Xia S, Chen J, Arsala D, Emerson JJ, Long M. Functional innovation through new genes as a general evolutionary process. Nat Genet. 2025;57:295–309. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41588-024-02059-0.
Google Scholar
Perry GH, Dominy NJ, Claw KG, Lee AS, Fiegler H, Redon R, et al. Diet and the evolution of human amylase gene copy number variation. Nat Genet. 2007;39:1256–60. https://doi.org/10.1038/ng2123.
Google Scholar
Choi SH, Park JH, Nguyen TTN, Shim HJ, Song YH. Initiation of Drosophila chorion gene amplification requires Claspin and mus101, whereas Claspin, but not mus101, plays a major role during elongation. Dev Dyn. 2017;246:466–74. https://doi.org/10.1002/dvdy.24499.
Google Scholar
Bailey C, Shoura MJ, Mischel PS, Swanton C. Extrachromosomal DNA-relieving heredity constraints, accelerating tumour evolution. Ann Oncol. 2020;31:884–93. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annonc.2020.03.303.
Google Scholar
Vasudevan A, Schukken KM, Sausville EL, Girish V, Adebambo OA, Sheltzer JM. Aneuploidy as a promoter and suppressor of malignant growth. Nat Rev Cancer. 2021;21:89–103. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41568-020-00321-1.
Google Scholar
Jamal-Hanjani M, Wilson GA, McGranahan N, Birkbak NJ, Watkins TBK, Veeriah S, et al. Tracking the evolution of non-small-cell lung cancer. N Engl J Med. 2017;376:2109–21. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1616288.
Google Scholar
Shohet J, Foster J. Neuroblastoma. BMJ. 2017;357. https://doi.org/10.1136/BMJ.J1863.
Qiu B, Matthay KK. Advancing therapy for neuroblastoma. Nat Rev Clin Oncol. 2022;19:515–33. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41571-022-00643-z.
Google Scholar
Irwin MS, Naranjo A, Zhang FF, Cohn SL, London WB, Gastier-Foster JM, et al. Revised neuroblastoma risk classification system: a report from the Children’s Oncology Group. J Clin Oncol. 2021;39:3229–41. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.21.00278.
Google Scholar
Ackermann S, Cartolano M, Hero B, Welte A, Kahlert Y, Roderwieser A, et al. A mechanistic classification of clinical phenotypes in neuroblastoma. Science. 2018;362:1165. https://doi.org/10.1126/SCIENCE.AAT6768.
Google Scholar
Seeger RC, Brodeur GM, Sather H, Dalton A, Siegel SE, Wong KY, et al. Association of Multiple Copies of the N-myc Oncogene with Rapid Progression of Neuroblastomas. N Engl J Med. 1985;313:1111–6. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJM198510313131802.
Google Scholar
Bown N, Łastowska M, Cotterill S, O’Neill S, Ellershaw C, Roberts P, et al. 17q gain in neuroblastoma predicts adverse clinical outcome. Med Pediatr Oncol. 2001;36:14–9.
Google Scholar
Brady SW, Liu Y, Ma X, Gout AM, Hagiwara K, Zhou X, et al. Pan-neuroblastoma analysis reveals age- and signature-associated driver alterations. Nat Commun. 2020;11:5183. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-020-18987-4.
Google Scholar
Valentijn LJ, Koster J, Zwijnenburg DA, Hasselt NE, van Sluis P, Volckmann R, et al. TERT rearrangements are frequent in neuroblastoma and identify aggressive tumors. Nat Genet. 2015;47:1411–4. https://doi.org/10.1038/ng.3438.
Google Scholar
Hertwig F, Peifer M, Fischer M. Telomere maintenance is pivotal for high-risk neuroblastoma. Cell Cycle. 2016;15:311–2. https://doi.org/10.1080/15384101.2015.1125243.
Google Scholar
Decaesteker B, Durinck K, Van Roy N, De Wilde B, Van Neste C, Van Haver S, et al. From DNA copy number gains and tumor dependencies to novel therapeutic targets for high-risk neuroblastoma. J Pers Med. 2021;11. https://doi.org/10.3390/JPM11121286.
Oberthuer A, Jessica T, Frank W, Barbara H, Fischer M. Molecular characterization and classification of neuroblastoma. Future Oncol. 2009;5:625–39. https://doi.org/10.2217/fon.09.41.
Google Scholar
Zeineldin M, Federico S, Chen X, Fan Y, Xu B, Stewart E, et al. MYCN amplification and ATRX mutations are incompatible in neuroblastoma. Nat Commun. 2020;11:913.
Google Scholar
Janoueix-Lerosey I, Lequin D, Brugières L, Ribeiro A, de Pontual L, Combaret V, et al. Somatic and germline activating mutations of the ALK kinase receptor in neuroblastoma. Nature. 2008;455:967–70. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature07398.
Google Scholar
Eleveld TF, Oldridge DA, Bernard V, Koster J, Daage LC, Diskin SJ, et al. Relapsed neuroblastomas show frequent RAS-MAPK pathway mutations. Nat Genet. 2015;47:864–71. https://doi.org/10.1038/ng.3333.
Google Scholar
Sharp SE, Trout AT, Weiss BD, Gelfand MJ. MIBG in neuroblastoma diagnostic imaging and therapy. Radiographics. 2016;36:258–78. https://doi.org/10.1148/RG.2016150099/ASSET/IMAGES/LARGE/RG.2016150099.FIG19B.JPEG.
Google Scholar
Del Bufalo F, De Angelis B, Caruana I, Del Baldo G, De Ioris MA, Serra A, et al. GD2-CART01 for relapsed or refractory high-risk neuroblastoma. N Engl J Med. 2023;388:1284–95. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMOA2210859/SUPPL_FILE/NEJMOA2210859_DATA-SHARING.PDF.
Google Scholar
Goldsmith KC, Park JR, Kayser K, Malvar J, Chi YY, Groshen SG, et al. Lorlatinib with or without chemotherapy in ALK-driven refractory/relapsed neuroblastoma: Phase 1 trial results. Nat Med. 2023;29:1092–102. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41591-023-02297-5.
Google Scholar
Moreno L, Barone G, DuBois SG, Molenaar J, Fischer M, Schulte J, et al. Accelerating drug development for neuroblastoma: Summary of the Second Neuroblastoma Drug Development Strategy forum from Innovative Therapies for Children with Cancer and International Society of Paediatric Oncology Europe Neuroblastoma. Eur J Cancer. 2020;136:52–68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejca.2020.05.010.
Google Scholar
Helmsauer K, Valieva ME, Ali S, Chamorro González R, Schöpflin R, Röefzaad C, et al. Enhancer hijacking determines extrachromosomal circular MYCN amplicon architecture in neuroblastoma. Nat Commun. 2020;11:5823. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-020-19452-y.
Google Scholar
Zhu S, Lee JS, Guo F, Shin J, Perez-Atayde AR, Kutok JL, et al. Activated ALK collaborates with MYCN in neuroblastoma pathogenesis. Cancer Cell. 2012;21:362–73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ccr.2012.02.010.
Google Scholar
Molenaar JJ, Domingo-Fernández R, Ebus ME, Lindner S, Koster J, Drabek K, et al. LIN28B induces neuroblastoma and enhances MYCN levels via let-7 suppression. Nat Genet. 2012;44:1199–206. https://doi.org/10.1038/ng.2436.
Google Scholar
Nunes C, Depestel L, Mus L, Keller KM, Delhaye L, Louwagie A, et al. RRM2 enhances MYCN-driven neuroblastoma formation and acts as a synergistic target with CHK1 inhibition. Sci Adv. 2022;8:28. https://doi.org/10.1126/SCIADV.ABN1382.
Google Scholar
Nelen IH, Leys S, Bekaert SL, De Vloed F, Martens F, Sanders E, et al. Targeting replication stress in neuroblastoma by exploiting the synergistic potential of second generation RRM2 and CHK1 inhibitors. Cell Death Dis. 2026;17:263. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41419-026-08514-6.
Google Scholar
Borenäs M, Umapathy G, Lind DE, Lai WY, Guan J, Johansson J, et al. ALK signaling primes the DNA damage response sensitizing ALK-driven neuroblastoma to therapeutic ATR inhibition. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2024;121:e2315242121. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2315242121.
Google Scholar
Cybulla E, Vindigni A. Leveraging the replication stress response to optimize cancer therapy. Nat Rev Cancer. 2023;23:6–24. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41568-022-00518-6.
Google Scholar
Da Costa AABA, Chowdhury D, Shapiro GI, D’Andrea AD, Konstantinopoulos PA. Targeting replication stress in cancer therapy. Nature Reviews Drug Discovery [Internet]. Nature Research; 2023 [cited 2024 Nov 22]. p. 38–58. Available from: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41573-022-00558-5.
Zeman Michelle K, Cimprich Karlene A. Causes and consequences of replication stress. Nat Cell Biol. 2014;16:2–9.
Google Scholar
Buisson R, Boisvert JL, Benes CH, Zou L. Distinct but Concerted Roles of ATR, DNA-PK, and Chk1 in Countering Replication Stress during S Phase. Mol Cell. 2015;59:1011–24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.molcel.2015.07.029.
Google Scholar
Patange S, Ball DA, Wan Y, Karpova TS, Girvan M, Levens D, et al. MYC amplifies gene expression through global changes in transcription factor dynamics. Cell Rep. 2022;38:110292. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.celrep.2021.110292.
Google Scholar
Hamperl S, Cimprich KA. Conflict resolution in the genome: how transcription and replication make it work. Cell. 2016;167:1455–67. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2016.09.053.
Google Scholar
Hamperl S, Bocek MJ, Saldivar JC, Swigut T, Cimprich KA. Transcription-replication conflict orientation modulates R-loop levels and activates distinct DNA damage responses. Cell. 2017;170:774–86.e19. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2017.07.043.
Google Scholar
Fulda S, Lutz W, Schwab M, Debatin KM. MycN sensitizes neuroblastoma cells for drug-induced apoptosis. Oncogene. 1999;18:1479–86. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.onc.1202435.
Google Scholar
Körber V, Stainczyk SA, Kurilov R, Henrich KO, Hero B, Brors B, et al. Neuroblastoma arises in early fetal development and its evolutionary duration predicts outcome. Nat Genet. 2023;55:619–30. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41588-023-01332-y.
Google Scholar
Okonechnikov K, Joshi P, Körber V, Rademacher A, Bortolomeazzi M, Mallm JP, et al. Oncogene aberrations drive medulloblastoma progression, not initiation. Nature. 2025. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-025-08973-5
Varis A, Wolf M, Monni O, Vakkari ML, Kokkola A, Moskaluk C, et al. Targets of Gene Amplification and Overexpression at 17q in Gastric Cancer1. Cancer Res. 2002;62:2625–9.
Google Scholar
Zhang W, Yu Y. The important molecular markers on Chromosome 17 and their clinical impact in breast cancer. Int J Mol Sci. 2011;12:5672–83. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms12095672.
Google Scholar
Sunpaweravong P, Thongwatchara P, Chotipanvithayakul R, Sangkhathat S, Thongsuksai P. Copy number gains of chromosome 17 identified by dual in situ hybridization in non-small cell lung cancer tissue correlate with overexpression of c-Myc. Transl Cancer Res. 2022;11:1033–44. https://doi.org/10.21037/tcr-21-2705.
Google Scholar
Mahlamäki EH, Bärlund M, Tanner M, Gorunova L, Höglund M, Karhu R, et al. Frequent amplification of 8q24, 11q, 17q, and 20q-specific genes in pancreatic cancer. Genes Chromosomes Cancer. 2002;35:353–8. https://doi.org/10.1002/gcc.10122.
Google Scholar
Hirasawa A, Saito-Ohara F, Inoue J, Aoki D, Susumu N, Yokoyama T, et al. Association of 17q21-q24 gain in ovarian clear cell adenocarcinomas with poor prognosis and identification of PPM1D and APPBP2 as likely amplification Targets1. Clin Cancer Res. 2003;9:1995–2004.
Google Scholar
Mus LM, Van Haver S, Popovic M, Trypsteen W, Lefever S, Zeltner N, et al. Recurrent chromosomal imbalances provide selective advantage to human embryonic stem cells under enhanced replicative stress conditions. Genes Chromosomes Cancer. 2021;60:272–81. https://doi.org/10.1002/gcc.22931.
Google Scholar
Milosevic J, Fransson S, Svensson J, Otte J, Olsen TK, Sveinbjornsson B, et al. Gain of chromosome 17 is an early genetic abnormality in neuroblastoma with PPM1D emerging as a strong candidate oncogene driving tumor progression. Cancer Lett. 2025. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.canlet.2025.217769
Schleiermacher G, Bourdeaut F, Combaret V, Picrron G, Raynal V, Aurias A, et al. Stepwise occurrence of a complex unbalanced translocation in neuroblastoma leading to insertion of a telomere sequence and late chromosome 17q gain. Oncogene. 2005;24:3377–84. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.onc.1208486.
Google Scholar
Van Haver S, Fan Y, Bekaert SL, Everaert C, Van Loocke W, Zanzani V, et al. Human iPSC modeling recapitulates in vivo sympathoadrenal development and reveals an aberrant developmental subpopulation in familial neuroblastoma. iScience. 2024;27:108096. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ISCI.2023.108096.
Google Scholar
Hilgert E, Van Neste C, Bekaert SL, Martens F, Vanhauwaert S, Sanders E, et al. Synergistic inhibition of CHK1 and MUS81 to combat replication stress resistance in high-risk neuroblastoma. Sci Rep. 2025. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-29898-z
De Wyn J, Zimmerman MW, Weichert-Leahey N, Nunes C, Cheung BB, Abraham BJ, et al. MEIS2 Is an adrenergic core regulatory transcription factor involved in early initiation of TH-MYCN-driven neuroblastoma formation. Cancers. 2021;13:19. https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers13194783.
Google Scholar
Flynn RL, Cox KE, Jeitany M, Wakimoto H, Bryll AR, Ganem NJ, et al. Alternative lengthening of telomeres renders cancer cells hypersensitive to ATR inhibitors. Science (1979). 2015;347:273–7. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1257216.
Google Scholar
Deng CX. BRCA1: cell cycle checkpoint, genetic instability, DNA damage response and cancer evolution. Nucleic Acids Res. 2006;34:1416–26. https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gkl010.
Google Scholar
Herold S, Kalb J, Büchel G, Ade CP, Baluapuri A, Xu J, et al. Recruitment of BRCA1 limits MYCN-driven accumulation of stalled RNA polymerase. Nature. 2019;567:545–9. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-019-1030-9.
Google Scholar
Solvie D, Baluapuri A, Uhl L, Fleischhauer D, Endres T, Papadopoulos D, et al. MYC multimers shield stalled replication forks from RNA polymerase. Nature. 2022;612:148–55. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-022-05469-4.
Google Scholar
Racca C, Britton S, Hédouin S, Francastel C, Calsou P, Larminat F. BRCA1 prevents R-loop-associated centromeric instability. Cell Death Dis. 2021;12:896. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41419-021-04189-3.
Google Scholar
Jalan M, Sharma A, Pei X, Weinhold N, Buechelmaier ES, Zhu Y, et al. RAD52 resolves transcription-replication conflicts to mitigate R-loop in genome instability. Nat Commun. 2024;15:7776. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-024-51784-x.
Google Scholar
Cantor SB, Bell DW, Ganesan S, Kass EM, Drapkin R, Grossman S, et al. BACH1, a novel helicase-like protein, interacts directly with BRCA1 and contributes to its DNA repair function. Cell. 2001;105:149–60.
Google Scholar
Gong Z, Kim JE, Leung CCY, Glover JNM, Chen J. BACH1/FANCJ acts with TopBP1 and participates early in DNA replication checkpoint control. Mol Cell. 2010;37:438–46. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.molcel.2010.01.002.
Google Scholar
Chen X, Wilson JB, McChesney P, Williams SA, Kwon Y, Longerich S, et al. The Fanconi anemia proteins FANCD2 and FANCJ interact and regulate each other’s chromatin localization. J Biol Chem. 2014;289:25774–82. https://doi.org/10.1074/jbc.M114.552570.
Google Scholar
Nath S, Nagaraju G. FANCJ helicase promotes DNA end resection by facilitating CtIP recruitment to DNA double-strand breaks. PLoS Genet. 2020;16:e1008701. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pgen.1008701.
Google Scholar
Brunner A, Li Q, Fisicaro S, Kourtesakis A, Viiliäinen J, Johansson HJ, et al. FBXL12 degrades FANCD2 to regulate replication recovery and promote cancer cell survival under conditions of replication stress. Mol Cell. 2023;83:3720–39.e8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.molcel.2023.07.026.
Google Scholar
Gupta R, Sharma S, Sommers JA, Kenny MK, Cantor SB, Brosh RM. FANCJ (BACH1) helicase forms DNA damage inducible foci with replication protein A and interacts physically and functionally with the single-stranded DNA-binding protein. Blood. 2007;110:2390–8. https://doi.org/10.1182/blood-2006-11-057273.
Google Scholar
Sakasai R, Sakai A, Iimori M, Kiyonari S, Matsuoka K, Kakeji Y, et al. CtIP- and ATR-dependent FANCJ phosphorylation in response to DNA strand breaks mediated by DNA replication. Genes Cells. 2012;17:962–70. https://doi.org/10.1111/gtc.12011.
Google Scholar
Sarkies P, Murat P, Phillips LG, Patel KJ, Balasubramanian S, Sale JE. FANCJ coordinates two pathways that maintain epigenetic stability at G-quadruplex DNA. Nucleic Acids Res. 2012;40:1485–98. https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gkr868.
Google Scholar
Sato K, Martin-Pintado N, Post H, Altelaar M, Knipscheer P. Multistep mechanism of G-quadruplex resolution during DNA replication. Sci Adv. 2021;7:eabf8653. https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.abf8653.
Google Scholar
van Schie JJM, Faramarz A, Balk JA, Stewart GS, Cantelli E, Oostra AB, et al. Warsaw Breakage Syndrome associated DDX11 helicase resolves G-quadruplex structures to support sister chromatid cohesion. Nat Commun. 2020;11:4287. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-020-18066-8.
Google Scholar
Yaneva D, Sparks JL, Donsbach M, Zhao S, Weickert P, Bezalel-Buch R, et al. The FANCJ helicase unfolds DNA-protein crosslinks to promote their repair. Mol Cell. 2023;83:43–56.e10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.molcel.2022.12.005.
Google Scholar
Isik E, Shukla K, Pospisilova M, König C, Andrs M, Rao S, et al. MutSβ-MutLβ-FANCJ axis mediates the restart of DNA replication after fork stalling at cotranscriptional G4/R-loops. Sci Adv. 2024;10. https://doi.org/10.1126/SCIADV.ADK2685.
Sakellariou D, Bak ST, Isik E, Barroso SI, Porro A, Aguilera A, et al. MutSβ regulates G4-associated telomeric R-loops to maintain telomere integrity in ALT cancer cells. Cell Rep. 2022;39:110602. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.celrep.2022.110602.
Google Scholar
Rein HL, Bernstein KA, Baldock RA. RAD51 paralog function in replicative DNA damage and tolerance. Curr Opin Genet Dev. 2021;71:86–91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gde.2021.06.010.
Google Scholar
Park JY, Singh TR, Nassar N, Zhang F, Freund M, Hanenberg H, et al. Breast cancer-associated missense mutants of the PALB2 WD40 domain, which directly binds RAD51C, RAD51 and BRCA2, disrupt DNA repair. Oncogene. 2014;33:4803–12. https://doi.org/10.1038/onc.2013.421.
Google Scholar
Bonfiglio F, Lasorsa VA, Cantalupo S, D’Alterio G, Aievola V, Boccia A, et al. Inherited rare variants in homologous recombination and neurodevelopmental genes are associated with increased risk of neuroblastoma. EBioMedicine. 2023;87. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ebiom.2022.104395.
Rodriguez-Fos E, Planas-Fèlix M, Burkert M, Puiggròs M, Toedling J, Thiessen N, et al. Mutational topography reflects clinical neuroblastoma heterogeneity. Cell Genomics. 2023;3:10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.xgen.2023.100402.
Google Scholar
Hanada K, Budzowska M, Davies SL, van Drunen E, Onizawa H, Beverloo HB, et al. The structure-specific endonuclease Mus81 contributes to replication restart by generating double-strand DNA breaks. Nat Struct Mol Biol. 2007;14:1096–104. https://doi.org/10.1038/nsmb1313.
Google Scholar
Pepe A, West SC. MUS81-EME2 Promotes Replication Fork Restart. Cell Rep. 2014;7:1048–55. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.CELREP.2014.04.007.
Google Scholar
Castor D, Nair N, Déclais AC, Lachaud C, Toth R, Macartney TJ, et al. Cooperative Control of Holliday Junction Resolution and DNA Repair by the SLX1 and MUS81-EME1 Nucleases. Mol Cell. 2013;52:221–33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.molcel.2013.08.036.
Google Scholar
Pepe A, West SC. Substrate specificity of the MUS81-EME2 structure selective endonuclease. Nucleic Acids Res. 2014;42:3833–45. https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gkt1333.
Google Scholar
Ait Saada A, Lambert SAE, Carr AM. Preserving replication fork integrity and competence via the homologous recombination pathway. DNA Repair (Amst). 2018;71:135–47. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dnarep.2018.08.017.
Google Scholar
Guo Z, Liang E, Li W, Jiang L, Zhi F. Essential meiotic structure-specific endonuclease1 (EME1) promotes malignant features in gastric cancer cells via the Akt/GSK3B/CCND1 pathway. Bioengineered. 2021;12:9869. https://doi.org/10.1080/21655979.2021.1999371.
Google Scholar
Weinandy A, Piroth MD, Goswami A, Nolte K, Sellhaus B, Gerardo-Nava J, et al. Cetuximab induces eme1-mediated DNA repair: a novel mechanism for cetuximab resistance. Neoplasia. 2014;16:207–20, 220.e1-4. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neo.2014.03.004.
Google Scholar
Tomoda Y, Katsura M, Okajima M, Hosoya N, Kohno N, Miyagawa K. Functional evidence for Eme1 as a marker of cisplatin resistance. Int J Cancer. 2009;124:2997–3001. https://doi.org/10.1002/ijc.24268.
Google Scholar
Deng W, Li J, Dorrah K, Jimenez-Tapia D, Arriaga B, Hao Q, et al. The role of PPM1D in cancer and advances in studies of its inhibitors. Biomed Pharmacother. 2020;125:109956. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biopha.2020.109956.
Google Scholar
Milosevic J, Treis D, Fransson S, Gallo-Oller G, Sveinbjörnsson B, Eissler N, et al. PPM1D Is a Therapeutic Target in Childhood Neural Tumors. Cancers. 2021;13. https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers13236042.
Dubbury SJ, Boutz PL, Sharp PA. CDK12 regulates DNA repair genes by suppressing intronic polyadenylation. Nature. 2018;564:141–5. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-018-0758-y.
Google Scholar
Paculová H, Kohoutek J. The emerging roles of CDK12 in tumorigenesis. Cell Div. 2017;12:7. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13008-017-0033-x.
Google Scholar
Dai W, Xie D, Huang H, Li J, Guo C, Cao F, et al. New insights into the dule roles CDK12 in human cancers: Mechanisms and interventions for cancer therapy. J Pharm Anal. 2025;15:101173. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpha.2024.101173.
Google Scholar
Campaner S, Amati B. Two sides of the Myc-induced DNA damage response: from tumor suppression to tumor maintenance. Cell Div. 2012;7:6. https://doi.org/10.1186/1747-1028-7-6.
Google Scholar
Uusküla-Reimand L, Wilson MD. Untangling the roles of TOP2A and TOP2B in transcription and cancer. Sci Adv. 2022;8:eadd4920. https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.add4920.
Google Scholar
Wang CI, Chien KY, Wang CL, Liu HP, Cheng CC, Chang YS, et al. Quantitative proteomics reveals regulation of karyopherin subunit alpha-2 (KPNA2) and its potential novel cargo proteins in nonsmall cell lung cancer. Mol Cell Proteom. 2012;11:1105–22. https://doi.org/10.1074/mcp.M111.016592.
Google Scholar
Zhou S, Zhuang C, Liu R. KPNA2 promotes osteosarcoma growth and metastasis in a c-Myc-dependent manner via the hedgehog /GLI1 signaling pathway. Arab J Chem. 2023;16:104805. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arabjc.2023.104805.
Google Scholar
Han Y, Wang X. The emerging roles of KPNA2 in cancer. Life Sci. 2020;241:117140. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lfs.2019.117140.
Google Scholar
Haji-Seyed-Javadi R, Koyen AE, Rath SK, Madden MZ, Hou Y, Song BS, et al. HELZ promotes R loop resolution to facilitate DNA double-strand break repair by homologous recombination. bioRxiv [Prepr]. 2023. https://doi.org/10.1101/2023.12.14.571747.
Google Scholar
Price JDW, Vizeacoumar FS, Abuhussein O, Maranda V, Zhang Y, Adachi H, et al. Epigenetic Control of TERRA by FTSJ3 is Critical for Telomerase-Driven Cancers. bioRxiv. 2025; https://doi.org/10.1101/2025.01.26.634101.
Xu C, Li C, Chen J, Xiong Y, Qiao Z, Fan P, et al. R-loop-dependent promoter-proximal termination ensures genome stability. Nature. 2023;621:610–9. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-023-06515-5.
Google Scholar
Shen L, Pelletier J. General and Target-Specific DExD/H RNA Helicases in Eukaryotic Translation Initiation. Int J Mol Sci. 2020;21:12. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms21124402.
Google Scholar
Cargill M, Venkataraman R, Lee S. DEAD-Box RNA Helicases and Genome Stability. Genes 2021;12. https://doi.org/10.3390/genes
Olkinuora A, Nieminen TT, Douglas S, Kauppinen A, Kontro M, Väänänen J, et al. Identification of DHX40 as a candidate susceptibility gene for colorectal and hematological neoplasia. Leukemia. 2023;37:2301–5. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41375-023-02021-9.
Google Scholar
Wang Q, Qian L, Tao M, Liu J, Qi FZ. Knockdown of DEAD-box RNA helicase 52 (DDX52) suppresses the proliferation of melanoma cells in vitro and of nude mouse xenografts by targeting c-Myc. Bioengineered. 2021;12:3539–49. https://doi.org/10.1080/21655979.2021.1950283.
Google Scholar
Li F, Ling X, Chakraborty S, Fountzilas C, Wang J, Jamroze A, et al. Role of the DEAD-box RNA helicase DDX5 (p68) in cancer DNA repair, immune suppression, cancer metabolic control, virus infection promotion, and human microbiome (microbiota) negative influence. J Exp Clin Cancer Res. 2023;42:213. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13046-023-02787-x.
Google Scholar
Yang F, Bian T, Zhan X, Chen Z, Xing Z, Larsen NA, et al. Mechanisms of the RNA helicases DDX42 and DDX46 in human U2 snRNP assembly. Nat Commun. 2023;14:897. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-023-36489-x.
Google Scholar
Kang HJ, Eom Hjin, Kim H, Myung K, Kwon HM, Choi JH. Thrap3 promotes R-loop resolution via interaction with methylated DDX5. Exp Mol Med. 2021;53:1602–11. https://doi.org/10.1038/s12276-021-00689-6.
Google Scholar
Clerc V, Valat J, Grand X, Fontrodona N, Bazire M, Rama N, et al. The MYCN oncoprotein and helicases DDX17 and DDX5 have opposite effects on the production of chimeric transcripts in neuroblastoma cells. bioRxiv. 2024;2024.02.05.578895. https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.02.05.578895
Zhao X, Li D, Yang F, Lian H, Wang J, Wang X, et al. Long noncoding RNA NHEG1 drives β-Catenin transactivation and neuroblastoma progression through interacting with DDX5. Mol Ther. 2020;28:946–62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ymthe.2019.12.013.
Google Scholar
Iwatani-Yoshihara M, Ito M, Ishibashi Y, Oki H, Tanaka T, Morishita D, et al. Discovery and Characterization of a Eukaryotic Initiation Factor 4A-3-Selective Inhibitor That Suppresses Nonsense-Mediated mRNA Decay. ACS Chem Biol. 2017;12:1760–8. https://doi.org/10.1021/acschembio.7b00041.
Google Scholar
Kanellis DC, Espinoza JA, Zisi A, Sakkas E, Bartkova J, Katsori AM, et al. The exon-junction complex helicase eIF4A3 controls cell fate via coordinated regulation of ribosome biogenesis and translational output. Sci Adv. 2021;7. https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.abf7561.
Skofler C, Kleinegger F, Krassnig S, Birkl-Toeglhofer AM, Singer G, Till H, et al. Eukaryotic Translation Initiation Factor 4AI: A Potential Novel Target in Neuroblastoma. Cells. 2021;10:301. https://doi.org/10.3390/cells10020301.
Google Scholar
Hamadeh Z, Lansdorp P. RECQL5 at the intersection of replication and transcription. Front Cell Dev Biol. 2020;8:324. https://doi.org/10.3389/fcell.2020.00324.
Google Scholar
Chappidi N, Nascakova Z, Boleslavska B, Zellweger R, Isik E, Andrs M, et al. Fork cleavage-religation cycle and active transcription mediate replication restart after fork stalling at co-transcriptional R-LLoops. Mol Cell. 2020;77:528–41.e8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.molcel.2019.10.026.
Google Scholar
Philip KT, Dutta K, Chakraborty S, Patro BS. Functional inhibition of RECQL5 helicase elicits non-homologous end joining response and sensitivity of breast cancers to PARP inhibitor. Int J Biochem Cell Biol. 2023;161:106443. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocel.2023.106443.
Google Scholar
Lin Y, Chen H, Wang X, Xiang J, Wang H, Peng J. Mining the role of RECQL5 in gastric cancer and seeking potential regulatory network by bioinformatics analysis. Exp Mol Pathol. 2020;115:104477. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.yexmp.2020.104477.
Google Scholar
Huang X, Zhang H, Guo X, Zhu Z, Cai H, Kong X. Insulin-like growth factor 2 mRNA-binding protein 1 (IGF2BP1) in cancer. J Hematol Oncol. 2018;11:88. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13045-018-0628-y.
Google Scholar
Bell JL, Turlapati R, Liu T, Schulte JH, Hüttelmaier S. IGF2BP1 harbors prognostic significance by gene gain and diverse expression in neuroblastoma. J Clin Oncol. 2015;33:1285–93. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2014.55.9880.
Google Scholar
Hagemann S, Misiak D, Bell JL, Fuchs T, Lederer MI, Bley N, et al. IGF2BP1 induces neuroblastoma via a druggable feedforward loop with MYCN promoting 17q oncogene expression. Mol Cancer. 2023;22. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12943-023-01792-0.
Ying Y, Wu Y, Zhang F, Tang Y, Yi J, Ma X, et al. Co-transcriptional R-loops-mediated epigenetic regulation drives growth retardation and docetaxel chemosensitivity enhancement in advanced prostate cancer. Mol Cancer. 2024;23:79. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12943-024-01994-0.
Google Scholar
Kim N, Sun H. The Dynamic Interactions of m6A Modification and R-Loops: Implications for Genome Stability. Epigenomes. 2025;9:21. https://doi.org/10.3390/epigenomes9020021.
Google Scholar
Huang H, Weng H, Sun W, Qin X, Shi H, Wu H, et al. Recognition of RNA N6-methyladenosine by IGF2BP proteins enhances mRNA stability and translation. Nat Cell Biol. 2018;20:285–95. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41556-018-0045-z.
Google Scholar
Manning M, Jiang Y, Wang R, Liu L, Rode S, Bonahoom M, et al. Pan-cancer analysis of RNA methyltransferases identifies FTSJ3 as a potential regulator of breast cancer progression. RNA Biol. 2020;17:474–86. https://doi.org/10.1080/15476286.2019.1708549.
Google Scholar
Zhuang Q, Dai Z, Xu X, Bai S, Zhang Y, Zheng Y, et al. RNA Methyltransferase FTSJ3 Regulates the Type I Interferon Pathway to Promote Hepatocellular Carcinoma Immune Evasion. Cancer Res. 2024;84:405–18. https://doi.org/10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-23-2049.
Google Scholar
Mengzhen Z, Xinwei H, Zeheng T, Nan L, Yang Y, Huirong Y, et al. Integrated machine learning-driven disulfidptosis profiling: CYFIP1 and EMILIN1 as therapeutic nodes in neuroblastoma. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol. 2024;150:109. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00432-024-05630-8.
Google Scholar
Nagy Z, Seneviratne JA, Kanikevich M, Chang W, Mayoh C, Venkat P, et al. An ALYREF-MYCN coactivator complex drives neuroblastoma tumorigenesis through effects on USP3 and MYCN stability. Nat Commun. 2021;12:1881. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-021-22143-x.
Google Scholar
Lamers F, van der Ploeg I, Schild L, Ebus ME, Koster J, Hansen BR, et al. Knockdown of survivin (BIRC5) causes apoptosis in neuroblastoma via mitotic catastrophe. Endocr Relat Cancer. 2011;18:657–68. https://doi.org/10.1530/ERC-11-0207.
Google Scholar
Chen YL, Eriksson S, Chang ZF. Regulation and functional contribution of thymidine kinase 1 in repair of DNA damage. J Biol Chem. 2010;285:27327–35. https://doi.org/10.1074/jbc.M110.137042.
Google Scholar
Yogev O, Almeida GS, Barker KT, George SL, Kwok C, Campbell J, et al. In vivo modeling of chemoresistant neuroblastoma provides new insights into chemorefractory disease and metastasis. Cancer Res. 2019;79:5382–93. https://doi.org/10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-18-2759.
Google Scholar
Zhang H, He Z, Qiu L, Wei J, Gong X, Xian M et al. PRR11 promotes cell proliferation by regulating PTTG1 through interacting with E2F1 transcription factor in pan-cancer. Front Mol Biosci. 2022. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/molecular-biosciences/articles/10.3389/fmolb.2022.877320.
Han W, Chen L. PRR11 in Malignancies: Biological Activities and Targeted Therapies. Biomolecules. MDPI; 2022. https://doi.org/10.3390/biom12121800.
Miao Z, Xu L, Gu W, Ren Y, Li R, Zhang S, et al. A targetable PRR11-DHODH axis drives ferroptosis- and temozolomide-resistance in glioblastoma. Redox Biol. 2024;73:103220. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.redox.2024.103220.
Google Scholar
Durinck K, Irwin MS. DNA repair and replicative stress addiction in neuroblastoma. EJC Paediatr Oncol. 2024;4:100177. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejcped.2024.100177.
Google Scholar
Müller M, Eing L, Uhl L, Schmitz M, Kaneva I, Byrne DP, et al. The MYCN/Aurora-A complex is a cyclin activating kinase for CDK12. bioRxiv [Preprint]. 2025. https://doi.org/10.1101/2025.01.15.633177.
Simon T, Langler A, Berthold F, Klingebiel T, Hero B. Topotecan and Etoposide in the Treatment of Relapsed High-risk Neuroblastoma. J Pediatr Hematol Oncol. 2007;29:101–6. https://doi.org/10.1097/MPH.0b013e3180320b48.
Google Scholar
Groelly FJ, Porru M, Zimmer J, Benainous H, De Visser Y, Kosova AA, et al. Anti-tumoural activity of the G-quadruplex ligand pyridostatin against BRCA1/2-deficient tumours. EMBO Mol Med. 2022;14:e14501. https://doi.org/10.15252/emmm.202114501.
Google Scholar
Johnson SF, Cruz C, Greifenberg AK, Dust S, Stover DG, Chi D, et al. CDK12 Inhibition Reverses De Novo and Acquired PARP Inhibitor Resistance in BRCA Wild-Type and Mutated Models of Triple-Negative Breast Cancer. Cell Rep. 2016;17:2367–81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.celrep.2016.10.077.
Google Scholar
Nunes C, Bekaert SL, Parsa S, Nelen Iris, Martens F, de Stanchina E et al. TPX2 is a downstream target of the eIF4A controlled translational program in neuroblastoma. Research Square [Preprint]. 2024 Nov 18. https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-5318040/v1.
Lamers F, Schild L, Koster J, Versteeg R, Caron HN, Molenaar JJ. Targeted BIRC5 silencing using YM155 causes cell death in neuroblastoma cells with low ABCB1 expression. Eur J Cancer. 2012;48:763–71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejca.2011.10.012.
Google Scholar
Giaccone G, Zatloukal P, Roubec J, Floor K, Musil J, Kuta M, et al. Multicenter Phase II Trial of YM155, a Small-Molecule Suppressor of Survivin, in Patients With Advanced, Refractory, Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27:4481–6. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2008.21.1862.
Google Scholar
Tolcher AW, Quinn DI, Ferrari A, Ahmann F, Giaccone G, Drake T, et al. A Phase II study of YM155, a novel small-molecule suppressor of survivin, in castration-resistant taxane-pretreated prostate cancer. Ann Oncol. 2012;23:968–73. https://doi.org/10.1093/annonc/mdr353.
Google Scholar
Li X, Yang F, He N, Zhang M, Lv Y, Yu Y, et al. YM155 inhibits neuroblastoma growth through degradation of MYCN: A new role as a USP7 inhibitor. Eur J Pharm Sci. 2023;181:106343. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejps.2022.106343.
Google Scholar
Ling X, Cao S, Cheng Q, Keefe JT, Rustum YM, Li F. A novel small molecule FL118 that selectively inhibits survivin, Mcl-1, XIAP and cIAP2 in a p53-independent manner, shows superior antitumor activity. PLoS One. 2012;7:e45571. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0045571.
Google Scholar
Li F, Fountzilas C, Puzanov I, Attwood KM, Morrison C, Ling X. Multiple functions of the DEAD-box RNA helicase, DDX5 (p68), make DDX5 a superior oncogenic biomarker and target for targeted cancer therapy. Am J Cancer Res. 2021;11:5190–213.
Google Scholar
Biegel JM, Dhamdhere M, Gao S, Gowda CP, Kawasawa YI, Spiegelman VS. Inhibition of the mRNA-Binding Protein IGF2BP1 Suppresses Proliferation and Sensitizes Neuroblastoma Cells to Chemotherapeutic Agents. Front Oncol. 2021;11:608816. https://doi.org/10.3389/fonc.2021.608816.
Google Scholar
Zhang X, Chen X, Lu L, Fang Q, Liu C, Lin Z. Identification of small-molecule inhibitors of human MUS81-EME1/2 by FRET-based high-throughput screening. Bioorg Med Chem. 2023 Jul 15;90. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.BMC.2023.117383.
Collie GW, Börjesson U, Chen Y, Dong Z, Di Fruscia P, Gohlke A, et al. Fragment-based discovery of novel MUS81 inhibitors. ACS Med Chem Lett. 2024;15:1151–8. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsmedchemlett.3c00453.
Google Scholar
Pfander B, Matos J. Control of Mus81 nuclease during the cell cycle. FEBS Lett. 2017;591:2048–56. https://doi.org/10.1002/1873-3468.12727.
Google Scholar
Kai M, Boddy MN, Russell P, Wang TSF. Replication checkpoint kinase Cds1 regulates Mus81 to preserve genome integrity during replication stress. Genes Dev. 2005;19:919–32. https://doi.org/10.1101/gad.1304305.
Google Scholar
Domínguez-Kelly R, Martín Y, Koundrioukoff S, Tanenbaum ME, Smits VAJ, Medema RH, et al. Wee1 controls genomic stability during replication by regulating the Mus81-Eme1 endonuclease. J Cell Biol. 2011;194:567–79. https://doi.org/10.1083/jcb.201101047.
Google Scholar
Xing M, Wang X, Palmai-Pallag T, Shen H, Helleday T, Hickson ID, et al. Acute MUS81 depletion leads to replication fork slowing and a constitutive DNA damage response. Oncotarget. 2015;6:37638–46. https://doi.org/10.18632/oncotarget.5497.
Google Scholar
Forment JV, Blasius M, Guerini I, Jackson SP. Structure-specific DNA endonuclease Mus81/Eme1 generates DNA damage caused by Chk1 inactivation. PLoS One [Internet]. 2011;6:e23517. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0023517.
Google Scholar
Matos DA, Zhang JM, Ouyang J, Nguyen HD, Genois MM, Zou L. ATR protects the genome against R loops through a MUS81-triggered feedback loop. Mol Cell. 2020;77:514–27.e4. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.molcel.2019.10.010.
Google Scholar
