Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Cell Senescence pp 93–120Cite as

Cytofluorometric Assessment of Cell Cycle Progression

  • Protocol
  • First Online:

Part of the book series: Methods in Molecular Biology ((MIMB,volume 965))

Abstract

One of the most prominent features of cellular senescence, a stress response that prevents the propagation of cells that have accumulated potentially oncogenic alterations, is a permanent loss of proliferative potential. Thus, at odds with quiescent cells, which resume proliferation when stimulated to do so, senescent cells cannot proceed through the cell cycle even in the presence of mitogenic factors. Here, we describe a set of cytofluorometric techniques for studying how chemical and/or physical stimuli alter the cell cycle in vitro, in both qualitative and quantitative terms. Taken together, these methods allow for the identification of bona fide cytostatic effects as well as for a refined characterization of cell cycle distributions, providing information on proliferation, DNA content as well as on the presence of cell cycle phase-specific markers. At the end of the chapter, a set of guidelines is offered to assist researchers that approach the study of the cell cycle with the interpretation of results.

I.V. and M.J. equally contributed to this paper.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Protocol
USD   49.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   139.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   179.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Springer Nature is developing a new tool to find and evaluate Protocols. Learn more

References

  1. Alberts B (2008) Molecular biology of the cell, extended version, 5th edn. Garland Science, New York

    Google Scholar 

  2. Blomen VA, Boonstra J (2007) Cell fate determination during G1 phase progression. Cell Mol Life Sci 64:3084–3104

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Pfeuty B, David-Pfeuty T, Kaneko K (2008) Underlying principles of cell fate determination during G1 phase of the mammalian cell cycle. Cell Cycle 7:3246–3257

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Hobert O (2011) Regulation of terminal differentiation programs in the nervous system. Annu Rev Cell Dev Biol 27:681–696

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Olson EN, Schneider MD (2003) Sizing up the heart: development redux in disease. Genes Dev 17:1937–1956

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Oh IH, Humphries RK (2012) Concise review: Multidimensional regulation of the hematopoietic stem cell state. Stem Cells 30:82–88

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Pazolli E, Stewart SA (2008) Senescence: the good the bad and the dysfunctional. Curr Opin Genet Dev 18:42–47

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Evan GI, d’Adda di Fagagna F (2009) Cellular senescence: hot or what? Curr Opin Genet Dev 19:25–31

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Morgan DO (2007) The cell cycle: principles of control. New Science Press, London

    Google Scholar 

  10. Hochegger H, Takeda S, Hunt T (2008) Cyclin-dependent kinases and cell-cycle transitions: does one fit all? Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol 9:910–916

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Morgan DO (1997) Cyclin-dependent kinases: engines, clocks, and microprocessors. Annu Rev Cell Dev Biol 13:261–291

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Bloom J, Cross FR (2007) Multiple levels of cyclin specificity in cell-cycle control. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol 8:149–160

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Satyanarayana A, Kaldis P (2009) Mammalian cell-cycle regulation: several Cdks, numerous cyclins and diverse compensatory mechanisms. Oncogene 28:2925–2939

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Liu X, Winey M (2012) The MPS1 family of protein kinases. Annu Rev Biochem 81:561–585

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Malumbres M (2011) Physiological relevance of cell cycle kinases. Physiol Rev 91:973–1007

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Sancar A, Lindsey-Boltz LA, Unsal-Kacmaz K, Linn S (2004) Molecular mechanisms of mammalian DNA repair and the DNA damage checkpoints. Annu Rev Biochem 73:39–85

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Foster DA, Yellen P, Xu L, Saqcena M (2010) Regulation of G1 cell cycle progression: distinguishing the restriction point from a nutrient-sensing cell growth checkpoint(s). Genes Cancer 1:1124–1131

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Lindqvist A, Rodriguez-Bravo V, Medema RH (2009) The decision to enter mitosis: feedback and redundancy in the mitotic entry network. J Cell Biol 185:193–202

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Bartek J, Lukas J (2007) DNA damage checkpoints: from initiation to recovery or adaptation. Curr Opin Cell Biol 19:238–245

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Gottifredi V, Prives C (2005) The S phase checkpoint: when the crowd meets at the fork. Semin Cell Dev Biol 16:355–368

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Segurado M, Tercero JA (2009) The S-phase checkpoint: targeting the replication fork. Biol Cell 101:617–627

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Musacchio A (2011) Spindle assembly checkpoint: the third decade. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 366:3595–3604

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Musacchio A, Salmon ED (2007) The spindle-assembly checkpoint in space and time. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol 8:379–393

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Vitale I, Galluzzi L, Castedo M, Kroemer G (2011) Mitotic catastrophe: a mechanism for avoiding genomic instability. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol 12:385–392

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Vitale I, Galluzzi L, Senovilla L, Criollo A, Jemaa M, Castedo M, Kroemer G (2011) Illicit survival of cancer cells during polyploidization and depolyploidization. Cell Death Differ 18:1403–1413

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Margolis RL, Lohez OD, Andreassen PR (2003) G1 tetraploidy checkpoint and the suppression of tumorigenesis. J Cell Biochem 88:673–683

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Giacinti C, Giordano A (2006) RB and cell cycle progression. Oncogene 25:5220–5227

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Giono LE, Manfredi JJ (2006) The p53 tumor suppressor participates in multiple cell cycle checkpoints. J Cell Physiol 209:13–20

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Deng CX (2006) BRCA1: cell cycle checkpoint, genetic instability, DNA damage response and cancer evolution. Nucleic Acids Res 34:1416–1426

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Jiang H, Reinhardt HC, Bartkova J, Tommiska J, Blomqvist C, Nevanlinna H, Bartek J, Yaffe MB, Hemann MT (2009) The combined status of ATM and p53 link tumor development with therapeutic response. Genes Dev 23:1895–1909

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Stewart ZA, Westfall MD, Pietenpol JA (2003) Cell-cycle dysregulation and anticancer therapy. Trends Pharmacol Sci 24:139–145

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. McDonald ER 3rd, El-Deiry WS (2001) Checkpoint genes in cancer. Ann Med 33:113–122

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Vitale I, Senovilla L, Galluzzi L, Criollo A, Vivet S, Castedo M, Kroemer G (2008) Chk1 inhibition activates p53 through p38 MAPK in tetraploid cancer cells. Cell Cycle 7:1956–1961

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Vitale I, Galluzzi L, Vivet S, Nanty L, Dessen P, Senovilla L, Olaussen KA, Lazar V, Prudhomme M, Golsteyn RM, Castedo M, Kroemer G (2007) Inhibition of Chk1 kills tetraploid tumor cells through a p53-dependent pathway. PLoS One 2:e1337

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Jemaà M, Vitale I, Kepp O, Berardinelli F, Galluzzi L, Senovilla L, Marino G, Malik SA, Rello-Varona S, Lissa D, Antoccia A, Tailler M, Schlemmer F, Harper F, Pierron G, Castedo M, Kroemer G (2012) Selective killing of p53-deficient cancer cells by SP600125. EMBO Mol Med 4(6):500–514

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Degenhardt Y, Greshock J, Laquerre S, Gilmartin AG, Jing J, Richter M, Zhang X, Bleam M, Halsey W, Hughes A, Moy C, Liu-Sullivan N, Powers S, Bachman K, Jackson J, Weber B, Wooster R (2010) Sensitivity of cancer cells to Plk1 inhibitor GSK461364A is associated with loss of p53 function and chromosome instability. Mol Cancer Ther 9:2079–2089

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Jemaà M, Galluzzi L, Kepp O, Boilève A, Lissa D, Senovilla L, Harper F, Pierron G, Berardinelli F, Antoccia A, Castedo M, Vitale I, Kroemer G (2012) Preferential killing of p53-deficient cancer cells by reversine. Cell Cycle 11(11):2149–2158

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Kroemer G, Galluzzi L, Brenner C (2007) Mitochondrial membrane permeabilization in cell death. Physiol Rev 87:99–163

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. Galluzzi L, Vitale I, Abrams JM, Alnemri ES, Baehrecke EH, Blagosklonny MV, Dawson TM, Dawson VL, El-Deiry WS, Fulda S, Gottlieb E, Green DR, Hengartner MO, Kepp O, Knight RA, Kumar S, Lipton SA, Lu X, Madeo F, Malorni W, Mehlen P, Nunez G, Peter ME, Piacentini M, Rubinsztein DC, Shi Y, Simon HU, Vandenabeele P, White E, Yuan J, Zhivotovsky B, Melino G, Kroemer G (2012) Molecular definitions of cell death subroutines: recommendations of the Nomenclature Committee on Cell Death 2012. Cell Death Differ 19:107–120

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  40. Hoffmann J, Vitale I, Buchmann B, Galluzzi L, Schwede W, Senovilla L, Skuballa W, Vivet S, Lichtner RB, Vicencio JM, Panaretakis T, Siemeister G, Lage H, Nanty L, Hammer S, Mittelstaedt K, Winsel S, Eschenbrenner J, Castedo M, Demarche C, Klar U, Kroemer G (2008) Improved cellular pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics underlie the wide anticancer activity of sagopilone. Cancer Res 68:5301–5308

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  41. Vitale I, Senovilla L, Jemaa M, Michaud M, Galluzzi L, Kepp O, Nanty L, Criollo A, Rello-Varona S, Manic G, Metivier D, Vivet S, Tajeddine N, Joza N, Valent A, Castedo M, Kroemer G (2010) Multipolar mitosis of tetraploid cells: inhibition by p53 and dependency on Mos. EMBO J 29:1272–1284

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  42. Kepp O, Galluzzi L, Lipinski M, Yuan J, Kroemer G (2011) Cell death assays for drug discovery. Nat Rev Drug Discov 10:221–237

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  43. Tasdemir E, Galluzzi L, Maiuri MC, Criollo A, Vitale I, Hangen E, Modjtahedi N, Kroemer G (2008) Methods for assessing autophagy and autophagic cell death. Methods Mol Biol 445:29–76

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  44. Galluzzi L, Aaronson SA, Abrams J, Alnemri ES, Andrews DW, Baehrecke EH, Bazan NG, Blagosklonny MV, Blomgren K, Borner C, Bredesen DE, Brenner C, Castedo M, Cidlowski JA, Ciechanover A, Cohen GM, De Laurenzi V, De Maria R, Deshmukh M, Dynlacht BD, El-Deiry WS, Flavell RA, Fulda S, Garrido C, Golstein P, Gougeon ML, Green DR, Gronemeyer H, Hajnoczky G, Hardwick JM, Hengartner MO, Ichijo H, Jaattela M, Kepp O, Kimchi A, Klionsky DJ, Knight RA, Kornbluth S, Kumar S, Levine B, Lipton SA, Lugli E, Madeo F, Malomi W, Marine JC, Martin SJ, Medema JP, Mehlen P, Melino G, Moll UM, Morselli E, Nagata S, Nicholson DW, Nicotera P, Nunez G, Oren M, Penninger J, Pervaiz S, Peter ME, Piacentini M, Prehn JH, Puthalakath H, Rabinovich GA, Rizzuto R, Rodrigues CM, Rubinsztein DC, Rudel T, Scorrano L, Simon HU, Steller H, Tschopp J, Tsujimoto Y, Vandenabeele P, Vitale I, Vousden KH, Youle RJ, Yuan J, Zhivotovsky B, Kroemer G (2009) Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring cell death in higher eukaryotes. Cell Death Differ 16:1093–1107

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

IV, LG and GK are especially grateful to Mr. Sundaramoorthy Balasubramanian, Senior Project Manager at SPi Global for assistance with the production of this book. This work is supported by grants to GK from the Ligue Nationale contre le Cancer (Equipes labellisée), Agence Nationale pour la Recherche (ANR), European Commission (Active p53, Apo-Sys, ChemoRes, ApopTrain), Fondation pour la Recherche Médicale (FRM), Institut National du Cancer (INCa), Cancéropôle Ile-de-France, Fondation Bettencourt-Schueller, and the LabEx Onco-Immunology.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. INSERM, U848, Villejuif, France

    Ilio Vitale, Mohamed Jemaà, Didier Metivier, Maria Castedo & Guido Kroemer

  2. Institut Gustave Roussy, Villejuif, France

    Ilio Vitale, Mohamed Jemaà, Lorenzo Galluzzi, Didier Metivier & Maria Castedo

  3. Université Paris Descartes, Sorbonne Paris Cité, Paris, France

    Lorenzo Galluzzi & Guido Kroemer

  4. Centre de Recherche des Cordeliers, Paris, France

    Guido Kroemer

  5. Metabolomics Platform, Institut Gustave Roussy, Villejuif, France

    Guido Kroemer

  6. Pôle de Biologie, Hôpital Européen Georges Pompidou, AP-HP, Paris, France

    Guido Kroemer

Authors
  1. Ilio Vitale
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Mohamed Jemaà
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Lorenzo Galluzzi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Didier Metivier
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Maria Castedo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Guido Kroemer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Guido Kroemer .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Institut Gustave Roussy, Pavillon de Recherche 1, INSERM U848, rue C. Desmoulins 39, Villejuif, 94085, France

    Lorenzo Galluzzi

  2. Institut Gustave Roussy, Pavillon de Recherche 1, INSERM U848, rue C. Desmoulins 39, Villejuif CEDEX, 94085, France

    Ilio Vitale

  3. Institut Gustave Roussy, Pavillon de Recherche 1, INSERM U848, rue C. Desmoulins 39, Villejuif CEDEX, 94085, France

    Oliver Kepp

  4. Institut Gustave Roussy (IGR), Pavillon de Recherche 1, INSERM, U848, rue Camille-Desmoulins 39, Villejuif, 94805, France

    Guido Kroemer

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2013 Springer Science+Busincess Media, LLC

About this protocol

Cite this protocol

Vitale, I., Jemaà, M., Galluzzi, L., Metivier, D., Castedo, M., Kroemer, G. (2013). Cytofluorometric Assessment of Cell Cycle Progression. In: Galluzzi, L., Vitale, I., Kepp, O., Kroemer, G. (eds) Cell Senescence. Methods in Molecular Biology, vol 965. Humana Press, Totowa, NJ. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-62703-239-1_6

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-62703-239-1_6

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Humana Press, Totowa, NJ

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-62703-238-4

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-62703-239-1

  • eBook Packages: Springer Protocols

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation