic core (APC2, APC10 and APC11), the tetratricopeptide repeat lobe (APC3, APC6, APC7 and APC8) and the platform (APC1, APC4, APC5 and APC15) subcomplex [4,5]. Two key APC/C activators, Cdc20 and Cdh1, which determine most of its substrate selectivity, control APC/C activity in a cell cycle-dependent manner [6]. In addition, inhibitors, the mitotic checkpoint complex (MCC) and phosphatases interact with the APC/C to spatially and temporally modulate its activity and ensure the accurate execution of mitotic events [7,8,9,10]. During the G1 phase, APC/CCdh1 is an active complex. With the accumulation of G1-cyclins, Cdh1 becomes phosphorylated and separates from the APC/C. This phosphorylation and APC/CCdh1 inactivity will be continued to anaphase [11]. From G2 to prophase, free APC/C is inactivated by its inhibitor Emi1, which associates with Cdc20 and prevents APC/C-Cdc20 binding [7]. At late prophase, Emi1 is proteolyzed, and RASSFA1 takes over the role of this inhibitor until late prometaphase, when the latter is also degraded [12]. Free APC/C is then phosphorylated by Polo-like kinase 1 (Plk1) and cyclin B/cdk1 [13]. At metaphase, APC/CCdc20 is still inactivated owing to the direct binding of the MCC. Once the spindle checkpoint is satisfied, the MCC is separated from APC/CCdc20, and this protein complex achieves its full activity and then induces the proteolysis of securin and cyclin B [3,8]. Degradation of securin actives separase and disassociates sister chromatids from each other by cleaving cohesin complexes, achieving metaphase to anaphase transition [14]. At the same time, continuous cyclin B degradation at anaphase induces dephosphorylation of Cdh1 and a decreased cyclin B activity, which is important for mitotic exit. Meanwhile, Cdc20 is degraded in an APC/CCdh1-dependent manner [3,11]. Thus, the APC/C is a key factor in the regulation of the cell cycle. With a deepening understanding of APC/C, however, it has been widely recognized that APC/C functions include more than mitosis.
Ageing, which is broadly defined as the progressive decline in homeostasis and functional integrity, has attracted great attention and has been a subject of curiosity throughout human history. People have reached some consensus on its hallmarks, such as cellular senescence, genome instability and loss of proteostasis [15,16]. Cellular senescence means the onset of body ageing for multicellular organisms but the end of their reproduction and even death for unicellular organisms. In yeast, various APC/C mutants cause different degrees of cell cycle arrest [17,18,19,20], which is a characteristic of senescent cells [21,22]. APC/C prevents chromosomal aneuploidy by precisely regulating cell cycle progression [23,24], thus, maintaining genomic stability. As a member of the ubiquitin-proteasome system (UPS), the APC/C also plays an important role in the proteostasis network [25]. Additionally, the insufficient function of the APC/C has been observed in ageing-related disease models, including Alzheimer’s disease (AD), premature ageing and cancer models [26,27,28]. Thus, the APC/C seems to have a great relevance with ageing.
This article focuses on the relationship between the APC/C and cellular senescence and reviews recent discoveries that have provided new insights into the potential regulatory mechanisms of the APC/C in ageing and its role in ageing-related diseases.

2. The Normal Operation of the APC/C Is Crucial to the Lifespan

On the basis of comprehensive knowledge of this unicellular organism and advanced tools for research into its physiology, budding yeast has become an ideal model organism to study ageing mechanisms in recent years. Sirtuins, mTOR signalling and dietary restrictions are considered key conserved longevity components from yeast to vertebrates [29,30,31]. Moreover, many cellular ageing regulators remain to be discovered.
The APC/C shows great relevance to genome instability and cancer [23], revealing a potential role for APC/C in ageing. In fact, deficient APC/C subunits (apc5CA, apc9∆, apc10∆ or cdc26∆) led to various degrees of shortened replicative lifespan (RLS) in yeast [32]. The apc10∆ mutant caused the most serious lifespan defect, probably due to its crucial role in the catalytic core and substrate recognition of the APC/C [33]. Interestingly, the lifespan of the apc5CA apc10∆ double mutant was shorter than either the apc5CA or apc10∆ mutant alone, and overexpression of APC5 reduced yeast lifespan [32]. Apc5p is a strict stoichiometric component of the APC/C since reduced or elevated levels of Apc5p were found to reduce the yeast lifespan.
In addition to yeast, APC/C deficiency exacerbates ageing in other species. For instance, the absence of CDC26 destroyed the human oocyte maturation process and led to oocyte ageing, while these defects were partially rescued by overexpression of Cdc26p [34]. Mice lacking Cdh1 entered replicative ageing prematurely due to the stabilization of Ets2 and subsequent activation of p16Ink4a expression and caused early lethality, revealing an essential role for APC/C in maintaining the RLS of murine embryonic fibroblasts [35]. Interestingly, abnormal activation of the APC/C in mammalian cells also induced ageing, similar to its effect on yeast reported in a previous study [32]. Kuo et al. found that premature activation of the APC/C by T-lymphotropic virus type 1 Tax induced rapid senescence independent of pRb or p53 activity [36]. Mitosis skipping mediated by the p53-dependent premature activation of APC/CCdh1 was necessary and sufficient for senescence induction [37]. Moreover, loss of Emi1-dependent APC/C inhibition elicited DNA damage-induced senescence [38]. Cdh1 is essential for the functions of APC/C in neuronal survival [39] and is tightly regulated by its own degradation, which depends upon two RXXL-type destruction boxes [40]. In human cells, the APC/C inhibitor MAD2L2 sequesters Cdh1 to prevent premature APC/C activation prior to anaphase onset, thereby contributing to mitotic fidelity [41]. Taken together, these studies showed that the normal function of the APC/C is of great significance in cellular senescence from yeasts to humans.
Cell differentiation is an essential process for the growth, development, reproduction, and longevity of all multicellular organisms [42]. The APC/C is also involved in regulating this process by mediating cell cycle withdrawal and promoting certain differentiation-related license factors synthesis [43]. By degradation of Skp2 to stabilize p27, which in turn downregulates Cdks activities, APC/CCdh1 elongates the G1 phase or G0 arrest to coordinate cell type-specific differentiation processes [44]. In response to TGF-β (transforming growth factor beta) stimulation, Smad3 can recruit APC/CCdh1 to ubiquitinate SnoN (Ski-related novel protein N), leading to its degradation and activation of TGF-β target genes and growth inhibition [45]. APC/CCdh1 also targets Id (inhibitor of differentiation/DNA binding) proteins, leading to activation of bHLH (basic helix-loop-helix) transcription factors and its target gene expression, which mediate differentiation in various cell types [46]. However, how the cell cycle and cell cycle-independent functions of APC/C are regulated during development remains poorly understood.

3. Mechanisms of the APC/C in Regulating Lifespan

To our knowledge, the APC/C regulates lifespan through at least the following two mechanisms: maintaining genomic stability and regulating the stress response (Figure 1).

3.1. Maintaining Genomic Stability

Genomic instability is a commonly accepted feature of ageing [15]. During normal ageing, genome stability and integrity are continuously challenged by numerous endogenous genotoxins, including DNA replication errors, reactive oxygen species and spontaneous hydrolytic reactions, as well as exogenous threats, such as chemical, physical, and biological agents [47]. Organisms have evolved a complex network of DNA repair mechanisms to deal with this damage collectively [48], but these repair mechanisms appear to be defective during cellular ageing [49]. Some premature ageing syndromes, such as Bloom syndrome and Werner syndrome, have been reported to be related to DNA damage accumulation [50]. In addition, genomic instability is associated with nuclear lamina deficits and aged mitochondrial DNA mutations [51].
Studies have shown that Cdh1 deficiency in mammalian cells caused genomic instability, such as structural and numerical chromosomal aberrations in mouse embryonic fibroblasts and chromosome separation and cytokinesis aberrations in primary human cells [52,53]. However, the exact causes of these phenotypes are unclear. Recently, several protein regulators of genomic stability and DNA damage repairs, such as Rad17, ubiquitin-specific protease 1, and Claspin, as well as the proteins G9a and Glucagon-like peptide, have been shown to be bona fide APC/CCdh1 substrates [54,55,56,57]. While Cdh1 overexpression improves emotion and cognitive-related behaviours in global cerebral ischemia rats, indicating that Cdh1 abundance exerts a neuroprotective effect [58]. Endoreduplication is a process of nuclear genome replication in the absence of mitosis, which leads to elevated nuclear gene content and polyploidy [59]. APC/CCdh1 is re-activated after the S phase resulting in reduced Cdk activity, thereby mediating the transition of mitotic cycles to endoreduplication cycles [60]. Altering SlCCS52A (ortholog of Cdh1 in plants) expression in either a positive or negative manner impacts the extent of endoreduplication in fruit and affects fruit size [61]. MAD2L2 plays an important role in several processes, such as DNA double-strand break repair, translesion synthesis and mitosis [62,63]. It is not only the APC/C regulator but also the substrate, which is rapidly degraded by APC/CCdc20 at the onset of anaphase, releasing Cdh1 to activate the dephosphorylated APC/C [41]. Therefore, it is likely that more unidentified APC/C substrates play roles in DNA damage repair and genome integrity, further underlining the importance and relevance of APC/C in maintaining cellular genomic stability.
In addition, activation of APC/CCdh1 was significant to the DNA damage-induced G2 checkpoint in chicken cells [64] and later observed in human cells [56]. Although APC/CCdh1 was active only during the G1 phase and mitotic exit, it was reactivated in the G2 phase in response to genotoxic stress to target the mitotic kinase Plk1, which shows clear potential for facilitating aberrant chromosome separation and DNA replication to delay degradation and prevent mitotic entry until damaged DNA has been repaired [56]. In APC/CCdh1-deficient cells, mitotic entry can still be delayed because of other existing G2-phase DNA damage checkpoints [56], and the APC/CCdh1-dependent checkpoint is not functional in these cells. Thus, cells with impaired DNA may enter mitosis more easily but with more risks, eventually leading to genetic lesions.
Recent studies have suggested that the APC/C plays a role in chromatin assembly and histone modifications [17,65], which are both required for DNA damage repair [66,67]. Based on the genetic interactions between the APC/C with Asf1 and CAF-1 mutants [68], the combinations lead to worsened phenotypes and can be reversed by elevating the expression of Asf1 or any CAF-1 subunits; the APC/C may be involved in DNA damage repair in a chromatin assembly dependent manner. In budding yeast, multiple APC/C subunit mutants showed reduced levels of H3K56Ac, H3K9Ac and H3K79Me [65]. H3K56Ac is important for DNA repair and histone deposition [69], H3K9Ac is also required for transcriptional activation [70], and H3K79Me is involved in various activities, such as the regulation of transcription, the cell-cycle checkpoint, DNA repair and cellular development [71]. Thus, the reduced levels of these modifications owing to an impaired APC/C could have a great influence on DNA repair, chromatin and chromosome structure, and transcription. Moreover, the histone acetyltransferase (HAT) GCN5, which is involved in centromere maintenance, DNA repair and transcriptional elongation [72], interacts with the APC/C genetically and functionally and has been shown to be targeted by the APC/C for degradation during the M/G1 transition [65]. Except in yeast, the APC/C has been reported to be involved in the mitotic turnover of TRRAP (TRansformation domain-Associated Protein), a common component of the HAT complex [73].
The molecular mechanisms that determine yeast lifespan have been extensively studied, and one of the important factors has been found to be Fob1 [74,75]. Fob1 antagonistically interacts with Sir2, leading to the accumulation of extrachromosomal ribosomal DNA circles (ERCs) [75], which were the first asymmetrically inherited form of molecular damage identified to cause ageing in yeast. Studies have demonstrated that APC/C plays a role in rDNA silencing, assembly and segregation [76,77]. Recently, Fob1 has been identified as a bona fide APC/C substrate [78]. Deletion of FOB1 suppressed APC/C-mutant phenotypes, including decreased RLS, increased the rDNA recombination rate and the number of cell cycle defects [78], suggesting that the APC/C maintains genomic stability and, thus, promotes longevity, partially owing, at least, to the degradation of Fob1.

3.2. Regulating the Stress Response

Increasing evidence demonstrates that stress, such as genotoxic and oxidative stress, shows a strong relationship with ageing [79,80]. Organisms evolve a series of repair mechanisms to prevent long-term damage, but the balance between the stress response and repair pathways is disrupted during ageing, causing an increased rate of ageing and age-related pathologies [81]. In addition, previous studies have indicated that many of the pathways that modulate stress resistance (such as the PKA, mTOR and Sch9 pathways) also play essential roles in lifespan regulation [31,82].
The Forkhead box (FOX) transcription factor family exhibits a conserved function in the regulation of stress responses and the cell cycle [83]. The APC/C genetically interacts with Fkh proteins, as indicated by the deletion of FKH1 and FKH2, exacerbating the effects of APC/C-mutant phenotypes, such as reduced lifespan and increased oxidative and temperature stress sensitivity, which can be reversed by increasing FKH expression [84,85]. Owing to their genetic redundancy, only deletion of both FKH1 and FKH2 reduces yeast lifespan in a Forkhead box O (FOXO)-like manner [84]. The Fkh1 protein is degraded specifically during mitosis in a proteasome- and APC/CCdc20-dependent manner, while a stable Fkh1 mutant exhibits increased stress sensitivity and genomic instability and has been associated with a decreased normal lifespan [85]. In fact, targeting of Fox proteins by the APC/C is a conserved process, as indicated by the mammalian Forkhead box M1 (FOXM1) also being identified as a target of the APC/CCdh1 during late mitosis and the early G1 phase for degradation, which is important for regulated entry into the S phase [86].
Several studies have shown that APC/C-defect mutants are sensitive to multiple stresses. In budding yeast, the cdh1∆ mutant was sensitive to caffeine, ethanol and salt [87], and cells lacking CDC26 were sensitive to elevated temperature [18]. The accumulation of Hsl1 and Clb2, two APC/C substrates that can disrupt MAPK pathway signalling, induced stress sensitivity, indicating that the APC/C may enhance stress resistance by inhibiting inhibitory signalling [87]. Moreover, the APC/C participates in an acute response to protein-damaging stress by mediating ubiquitination and degradation of heat shock factor 2 (HSF2) and supports cell survival in response to endoplasmic reticulum stress by Cdh1-dependent degradation of its substrates [88,89]. In Caenorhabditis elegans, multiple APC/C loss-of-function mutants showed supersensitive phenotype to aldicarb [90], whose responsiveness can be indirectly reflected the muscle activity [91], indicating APC/C can inhibit muscle excitation at the neuromuscular junction.
The list of APC/C substrates continues to increase, as does the number of discoveries showing its involvement in cellular functions. Therefore, the continued study of APC/C substrates involved in regulating lifespan will provide new insight into the role of these substrates in cellular ageing.

4. The APC/C in Ageing-Related Diseases

The decline in biological function during ageing is a major trigger for most late-onset diseases, such as cancer, neurodegenerative diseases, cardiovascular disease and diabetes [16,92]. Thus, comprehensive knowledge of the pathogenesis and characteristics of these ageing-related diseases and the development of novel treatment strategies targeting them are very important for life- and healthspan extension.

4.1. Neurodegenerative Diseases

Despite various existing clinical manifestations and specifically pathogenic genes, many common neurodegenerative diseases share similar molecular mechanisms. Prototypical examples include Alzheimer’s disease, Huntington’s disease, amyotrophic lateral sclerosis and Parkinson’s disease, all of which contain amyloid inclusion bodies formed by the aggregation of mutated or misfolded proteins during their accumulation because of the diminished capacity of the cellular UPS [93,94]. Considering its role, the UPS is not only a precipitating factor but also a solution, at least in part, in neurodegenerative diseases.
In recent years, emerging evidence has led to the identification of additional novel roles for the APC/C, an E3 ubiquitin ligase of the UPS, in the nervous system and Alzheimer’s disease (AD). Firstly, the APC/C was shown to regulate a series of biological processes in the nervous system, such as axonal morphogenesis [95], neuronal differentiation [96], neuronal cell cycle exit [46], neurogenesis [97], and neuronal survival [35]. TGF-β/Smad2 signalling recruits APC/CCdh1 to degree its substrate SnoN, thus, inhibiting axon growth [95]. Furthermore, two APC/CCdh1 substrates, Id2 and Smurf1, are also involved in axon growth regulation [46,98]. Various APC/CCdh1 substrates have been shown to be involved in the regulation of the cell cycle of neuronal progenitors, such as E2F3A, Ck1 (casein kinase 1) δ and Skp2, whose downregulation is responsible for maintaining the cell cycle exit [99,100,101]. Secondly, the deregulation of APC/C and accumulation of its substrates have been related to AD, as it was shown to be involved in erroneous cell cycle re-entry [102], oxidative stress [103] and excitotoxicity [104]. Cyclin B1 is a cell cycle protein, and it has been shown to accumulate in neurons in AD brains [105]. Maestre et al. reported that Cdk5 phosphorylates Cdh1 and modulates cyclin B1 stability under excitotoxic conditions, thus, inducing neuronal apoptosis in primary culture [102]. Previous studies have shown that there is oxidative damage in AD patients’ brains [106]. The inhibition of Cdh1 causes an increased PFKFB3 (6-phosphofructo-2-kinase/fructose-2,6-bisphosphatase-3) levels, thus, leading to the upregulation of glycolysis. Less glucose is used for the pentose-phosphate pathway, and this causes oxidative stress and apoptosis in neurons [107]. In addition, excitotoxic stimulus stabilizes PFKFB3 by inhibiting APC/CCdh1 and thereby causes neurodegeneration [103]. Compared to healthy individuals in similar age groups, increased glutamate levels are observed in the cerebrospinal fluid of AD patients [108]. Downregulation of APC/CCdh1 causes an accumulation of its substrate glutaminase, which catalyses the conversion of glutamine into glutamate [109]. High levels of glutamate overstimulate the NMDA (N-methyl-D-aspartate) receptor, which subsequently leads to an increase in Ca2+, thus, causing excitotoxicity and neuronal death [110,111]. Presently, the glutamatergic system is one of the main targets for AD treatment [112]. Finally, it has been reported that oligomeric Aβ, a peptide related to AD, induced proteasome-dependent degradation of cdh1 in vivo in the mouse hippocampus and in vitro in cultured neurons [113]. Furthermore, lower levels of cdh1 have been observed in APP/PS1 mice (an experimental model of AD) compared to age-matched wildtype mice [113]. These studies give strong evidence for the direct involvement of APC/CCdh1 in AD and provide a new clue to explore the pathogenic mechanism and treatment strategy for this neurodegenerative disease.

4.2. Cancer

Cancer is one of the leading causes of death worldwide. Although carcinogenesis can occur in any age group, cancer disproportionately jeopardizes individuals 65 years of age and older. The defective operation of the APC/C usually triggers inaccurate mitotic checkpoint signalling, abnormal mitotic exit and uncontrolled genome replication, eventually causing genomic instability, a widely recognized cancer hallmark [114]. Therefore, an increasing number of studies have unsurprisingly identified an essential direct or indirect role for APC/C in cancer.
Deregulation of the APC/C drives oncogenesis. A total of 132 APC/C subunit missense mutations have been identified in cancer, and some of these mutations affect the degree of chromosomal instability, causing cancer cells to adapt during tumour evolution gradually [115]. The expression of APC/C subunits is highly heterogeneous in different cancers. For example, the expression of APC3/CDC27 was significantly elevated in gastric cancer but downregulated in several breast cancer cell lines [116,117]. Interestingly, two APC/C activators play opposing roles in tumorigenesis, with Cdh1 and Cdc20 identified as a tumour suppressor and an oncoprotein, respectively [118]. Downregulation of Cdh1 has been reported in different tumour types, such as prostate, liver, ovary, brain and breast cancers [56,119]. Heterozygous mice lacking Cdh1 showed an increased probability of developing spontaneous tumours [52], further supporting a role for Cdh1 as a tumour suppressor. In contrast to Cdh1, elevated Cdc20 expression has been reported in many cancer cell lines and primary tissues. Overexpression of Cdc20 prevented the inhibition of the spindle assembly checkpoint (SAC) to mediate the APC/C and allowed cell exit from mitosis prematurely [120], eventually leading to genomic instability. Importantly, the ablation of Cdc20 in a mouse model resulted in the efficient regression of skin tumours in vivo [121], confirming the rationale for considering Cdc20 to be an oncoprotein. Moreover, defects in APC/C inhibitory mechanisms led to the occurrence of human diseases, especially cancer [122]. Dysregulation of endogenous APC/C inhibitors, such as Emi1 and Mad2, has been found in various tumour types [123,124]. In addition, recent data also showed that MAD2L2 was significantly upregulated in triple-negative breast cancers and MDA-MB-157 triple-negative cell lines [125].
In addition, many APC/C substrates are implicated in tumorigenesis. The timely destruction of Securin by APC/C is necessary for the transition of metaphase to anaphase during mitosis, and its overexpression can result in aneuploidy [126], which is a hallmark of cancer cells [127]. Securin also serves as a strong prognostic maker in human breast cancer [128], and its accumulation indicates a poor patient outcome [129]. FOXM1 is a member of the FOX family of transcription factors and primarily contributes to the regulation of cell cycle and proliferation [130] and usually accumulates in rapidly dividing cells [131,132]. FOXM1 has achieved great attention for its role in tumour development. Erroneously elevated levels of FOXM1 have been linked to improper cell proliferation, inhibition of apoptotic pathways and cancer metastasis [133,134,135]. In addition, overexpression of FOXM1 is a significant prognostic marker for worsened patient outcomes [136,137]. The Aurora A and B kinases are serine/threonine kinases that are involved in regulating the accurate and equal segregation of genomic material during the cell cycle [138]. Although they have different targets, both of them phosphorylate proteins that promote chromatid segregation during cell division [139]. Elevated levels of Aurora A and B induce chromosomal instability and oncogenesis [107] and have been detected in multiple malignant tumours, such as breast, colorectal and pancreatic cancers [140,141,142]. Overexpression of Aurora A overrides the cell cycle arrest induced by SAC and causes mitotic slippage [143], which is a common phenotype for cancer cells to avoid cell death when treated with mitotic blockers [144]. In addition, the accumulation of Aurora A causes inhibitory phosphorylation of p73, a tumour suppressor with similar functions to p53 [145], further inducing abnormal apoptotic pathways and promoting mitotic slippage [146]. Plk1 is a serine/threonine kinase that plays great roles in the progression and withdrawal of mitosis and is implicated in tumour development [147,148]. In breast cancer, oropharyngeal carcinomas and non-small cell lung cancer, Plk1 is considered a prognostic marker for worsened patient outcomes [149,150,151]. Plk1 depletion in cancer cells induces apoptosis [152], while Plk1 accumulation promotes tumour formation induced by DNA damage [153]. These APC/C substrates have commonly been considered in isolation rather than as a whole population. When combined with the influences of multiple accumulated APC/C substrates on cell biology, such as impaired apoptotic pathways, dysregulation of cell cycle and increased genome instability, the tumour is not far away.
Considering its indispensable role in regulating mitotic progression and tumorigenesis, the APC/C seems to be an attractive therapeutic target for cancer treatment. Apcin and pro-TAME (the prodrug form of tosyl-l-arginine methyl ester) directly inhibited APC/C activity and, thus, were used in combination to suppress tumour cell growth in diverse osteosarcoma and myeloma cancer cell lines [154,155,156]. Many new drugs are being explored to determine their functions as APC/C inhibitors. For example, curcumin has been reported to inhibit pancreatic cell proliferation, probably by downregulating the expression of Cdc20 [157]. Another study showed that a triterpene mixture extracted from the mushroom Poria cocos suppressed the migration of pancreatic cancer cells, coinciding with decreased Cdc20 expression [158].

4.3. Premature Ageing

Premature ageing syndrome is a rare disease in which certain physiological characteristics associated with normal ageing manifest at an early age; these aberrations include telomere attrition, genome instability and defective stem cell homeostasis during disease development [159,160].
Recent research suggested an unexpected role for the APC/C activator Cdc20 in human premature ageing syndrome [26]. A patient presented with a series of premature ageing phenotypes, including atrophic skin, early hair loss and lack of haematopoietic stem cells, as well as molecular function defects, including SAC failure and chromosomal instability. A de novo heterozygous germline missense mutation, c.856C>A (p. R286S), in CDC20 was identified by exome sequencing. CDC20 bound to BUBR1 in the formation of the MCC, and APC/CCdc20 activity was inhibited through the MCC. Interestingly, this variant showed decreased binding affinity for BUBR1, but the APC/CCdc20 and MCC interaction was not affected. Moreover, the heterozygous knockout of CDC20 did not induce SAC failure, but knock-in of mutant CDC20 induced SAC failure and random aneuploidy in cultured cells, indicating that the pathogenicity of this p. R286S CDC20 variant could probably be attributed to an imbalance between APC/CCdc20 and MCC activity. This finding associated the APC/C with premature ageing for the first time, but it will not be the last discovery showing this relationship.

5. Concluding Remarks and Future Perspectives

In the past few years, significant progress in understanding cell cycle regulation and the indispensable role of APC/C in this process has been achieved. However, only a few of the cell cycle-independent functions of the APC/C in cells have been identified. Therefore, we propose the view that the APC/C is a cellular ageing regulator based on the following points: First, scheduled regulation of the APC/C is crucial to lifespan maintenance. Second, the APC/C is a novel regulator of lifespan, likely because it maintains genomic stability and regulates the stress response. Finally, increasing evidence indicates the direct involvement of APC/C in age-associated diseases, including cancer, AD and premature ageing.
A previous study indicated that the apc5CA apc10∆ double mutant led to a shorter lifespan than either the apc5CA or apc10∆ mutant alone, suggesting that these two subunits probably act in parallel to affect lifespan. To explore this possibility, future work should be directed into investigating whether the APC/C subunits play different roles independent of the APC/C protein complex. Further exploration to determine whether other APC/C subunit mutants can shorten their lifespan is imperative. In particular, the differences in the degree of lifespan reduction due to different gene mutants and double mutants require further investigation. With these results, we will be able to determine whether each APC/C subunit is indispensable for lifespan maintenance and whether subcomplexes affect lifespan independent of the APC/C holoenzyme.
The identification of novel APC/C substrates remains a crucial and active field of research and is essential to advance our knowledge and understanding of its functions, including its regulatory patterns and roles in ageing and related diseases. In many cases, the connection between APC/C and ageing is largely based on the roles of APC/C substrates in lifespan and age-related diseases. Future work should focus on enhancing our understanding of the structural architecture of the APC/C and characterizing the motifs in Cdh1 and Cdc20 critical for substrate-specific recognition and binding. With this information, we can construct a comprehensive APC/C substrate library and classify the substrates according to cellular functions. This work will further expand the APC/C repertoire of known functions to confirm its crucial roles in cellular ageing and other cell cycle-independent processes.
Recent studies have elucidated APC/C functions in the nervous system and DNA damage repair. Diverse protein regulators implicated in DNA damage repair and involved in the maintenance of a stable genome have been identified as APC/C substrates. Not surprisingly, deregulation of the APC/C seems to be associated with AD pathophysiology. Recent evidence has demonstrated that the accumulation of APC/C substrates, such as cyclin B1, PFKFB3, and glutaminase, has significant implications in AD with respect to erroneous cell cycle re-entry, neurodegeneration, oxidative stress and apoptosis in neurons. Furthermore, oligomeric Aβ and glutamate excitotoxicity both reduced Cdh1 levels via proteasome-dependent degradation, inactivating APC/CCdh1 activity with subsequent APC/C substrate accumulation. Based on the similarity of pathogenic mechanisms, it is possible that certain unidentified APC/C substrates accumulate in other neurodegenerative diseases because of deregulated APC/C activity. Future studies to elucidate all the functions of APC/CCdc20 and APC/CCdh1 in diseases and health will be indispensable for determining whether these complexes are valuable therapeutic targets for treating AD and other neurodegenerative diseases.
Increasing evidence indicates that the deregulation of APC/C activity through the mutations of its core subunits or dysregulation of its activators and inhibitors is related to tumorigenesis. A large number of mutations in APC/C subunits have been found in various cancer tissues, and the expression of these mutants is highly heterogeneous. Importantly, two APC/C coactivators play contrasting roles; that is, Cdh1 and Cdc20 function as a tumour suppressor and an oncoprotein, respectively. In fact, Cdh1 can inhibit Cdc20 degradation; thus, APC/C tumorigenic impacts are potential results of imbalanced regulation between these two proteins. Future work should be aimed at elucidating the precise molecular details of carcinogenesis caused by APC/C dysregulation. Further investigation into the causal relations between these APC/C subunits, either individually or collectively and tumorigenesis is also imperative. In addition, accumulating evidence suggests that the APC/C is an attractive therapeutic target for cancer treatment. Future work should be aimed at discovering additional novel potent APC/C inhibitors that can be validated in vivo for designing and developing prospective therapeutic strategies for diverse cancers.
Taken together, APC/C is undoubtedly a novel cellular ageing regulator owing to its significant role in lifespan and age-related diseases. Future work should be aimed at deepening our understanding of the physiological role played by APC/C in these cellular processes, and through the interactions that are confirmed, the repertoire of APC/C functions will be expanded, including those related to its crucial roles in cellular ageing.

Author Contributions

Research idea development and conceptualization by X.C. and B.L.; writing and main draft preparation by X.H. and X.J.; writing—reviewing and editing by X.C. and X.J.; figures drawing by X.H. and X.C.; visualization and supervision by X.J. and B.L.. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by grants from the National Natural Science Foundation of China (32000387) to X.C., Scientific Research Foundation of Zhejiang A&F University (2021LFR053) to X.J., as well as the Swedish Cancer Fund (Cancerfonden) [19 0069] and the Swedish Research Council (Vetenskapsrådet) [VR 2019-03604] to B.L.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

The data presented in this study are available in this paper.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Morgan, D.O. Regulation of the APC and the exit from mitosis. Nat. Cell Biol. 1999, 1, E47–E53. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Peters, J.M. The anaphase promoting complex/cyclosome: A machine designed to destroy. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 2006, 7, 644–656. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Sivakumar, S.; Gorbsky, G.J. Spatiotemporal regulation of the anaphase-promoting complex in mitosis. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 2015, 16, 82–94. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  4. Chang, L.F.; Zhang, Z.; Yang, J.; McLaughlin, S.H.; Barford, D. Molecular architecture and mechanism of the anaphase-promoting complex. Nature 2014, 513, 388–393. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  5. Acquaviva, C.; Pines, J. The anaphase-promoting complex/cyclosome: APC/C. J. Cell Sci. 2006, 119, 2401–2404. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  6. Visintin, R.; Prinz, S.; Amon, A. CDC20 and CDH1: A family of substrate-specific activators of APC-dependent proteolysis. Science 1997, 278, 460–463. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Reimann, J.D.; Freed, E.; Hsu, J.Y.; Kramer, E.R.; Peters, J.M.; Jackson, P.K. Emi1 is a mitotic regulator that interacts with Cdc20 and inhibits the anaphase promoting complex. Cell 2001, 105, 645–655. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  8. 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. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Rudner, A.D.; Murray, A.W. Phosphorylation by Cdc28 activates the Cdc20-dependent activity of the anaphase-promoting complex. J. Cell Biol. 2000, 149, 1377–1390. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  10. Peters, J.M. The anaphase-promoting complex: Proteolysis in mitosis and beyond. Mol. Cell 2002, 9, 931–943. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Castro, A.; Bernis, C.; Vigneron, S.; Labbé, J.C.; Lorca, T. The anaphase-promoting complex: A key factor in the regulation of cell cycle. Oncogene 2005, 24, 314–325. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  12. Song, M.S.; Song, S.J.; Ayad, N.G.; Chang, J.S.; Lee, J.H.; Hong, H.K.; Lee, H.; Choi, N.; Kim, J.; Kim, H.; et al. The tumour suppressor RASSF1A regulates mitosis by inhibiting the APC-Cdc20 complex. Nat. Cell Biol. 2004, 6, 129–137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Moshe, Y.; Boulaire, J.; Pagano, M.; Hershko, A. Role of Polo-like kinase in the degradation of early mitotic inhibitor 1, a regulator of the anaphase promoting complex/cyclosome. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2004, 101, 7937–7942. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  14. Nasmyth, K. Separating sister chromatids. Trends Biochem. Sci. 1999, 24, 98–104. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Lopez-Otin, C.; Blasco, M.A.; Partridge, L.; Serrano, M.; Kroemer, G. The hallmarks of aging. Cell 2013, 153, 1194–1217. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  16. Kennedy, B.K.; Berger, S.L.; Brunet, A.; Campisi, J.; Cuervo, A.M.; Epel, E.S.; Franceschi, C.; Lithgow, G.J.; Morimoto, R.I.; Pessin, J.E.; et al. Geroscience: Linking aging to chronic disease. Cell 2014, 159, 709–713. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  17. Harkness, T.A.; Davies, G.F.; Ramaswamy, V.; Arnason, T.G. The ubiquitin-dependent targeting pathway in Saccharomyces cerevisiae plays a critical role in multiple chromatin assembly regulatory steps. Genetics 2002, 162, 615–632. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Hartwell, L.H.; Mortimer, R.K.; Culotti, J.; Culotti, M. Genetic control of the cell division cycle in yeast: V. genetic analysis of cdc mutants. Genetics 1973, 74, 267–286. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Heichman, K.A.; Roberts, J.M. The yeast CDC16 and CDC27 genes restrict DNA replication to once per cell cycle. Cell 1996, 85, 39–48. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  20. Leverson, J.D.; Joazeiro, C.A.; Page, A.M.; Huang, H.; Hieter, P.; Hunter, T. The APC11 RING-H2 finger mediates E2-dependent ubiquitination. Mol. Biol. Cell 2000, 11, 2315–2325. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Gorgoulis, V.; Adams, P.D.; Alimonti, A.; Bennett, D.C.; Bischof, O.; Bishop, C.; Campisi, J.; Collado, M.; Evangelou, K.; Ferbeyre, G.; et al. Cellular senescence: Defining a path forward. Cell 2019, 179, 813–827. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  22. Hernandez-Segura, A.; Nehme, J.; Demaria, M. Hallmarks of cellular senescence. Trends Cell Biol. 2018, 28, 436–453. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  23. Naylor, R.M.; van Deursen, J.M. Aneuploidy in cancer and aging. Annu. Rev. Genet. 2016, 50, 45–66. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  24. Wang, H.; Feng, K.; Wang, Q.; Deng, H. Reciprocal interaction between SIRT6 and APC/C regulates genomic stability. Sci. Rep. 2021, 11, 14253. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  25. Labbadia, J.; Morimoto, R.I. The biology of proteostasis in aging and disease. Annu. Rev. Biochem. 2015, 84, 435–464. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  26. Fujita, H.; Sasaki, T.; Miyamoto, T.; Akutsu, S.N.; Sato, S.; Mori, T.; Nakabayashi, K.; Hata, K.; Suzuki, H.; Kosaki, K.; et al. Premature aging syndrome showing random chromosome number instabilities with CDC20 mutation. Aging Cell 2020, 19, e13251. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Fuchsberger, T.; Lloret, A.; Vina, J. New functions of APC/C ubiquitin ligase in the nervous system and its role in Alzheimer’s disease. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2017, 18, 1057. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  28. Wang, Q.; Moyret-Lalle, C.; Couzon, F.; Surbiguet-Clippe, C.; Saurin, J.C.; Lorca, T.; Navarro, C.; Puisieux, A. Alterations of anaphase-promoting complex genes in human colon cancer cells. Oncogene 2003, 22, 1486–1490. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  29. Wasko, B.M.; Kaeberlein, M. Yeast replicative aging: A paradigm for defining conserved longevity interventions. FEMS Yeast Res. 2014, 14, 148–159. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  30. Khan, A.H.; Zou, Z.; Xiang, Y.; Chen, S.; Tian, X.L. Conserved signaling pathways genetically associated with longevity across the species. Biochim. Biophys. Acta Mol. Basis Dis. 2019, 1865, 1745–1755. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Kaeberlein, M. Lessons on longevity from budding yeast. Nature 2010, 464, 513–519. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  32. Harkness, T.A.; Shea, K.A.; Legrand, C.; Brahmania, M.; Davies, G.F. A functional analysis reveals dependence on the anaphase-promoting complex for prolonged life span in yeast. Genetics 2004, 168, 759–774. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  33. Passmore, L.A.; McCormack, E.A.; Au, S.W.; Paul, A.; Willison, K.R.; Harper, J.W.; Barford, D. Doc1 mediates the activity of the anaphase-promoting complex by contributing to substrate recognition. EMBO J. 2003, 22, 786–796. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  34. Li, L.; Xia, Y.; Yang, Y.; Zhang, W.; Yan, H.; Yin, P.; Li, K.; Chen, Y.; Lu, L.; Tong, G. CDC26 is a key factor in human oocyte aging. Hum. Reprod. 2021, 36, 3095–3107. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  35. Li, M.; Shin, Y.H.; Hou, L.; Huang, X.; Wei, Z.; Klann, E.; Zhang, P. The adaptor protein of the anaphase promoting complex Cdh1 is essential in maintaining replicative lifespan and in learning and memory. Nat. Cell Biol. 2008, 10, 1083–1089. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  36. Kuo, Y.L.; Giam, C.Z. Activation of the anaphase promoting complex by HTLV-1 tax leads to senescence. EMBO J. 2006, 25, 1741–1752. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  37. Johmura, Y.; Shimada, M.; Misaki, T.; Naiki-Ito, A.; Miyoshi, H.; Motoyama, N.; Ohtani, N.; Hara, E.; Nakamura, M.; Morita, A.; et al. Necessary and sufficient role for a mitosis skip in senescence induction. Mol. Cell 2014, 55, 73–84. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  38. Verschuren, E.W.; Ban, K.H.; Masek, M.A.; Lehman, N.L.; Jackson, P.K. Loss of Emi1-dependent anaphase-promoting complex/cyclosome inhibition deregulates E2F target expression and elicits DNA damage-induced senescence. Mol. Cell Biol. 2007, 27, 7955–7965. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  39. Almeida, A. Regulation of APC/C-Cdh1 and its function in neuronal survival. Mol. Neurobiol. 2012, 46, 547–554. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  40. Listovsky, T.; Oren, Y.S.; Yudkovsky, Y.; Mahbubani, H.M.; Weiss, A.M.; Lebendiker, M.; Brandeis, M. Mammalian Cdh1/Fzr mediates its own degradation. EMBO J. 2004, 23, 1619–1626. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Listovsky, T.; Sale, J.E. Sequestration of CDH1 by MAD2L2 prevents premature APC/C activation prior to anaphase onset. J. Cell Biol. 2013, 203, 87–100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  42. Sánchez Alvarado, A.; Yamanaka, S. Rethinking differentiation: Stem cells, regeneration, and plasticity. Cell 2014, 157, 110–119. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  43. Qiao, X.; Zhang, L.; Gamper, A.M.; Fujita, T.; Wan, Y. APC/C-Cdh1: From cell cycle to cellular differentiation and genomic integrity. Cell Cycle 2010, 9, 3904–3912. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Wei, W.; Ayad, N.G.; Wan, Y.; Zhang, G.J.; Kirschner, M.W.; Kaelin, W.G., Jr. Degradation of the SCF component Skp2 in cell-cycle phase G1 by the anaphase-promoting complex. Nature 2004, 428, 194–198. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Stroschein, S.L.; Bonni, S.; Wrana, J.L.; Luo, K. Smad3 recruits the anaphase-promoting complex for ubiquitination and degradation of SnoN. Genes Dev. 2001, 15, 2822–2836. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Lasorella, A.; Stegmüller, J.; Guardavaccaro, D.; Liu, G.; Carro, M.S.; Rothschild, G.; de la Torre-Ubieta, L.; Pagano, M.; Bonni, A.; Iavarone, A. Degradation of Id2 by the anaphase-promoting complex couples cell cycle exit and axonal growth. Nature 2006, 442, 471–474. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Hoeijmakers, J.H. DNA damage, aging, and cancer. N. Engl. J. Med. 2009, 361, 1475–1485. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Lord, C.J.; Ashworth, A. The DNA damage response and cancer therapy. Nature 2012, 481, 287–294. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Young, T.Z.; Liu, P.; Urbonaite, G.; Acar, M. Quantitative Insights into Age-Associated DNA-Repair Inefficiency in Single Cells. Cell Rep. 2019, 28, 2220–2230.e7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  50. Burtner, C.R.; Kennedy, B.K. Progeria syndromes and ageing: What is the connection? Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 2010, 11, 567–578. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Kauppila, T.E.S.; Bratic, A.; Jensen, M.B.; Baggio, F.; Partridge, L.; Jasper, H.; Gronke, S.; Larsson, N.G. Mutations of mitochondrial DNA are not major contributors to aging of fruit flies. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2018, 115, E9620–E9629. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  52. Garcia-Higuera, I.; Manchado, E.; Dubus, P.; Canamero, M.; Mendez, J.; Moreno, S.; Malumbres, M. Genomic stability and tumour suppression by the APC/C cofactor Cdh1. Nat. Cell Biol. 2008, 10, 802–811. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  53. Engelbert, D.; Schnerch, D.; Baumgarten, A.; Wasch, R. The ubiquitin ligase APCCdh1 is required to maintain genome integrity in primary human cells. Oncogene 2008, 27, 907–917. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  54. Zhang, L.; Park, C.H.; Wu, J.; Kim, H.; Liu, W.; Fujita, T.; Balasubramani, M.; Schreiber, E.M.; Wang, X.F.; Wan, Y. Proteolysis of Rad17 by Cdh1/APC regulates checkpoint termination and recovery from genotoxic stress. EMBO J. 2010, 29, 1726–1737. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  55. Cotto-Rios, X.M.; Jones, M.J.; Busino, L.; Pagano, M.; Huang, T.T. APC/CCdh1-dependent proteolysis of USP1 regulates the response to UV-mediated DNA damage. J. Cell Biol. 2011, 194, 177–186. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  56. Bassermann, F.; Frescas, D.; Guardavaccaro, D.; Busino, L.; Peschiaroli, A.; Pagano, M. The Cdc14B-Cdh1-Plk1 axis controls the G2 DNA-damage-response checkpoint. Cell 2008, 134, 256–267. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  57. Takahashi, A.; Imai, Y.; Yamakoshi, K.; Kuninaka, S.; Ohtani, N.; Yoshimoto, S.; Hori, S.; Tachibana, M.; Anderton, E.; Takeuchi, T.; et al. DNA damage signaling triggers degradation of histone methyltransferases through APC/CCdh1 in senescent cells. Mol. Cell 2012, 45, 123–131. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  58. Zhang, B.; Chen, X.; Lv, Y.; Wu, X.; Gui, L.; Zhang, Y.; Qiu, J.; Song, G.; Yao, W.; Wan, L.; et al. Cdh1 overexpression improves emotion and cognitive-related behaviors via regulating hippocampal neuroplasticity in global cerebral ischemia rats. Neurochem. Int. 2019, 124, 225–237. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Larkins, B.A.; Dilkes, B.P.; Dante, R.A.; Coelho, C.M.; Woo, Y.M.; Liu, Y. Investigating the hows and whys of DNA endoreduplication. J. Exp. Bot. 2001, 52, 183–192. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Eguren, M.; Manchado, E.; Malumbres, M. Non-mitotic functions of the anaphase-promoting complex. Semin. Cell Dev. Biol. 2011, 22, 572–578. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Mathieu-Rivet, E.; Gévaudant, F.; Cheniclet, C.; Hernould, M.; Chevalier, C. The anaphase promoting complex activator CCS52A, a key factor for fruit growth and endoreduplication in tomato. Plant Signal. Behav. 2010, 5, 985–987. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  62. de Krijger, I.; Föhr, B.; Pérez, S.H.; Vincendeau, E.; Serrat, J.; Thouin, A.M.; Susvirkar, V.; Lescale, C.; Paniagua, I.; Hoekman, L.; et al. MAD2L2 dimerization and TRIP13 control shieldin activity in DNA repair. Nat. Commun. 2021, 12, 5421. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Pernicone, N.; Grinshpon, S.; Listovsky, T. CDH1 binds MAD2L2 in a Rev1-like pattern. Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 2020, 531, 566–572. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Sudo, T.; Ota, Y.; Kotani, S.; Nakao, M.; Takami, Y.; Takeda, S.; Saya, H. Activation of Cdh1-dependent APC is required for G1 cell cycle arrest and DNA damage-induced G2 checkpoint in vertebrate cells. EMBO J. 2001, 20, 6499–6508. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Turner, E.L.; Malo, M.E.; Pisclevich, M.G.; Dash, M.D.; Davies, G.F.; Arnason, T.G.; Harkness, T.A. The Saccharomyces cerevisiae anaphase-promoting complex interacts with multiple histone-modifying enzymes to regulate cell cycle progression. Eukaryot Cell 2010, 9, 1418–1431. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  66. Linger, J.G.; Tyler, J.K. Chromatin disassembly and reassembly during DNA repair. Mutat. Res. 2007, 618, 52–64. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  67. Tessarz, P.; Kouzarides, T. Histone core modifications regulating nucleosome structure and dynamics. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 2014, 15, 703–708. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Kim, J.A.; Haber, J.E. Chromatin assembly factors Asf1 and CAF-1 have overlapping roles in deactivating the DNA damage checkpoint when DNA repair is complete. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2009, 106, 1151–1156. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  69. Rodriges Blanko, E.; Kadyrova, L.Y.; Kadyrov, F.A. DNA mismatch repair interacts with CAF-1- and ASF1A-H3-H4-dependent histone (H3-H4)2 tetramer deposition. J. Biol. Chem. 2016, 291, 9203–9217. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  70. Gates, L.A.; Shi, J.; Rohira, A.D.; Feng, Q.; Zhu, B.; Bedford, M.T.; Sagum, C.A.; Jung, S.Y.; Qin, J.; Tsai, M.J.; et al. Acetylation on histone H3 lysine 9 mediates a switch from transcription initiation to elongation. J. Biol. Chem. 2017, 292, 14456–14472. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  71. Farooq, Z.; Banday, S.; Pandita, T.K.; Altaf, M. The many faces of histone H3K79 methylation. Mutat. Res. Rev. Mutat. Res. 2016, 768, 46–52. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  72. Espinosa, M.C.; Rehman, M.A.; Chisamore-Robert, P.; Jeffery, D.; Yankulov, K. GCN5 is a positive regulator of origins of DNA replication in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. PLoS ONE 2010, 5, e8964. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  73. Ichim, G.; Mola, M.; Finkbeiner, M.G.; Cros, M.P.; Herceg, Z.; Hernandez-Vargas, H. The histone acetyltransferase component TRRAP is targeted for destruction during the cell cycle. Oncogene 2014, 33, 181–192. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  74. Sinclair, D.A.; Guarente, L. Extrachromosomal rDNA circles—A cause of aging in yeast. Cell 1997, 91, 1033–1042. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  75. Defossez, P.A.; Prusty, R.; Kaeberlein, M.; Lin, S.J.; Ferrigno, P.; Silver, P.A.; Keil, R.L.; Guarente, L. Elimination of replication block protein Fob1 extends the life span of yeast mother cells. Mol. Cell 1999, 3, 447–455. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Sullivan, M.; Holt, L.; Morgan, D.O. Cyclin-specific control of ribosomal DNA segregation. Mol. Cell Biol. 2008, 28, 5328–5336. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  77. Dubey, R.N.; Nakwal, N.; Bisht, K.K.; Saini, A.; Haldar, S.; Singh, J. Interaction of APC/C-E3 ligase with Swi6/HP1 and Clr4/Suv39 in heterochromatin assembly in fission yeast. J. Biol. Chem. 2009, 284, 7165–7176. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  78. Menzel, J.; Malo, M.E.; Chan, C.; Prusinkiewicz, M.; Arnason, T.G.; Harkness, T.A. The anaphase promoting complex regulates yeast lifespan and rDNA stability by targeting Fob1 for degradation. Genetics 2014, 196, 693–709. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  79. Yousefzadeh, M.; Henpita, C.; Vyas, R.; Soto-Palma, C.; Robbins, P.; Niedernhofer, L. DNA damage-how and why we age? Elife 2021, 10, e62852. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Vatner, S.F.; Zhang, J.; Oydanich, M.; Berkman, T.; Naftalovich, R.; Vatner, D.E. Healthful aging mediated by inhibition of oxidative stress. Ageing Res. Rev. 2020, 64, 101194. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Haigis, M.C.; Yankner, B.A. The aging stress response. Mol. Cell 2010, 40, 333–344. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  82. Longo, V.D.; Fabrizio, P. Regulation of longevity and stress resistance: A molecular strategy conserved from yeast to humans? Cell Mol. Life Sci. 2002, 59, 903–908. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Furukawa-Hibi, Y.; Kobayashi, Y.; Chen, C.; Motoyama, N. FOXO transcription factors in cell-cycle regulation and the response to oxidative stress. Antioxid. Redox Signal. 2005, 7, 752–760. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  84. Postnikoff, S.D.; Malo, M.E.; Wong, B.; Harkness, T.A. The yeast forkhead transcription factors fkh1 and fkh2 regulate lifespan and stress response together with the anaphase-promoting complex. PLoS Genet. 2012, 8, e1002583. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  85. Malo, M.E.; Postnikoff, S.D.; Arnason, T.G.; Harkness, T.A. Mitotic degradation of yeast Fkh1 by the anaphase promoting complex is required for normal longevity, genomic stability and stress resistance. Aging 2016, 8, 810–830. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  86. Park, H.J.; Costa, R.H.; Lau, L.F.; Tyner, A.L.; Raychaudhuri, P. Anaphase-promoting complex/cyclosome-CDH1-mediated proteolysis of the forkhead box M1 transcription factor is critical for regulated entry into S phase. Mol. Cell Biol. 2008, 28, 5162–5171. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  87. Simpson-Lavy, K.J.; Sajman, J.; Zenvirth, D.; Brandeis, M. APC/CCdh1 specific degradation of Hsl1 and Clb2 is required for proper stress responses of S. cerevisiae. Cell Cycle 2014, 8, 3006–3012. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  88. Ahlskog, J.K.; Bjork, J.K.; Elsing, A.N.; Aspelin, C.; Kallio, M.; Roos-Mattjus, P.; Sistonen, L. Anaphase-promoting complex/cyclosome participates in the acute response to protein-damaging stress. Mol. Cell Biol. 2010, 30, 5608–5620. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  89. Chen, M.; Gutierrez, G.J.; Ronai, Z.A. The anaphase-promoting complex or cyclosome supports cell survival in response to endoplasmic reticulum stress. PLoS ONE 2012, 7, e35520. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  90. Kowalski, J.R.; Dube, H.; Touroutine, D.; Rush, K.M.; Goodwin, P.R.; Carozza, M.; Didier, Z.; Francis, M.M.; Juo, P. The Anaphase-Promoting Complex (APC) ubiquitin ligase regulates GABA transmission at the C. elegans neuromuscular junction. Mol. Cell. Neurosci. 2014, 58, 62–75. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  91. Mahoney, T.R.; Luo, S.; Nonet, M.L. Analysis of synaptic transmission in Caenorhabditis elegans using an aldicarb-sensitivity assay. Nat. Protoc. 2006, 1, 1772–1777. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  92. Niccoli, T.; Partridge, L. Ageing as a risk factor for disease. Curr. Biol. 2012, 22, R741–R752. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  93. Ross, C.A.; Poirier, M.A. Protein aggregation and neurodegenerative disease. Nat. Med. 2004, 10, S10–S17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  94. Dantuma, N.P.; Bott, L.C. The ubiquitin-proteasome system in neurodegenerative diseases: Precipitating factor, yet part of the solution. Front. Mol. Neurosci. 2014, 7, 70. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  95. Stegmuller, J.; Konishi, Y.; Huynh, M.A.; Yuan, Z.; Dibacco, S.; Bonni, A. Cell-intrinsic regulation of axonal morphogenesis by the Cdh1-APC target SnoN. Neuron 2006, 50, 389–400. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  96. Harmey, D.; Smith, A.; Simanski, S.; Moussa, C.Z.; Ayad, N.G. The anaphase promoting complex induces substrate degradation during neuronal differentiation. J. Biol. Chem. 2009, 284, 4317–4323. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  97. Delgado-Esteban, M.; Garcia-Higuera, I.; Maestre, C.; Moreno, S.; Almeida, A. APC/C-Cdh1 coordinates neurogenesis and cortical size during development. Nat. Commun. 2013, 4, 2879. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  98. Kannan, M.; Lee, S.J.; Schwedhelm-Domeyer, N.; Stegmüller, J. The E3 ligase Cdh1-anaphase promoting complex operates upstream of the E3 ligase Smurf1 in the control of axon growth. Development 2012, 139, 3600–3612. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  99. Ping, Z.; Lim, R.; Bashir, T.; Pagano, M.; Guardavaccaro, D. APC/C (Cdh1) controls the proteasome-mediated degradation of E2F3 during cell cycle exit. Cell Cycle 2012, 11, 1999–2005. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  100. Penas, C.; Govek, E.E.; Fang, Y.; Ramachandran, V.; Daniel, M.; Wang, W.; Maloof, M.E.; Rahaim, R.J.; Bibian, M.; Kawauchi, D.; et al. Casein kinase 1δ is an APC/CCdh1 substrate that regulates cerebellar granule cell neurogenesis. Cell Rep. 2015, 11, 249–260. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  101. Bashir, T.; Dorrello, N.V.; Amador, V.; Guardavaccaro, D.; Pagano, M. Control of the SCF(Skp2-Cks1) ubiquitin ligase by the APC/C(Cdh1) ubiquitin ligase. Nature 2004, 428, 190–193. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  102. Maestre, C.; Delgado-Esteban, M.; Gomez-Sanchez, J.C.; Bolaños, J.P.; Almeida, A. Cdk5 phosphorylates Cdh1 and modulates cyclin B1 stability in excitotoxicity. EMBO J. 2008, 27, 2736–2745. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  103. Rodriguez-Rodriguez, P.; Fernandez, E.; Almeida, A.; Bolanos, J.P. Excitotoxic stimulus stabilizes PFKFB3 causing pentose-phosphate pathway to glycolysis switch and neurodegeneration. Cell Death Differ. 2012, 19, 1582–1589. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  104. Burbaeva, G.; Boksha, I.S.; Tereshkina, E.B.; Savushkina, O.K.; Starodubtseva, L.I.; Turishcheva, M.S. Glutamate metabolizing enzymes in prefrontal cortex of Alzheimer’s disease patients. Neurochem. Res. 2005, 30, 1443–1451. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  105. Vincent, I.; Jicha, G.; Rosado, M.; Dickson, D.W. Aberrant expression of mitotic cdc2/cyclin B1 kinase in degenerating neurons of Alzheimer’s disease brain. J. Neurosci. 1997, 17, 3588–3598. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  106. Smith, M.A.; Perry, G.; Richey, P.L.; Sayrec, L.M.; Anderson, V.E.; Beal, M.F.; Kowall, N. Oxidative damage in Alzheimer’s. Nature 1996, 382, 120–121. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  107. Herrero-Mendez, A.; Almeida, A.; Fernandez, E.; Maestre, C.; Moncada, S.; Bolanos, J.P. The bioenergetic and antioxidant status of neurons is controlled by continuous degradation of a key glycolytic enzyme by APC/C-Cdh1. Nat. Cell Biol. 2009, 11, 747–752. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  108. Pomara, N.; Singh, R.; Deptula, D.; Chou, J.C.; Schwartz, M.B.; LeWitt, P.A. Glutamate and other CSF amino acids in Alzheimer’s disease. Am. J. Psychiatry 1992, 149, 251–254. [Google Scholar]
  109. Colombo, S.L.; Palacios-Callender, M.; Frakich, N.; Carcamo, S.; Kovacs, I.; Tudzarova, S.; Moncada, S. Molecular basis for the differential use of glucose and glutamine in cell proliferation as revealed by synchronized HeLa cells. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2011, 108, 21069–21074. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  110. Norris, C.M.; Blalock, E.M.; Thibault, O.; Brewer, L.D.; Clodfelter, G.V.; Porter, N.M.; Landfield, P.W. Electrophysiological mechanisms of delayed excitotoxicity: Positive feedback loop between NMDA receptor current and depolarization-mediated glutamate release. J. Neurophysiol. 2006, 96, 2488–2500. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  111. LaFerla, F.M. Calcium dyshomeostasis and intracellular signalling in Alzheimer’s disease. Nat. Rev. Neurosci. 2002, 3, 862–872. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  112. Zádori, D.; Veres, G.; Szalárdy, L.; Klivényi, P.; Toldi, J.; Vécsei, L. Glutamatergic dysfunctioning in Alzheimer’s disease and related therapeutic targets. J. Alzheimer’s Dis. 2014, 42 (Suppl. 3), S177–S187. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  113. Fuchsberger, T.; Martinez-Bellver, S.; Giraldo, E.; Teruel-Marti, V.; Lloret, A.; Vina, J. Aβ induces excitotoxicity mediated by APC/C-Cdh1 depletion that can be prevented by glutaminase inhibition promoting neuronal survival. Sci. Rep. 2016, 6, 31158. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  114. Hanahan, D.; Weinberg, R.A. Hallmarks of cancer: The next generation. Cell 2011, 144, 646–674. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  115. Sansregret, L.; Patterson, J.O.; Dewhurst, S.; Lopez-Garcia, C.; Koch, A.; McGranahan, N.; Chao, W.C.H.; Barry, D.J.; Rowan, A.; Instrell, R.; et al. APC/C dysfunction limits excessive cancer chromosomal instability. Cancer Discov. 2017, 7, 218–233. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  116. Xin, Y.; Ning, S.; Zhang, L.; Cui, M. CDC27 facilitates gastric cancer cell proliferation, invasion and metastasis via twist-induced epithelial-mesenchymal transition. Cell Physiol. Biochem. 2018, 50, 501–511. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  117. Pawar, S.A.; Sarkar, T.R.; Balamurugan, K.; Sharan, S.; Wang, J.; Zhang, Y.; Dowdy, S.F.; Huang, A.M.; Sterneck, E. C/EBPδ targets cyclin D1 for proteasome-mediated degradation via induction of CDC27/APC3 expression. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2010, 107, 9210–9215. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  118. Schrock, M.S.; Stromberg, B.R.; Scarberry, L.; Summers, M.K. APC/C ubiquitin ligase: Functions and mechanisms in tumorigenesis. Semin. Cancer Biol. 2020, 67, 80–91. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  119. Fujita, T.; Liu, W.; Doihara, H.; Date, H.; Wan, Y. Dissection of the APCCdh1-Skp2 cascade in breast cancer. Clin. Cancer Res. 2008, 14, 1966–1975. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  120. Bonaiuti, P.; Chiroli, E.; Gross, F.; Corno, A.; Vernieri, C.; Stefl, M.; Cosentino Lagomarsino, M.; Knop, M.; Ciliberto, A. Cells escape an operational mitotic checkpoint through a stochastic process. Curr. Biol. 2018, 28, 28–37.e7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  121. Manchado, E.; Guillamot, M.; de Carcer, G.; Eguren, M.; Trickey, M.; Garcia-Higuera, I.; Moreno, S.; Yamano, H.; Canamero, M.; Malumbres, M. Targeting mitotic exit leads to tumor regression in vivo: Modulation by Cdk1, Mastl, and the PP2A/B55α,δ phosphatase. Cancer Cell 2010, 18, 641–654. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  122. Schvartzman, J.M.; Sotillo, R.; Benezra, R. Mitotic chromosomal instability and cancer: Mouse modelling of the human disease. Nat. Rev. Cancer 2010, 10, 102–115. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  123. Gutgemann, I.; Lehman, N.L.; Jackson, P.K.; Longacre, T.A. Emi1 protein accumulation implicates misregulation of the anaphase promoting complex/cyclosome pathway in ovarian clear cell carcinoma. Mod. Pathol. 2008, 21, 445–454. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  124. Kato, T.; Daigo, Y.; Aragaki, M.; Ishikawa, K.; Sato, M.; Kondo, S.; Kaji, M. Overexpression of MAD2 predicts clinical outcome in primary lung cancer patients. Lung Cancer 2011, 74, 124–131. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  125. Pernicone, N.; Peretz, L.; Grinshpon, S.; Listovsky, T. MDA-MB-157 cell line presents high levels of MAD2L2 and dysregulated mitosis. Anticancer Res. 2020, 40, 5471–5480. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  126. Christopoulou, L.; Moore, J.D.; Tyler-Smith, C. Over-expression of wild-type Securin leads to aneuploidy in human cells. Cancer Lett. 2003, 202, 213–218. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  127. Chiarle, R. Solving the chromosome puzzle of aneuploidy in cancer. Genes Dev. 2021, 35, 1073–1075. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  128. Karra, H.; Pitkänen, R.; Nykänen, M.; Talvinen, K.; Kuopio, T.; Söderström, M.; Kronqvist, P. Securin predicts aneuploidy and survival in breast cancer. Histopathology 2012, 60, 586–596. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  129. Karra, H.; Repo, H.; Ahonen, I.; Löyttyniemi, E.; Pitkänen, R.; Lintunen, M.; Kuopio, T.; Söderström, M.; Kronqvist, P. Cdc20 and securin overexpression predict short-term breast cancer survival. Br. J. Cancer 2014, 110, 2905–2913. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  130. Liao, G.B.; Li, X.Z.; Zeng, S.; Liu, C.; Yang, S.M.; Yang, L.; Hu, C.J.; Bai, J.Y. Regulation of the master regulator FOXM1 in cancer. Cell Commun. Signal. 2018, 16, 57. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  131. Ye, H.; Kelly, T.F.; Samadani, U.; Lim, L.; Rubio, S.; Overdier, D.G.; Roebuck, K.A.; Costa, R.H. Hepatocyte nuclear factor 3/fork head homolog 11 is expressed in proliferating epithelial and mesenchymal cells of embryonic and adult tissues. Mol. Cell Biol. 1997, 17, 1626–1641. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  132. Wang, I.C.; Chen, Y.J.; Hughes, D.; Petrovic, V.; Major, M.L.; Park, H.J.; Tan, Y.; Ackerson, T.; Costa, R.H. Forkhead box M1 regulates the transcriptional network of genes essential for mitotic progression and genes encoding the SCF (Skp2-Cks1) ubiquitin ligase. Mol. Cell Biol. 2005, 25, 10875–10894. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  133. Wang, X.; Chen, D.; Gao, J.; Long, H.; Zha, H.; Zhang, A.; Shu, C.; Zhou, L.; Yang, F.; Zhu, B.; et al. Centromere protein U expression promotes non-small-cell lung cancer cell proliferation through FOXM1 and predicts poor survival. Cancer Manag. Res. 2018, 10, 6971–6984. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  134. Halasi, M.; Gartel, A.L. Suppression of FOXM1 sensitizes human cancer cells to cell death induced by DNA-damage. PLoS ONE 2012, 7, e31761. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  135. Dai, B.; Kang, S.H.; Gong, W.; Liu, M.; Aldape, K.D.; Sawaya, R.; Huang, S. Aberrant FoxM1B expression increases matrix metalloproteinase-2 transcription and enhances the invasion of glioma cells. Oncogene 2007, 26, 6212–6219. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  136. Wen, N.; Wang, Y.; Wen, L.; Zhao, S.H.; Ai, Z.H.; Wang, Y.; Wu, B.; Lu, H.X.; Yang, H.; Liu, W.C.; et al. Overexpression of FOXM1 predicts poor prognosis and promotes cancer cell proliferation, migration and invasion in epithelial ovarian cancer. J. Transl. Med. 2014, 12, 134. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  137. Wang, K.; Zhu, X.; Zhang, K.; Zhu, L.; Zhou, F. FoxM1 inhibition enhances chemosensitivity of docetaxel-resistant A549 cells to docetaxel via activation of JNK/mitochondrial pathway. Acta Biochim. Biophys. Sin. 2016, 48, 804–809. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  138. 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. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  139. Zhang, H.; Chen, X.; Jin, Y.; Liu, B.; Zhou, L. Overexpression of Aurora-A promotes laryngeal cancer progression by enhancing invasive ability and chromosomal instability. Eur. Arch. Oto-Rhino-Laryngol. 2012, 269, 607–614. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  140. Li, J.J.; Weroha, S.J.; Lingle, W.L.; Papa, D.; Salisbury, J.L.; Li, S.A. Estrogen mediates Aurora-A overexpression, centrosome amplification, chromosomal instability, and breast cancer in female ACI rats. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2004, 101, 18123–18128. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  141. Bischoff, J.R.; Anderson, L.; Zhu, Y.; Mossie, K.; Ng, L.; Souza, B.; Schryver, B.; Flanagan, P.; Clairvoyant, F.; Ginther, C.; et al. A homologue of Drosophila aurora kinase is oncogenic and amplified in human colorectal cancers. EMBO J. 1998, 17, 3052–3065. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  142. Li, D.; Zhu, J.; Firozi, P.F.; Abbruzzese, J.L.; Evans, D.B.; Cleary, K.; Friess, H.; Sen, S. Overexpression of oncogenic STK15/BTAK/Aurora A kinase in human pancreatic cancer. Clin. Cancer Res. 2003, 9, 991–997. [Google Scholar]
  143. Anand, S.; Penrhyn-Lowe, S.; Venkitaraman, A.R. AURORA-A amplification overrides the mitotic spindle assembly checkpoint, inducing resistance to Taxol. Cancer Cell 2003, 3, 51–62. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  144. Sinha, D.; Duijf, P.H.G.; Khanna, K.K. Mitotic slippage: An old tale with a new twist. Cell Cycle 2019, 18, 7–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  145. Tomasini, R.; Mak, T.W.; Melino, G. The impact of p53 and p73 on aneuploidy and cancer. Trends. Cell Biol. 2008, 18, 244–252. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  146. Katayama, H.; Wang, J.; Treekitkarnmongkol, W.; Kawai, H.; Sasai, K.; Zhang, H.; Wang, H.; Adams, H.P.; Jiang, S.; Chakraborty, S.N.; et al. Aurora kinase-A inactivates DNA damage-induced apoptosis and spindle assembly checkpoint response functions of p73. Cancer Cell 2012, 21, 196–211. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  147. Colicino, E.G.; Hehnly, H. Regulating a key mitotic regulator, polo-like kinase 1 (PLK1). Cytoskeleton 2018, 75, 481–494. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  148. Cholewa, B.D.; Liu, X.; Ahmad, N. The role of polo-like kinase 1 in carcinogenesis: Cause or consequence? Cancer Res. 2013, 73, 6848–6855. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  149. Lens, S.M.; Voest, E.E.; Medema, R.H. Shared and separate functions of polo-like kinases and aurora kinases in cancer. Nat. Rev. Cancer 2010, 10, 825–841. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  150. Knecht, R.; Oberhauser, C.; Strebhardt, K. PLK (polo-like kinase), a new prognostic marker for oropharyngeal carcinomas. Int. J. Cancer 2000, 89, 535–536. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  151. Wolf, G.; Elez, R.; Doermer, A.; Holtrich, U.; Ackermann, H.; Stutte, H.J.; Altmannsberger, H.M.; Rübsamen-Waigmann, H.; Strebhardt, K. Prognostic significance of polo-like kinase (PLK) expression in non-small cell lung cancer. Oncogene 1997, 14, 543–549. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  152. Liu, X.; Erikson, R.L. Polo-like kinase (Plk)1 depletion induces apoptosis in cancer cells. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2003, 100, 5789–5794. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  153. Li, Z.; Liu, J.; Li, J.; Kong, Y.; Sandusky, G.; Rao, X.; Liu, Y.; Wan, J.; Liu, X. Polo-like kinase 1 (Plk1) overexpression enhances ionizing radiation-induced cancer formation in mice. J. Biol. Chem. 2017, 292, 17461–17472. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  154. Gao, Y.; Zhang, B.; Wang, Y.; Shang, G. Cdc20 inhibitor apcin inhibits the growth and invasion of osteosarcoma cells. Oncol. Rep. 2018, 40, 841–848. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  155. De, K.; Grubb, T.M.; Zalenski, A.A.; Pfaff, K.E.; Pal, D.; Majumder, S.; Summers, M.K.; Venere, M. Hyperphosphorylation of CDH1 in glioblastoma cancer stem cells attenuates APC/CCDH1 activity and pharmacologic inhibition of APC/CCDH1/CDC20 compromises viability. Mol. Cancer Res. 2019, 17, 1519–1530. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  156. Lub, S.; Maes, A.; Maes, K.; De Veirman, K.; De Bruyne, E.; Menu, E.; Fostier, K.; Kassambara, A.; Moreaux, J.; Hose, D.; et al. Inhibiting the anaphase promoting complex/cyclosome induces a metaphase arrest and cell death in multiple myeloma cells. Oncotarget 2016, 7, 4062–4076. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  157. Zhang, Y.; Xue, Y.B.; Li, H.; Qiu, D.; Wang, Z.W.; Tan, S.S. Inhibition of cell survival by curcumin is associated with downregulation of cell division cycle 20 (Cdc20) in pancreatic cancer cells. Nutrients 2017, 9, 109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  158. Cheng, S.; Castillo, V.; Sliva, D. CDC20 associated with cancer metastasis and novel mushroomderived CDC20 inhibitors with antimetastatic activity. Int. J. Oncol. 2019, 54, 2250–2256. [Google Scholar]
  159. Kudlow, B.A.; Kennedy, B.K.; Monnat, R.J., Jr. Werner and Hutchinson-Gilford Progeria Syndromes: Mechanistic basis of human progeroid diseases. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 2007, 8, 394–404. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  160. Gonzalo, S.; Kreienkamp, R.; Askjaer, P. Hutchinson-Gilford Progeria Syndrome: A premature aging disease caused by LMNA gene mutations. Ageing Res. Rev. 2017, 33, 18–29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Ijms 23 15327 g001 550
Figure 1. Mechanisms of the anaphase-promoting complex/cyclosome (APC/C) in regulating lifespan. Dysregulation of APC/C can trigger the abnormal accumulation of its substrates, thus, leading to genomic instability and downregulated stress response. Some lifespan determinants, such as Fob1 and Fkh1, are both identified as a bona fide APC/C substrate, indicating that APC/C promotes longevity at least partly owing to the degradation of them.
Figure 1. Mechanisms of the anaphase-promoting complex/cyclosome (APC/C) in regulating lifespan. Dysregulation of APC/C can trigger the abnormal accumulation of its substrates, thus, leading to genomic instability and downregulated stress response. Some lifespan determinants, such as Fob1 and Fkh1, are both identified as a bona fide APC/C substrate, indicating that APC/C promotes longevity at least partly owing to the degradation of them.
Ijms 23 15327 g001
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Hu, X.; Jin, X.; Cao, X.; Liu, B. The Anaphase-Promoting Complex/Cyclosome Is a Cellular Ageing Regulator. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2022, 23, 15327. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms232315327

AMA Style

Hu X, Jin X, Cao X, Liu B. The Anaphase-Promoting Complex/Cyclosome Is a Cellular Ageing Regulator. International Journal of Molecular Sciences. 2022; 23(23):15327. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms232315327

Chicago/Turabian Style

Hu, Xiangdong, Xuejiao Jin, Xiuling Cao, and Beidong Liu. 2022. "The Anaphase-Promoting Complex/Cyclosome Is a Cellular Ageing Regulator" International Journal of Molecular Sciences 23, no. 23: 15327. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms232315327

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop