-
Biochemical Pharmacology Sep 2019Mitosis ensures accurate segregation of duplicated DNA through tight regulation of chromosome condensation, bipolar spindle assembly, chromosome alignment in the... (Review)
Review
Mitosis ensures accurate segregation of duplicated DNA through tight regulation of chromosome condensation, bipolar spindle assembly, chromosome alignment in the metaphase plate, chromosome segregation and cytokinesis. Poly(ADP-ribose) polymerases (PARPs), in particular PARP1, PARP2, PARP3, PARP5a (TNKS1), as well as poly(ADP-ribose) glycohydrolase (PARG), regulate different mitotic functions, including centrosome function, mitotic spindle assembly, mitotic checkpoints, telomere length and telomere cohesion. PARP depletion or inhibition give rise to various mitotic defects such as centrosome amplification, multipolar spindles, chromosome misalignment, premature loss of cohesion, metaphase arrest, anaphase DNA bridges, lagging chromosomes, and micronuclei. As the mechanisms of PARP1/2 inhibitor-mediated cell death are being progressively elucidated, it is becoming clear that mitotic defects caused by PARP1/2 inhibition arise due to replication stress and DNA damage in S phase. As it stands, entrapment of inactive PARP1/2 on DNA phenocopies replication stress through accumulation of unresolved replication intermediates, double-stranded DNA breaks (DSBs) and incorrectly repaired DSBs, which can be transmitted from S phase to mitosis and instigate various mitotic defects, giving rise to both numerical and structural chromosomal aberrations. Cancer cells have increased levels of replication stress, which makes them particularly susceptible to a combination of agents that compromise replication fork stability. Indeed, combining PARP1/2 inhibitors with genetic deficiencies in DNA repair pathways, DNA-damaging agents, ATR and other cell cycle checkpoint inhibitors has yielded synergistic effects in killing cancer cells. Here I provide a comprehensive overview of the mitotic functions of PARPs and PARG, mitotic phenotypes induced by their depletion or inhibition, as well as the therapeutic relevance of targeting mitotic cells by directly interfering with mitotic functions or indirectly through replication stress.
Topics: Animals; DNA Damage; DNA Repair; Humans; Mitosis; Poly (ADP-Ribose) Polymerase-1; Poly(ADP-ribose) Polymerase Inhibitors; Poly(ADP-ribose) Polymerases
PubMed: 30910692
DOI: 10.1016/j.bcp.2019.03.028 -
Environmental and Molecular Mutagenesis Aug 2020Environmental DNA damaging agents continuously challenge the integrity of the genome by introducing a variety of DNA lesions. The DNA damage caused by environmental... (Review)
Review
Environmental DNA damaging agents continuously challenge the integrity of the genome by introducing a variety of DNA lesions. The DNA damage caused by environmental factors will lead to mutagenesis and subsequent carcinogenesis if they are not removed efficiently by repair pathways. Methods for detection of DNA damage and repair can be applied to identify, visualize, and quantify the DNA damage formation and repair events, and they enable us to illustrate the molecular mechanisms of DNA damage formation, DNA repair pathways, mutagenesis, and carcinogenesis. Ever since the discovery of the double helical structure of DNA in 1953, a great number of methods have been developed to detect various types of DNA damage and repair. Rapid advances in sequencing technologies have facilitated the emergence of a variety of novel methods for detecting environmentally induced DNA damage and repair at the genome-wide scale during the last decade. In this review, we provide a historical overview of the development of various damage detection methods. We also highlight the current methodologies to detect DNA damage and repair, especially some next generation sequencing-based methods.
Topics: Animals; Carcinogenesis; DNA; DNA Damage; DNA Repair; Environmental Exposure; High-Throughput Nucleotide Sequencing; Humans; Mutagenesis
PubMed: 32083352
DOI: 10.1002/em.22365 -
Frontiers in Immunology 2021The maintenance of genomic stability in multicellular organisms relies on the DNA damage response (DDR). The DDR encompasses several interconnected pathways that... (Review)
Review
The maintenance of genomic stability in multicellular organisms relies on the DNA damage response (DDR). The DDR encompasses several interconnected pathways that cooperate to ensure the repair of genomic lesions. Besides their repair functions, several DDR proteins have emerged as involved in the onset of inflammatory responses. In particular, several actors of the DDR have been reported to elicit innate immune activation upon detection of cytosolic pathological nucleic acids. Conversely, pattern recognition receptors (PRRs), initially described as dedicated to the detection of cytosolic immune-stimulatory nucleic acids, have been found to regulate DDR. Thus, although initially described as operating in specific subcellular localizations, actors of the DDR and nucleic acid immune sensors may be involved in interconnected pathways, likely influencing the efficiency of one another. Within this mini review, we discuss evidences for the crosstalk between PRRs and actors of the DDR. For this purpose, we mainly focus on cyclic GMP-AMP (cGAMP) synthetase (cGAS) and Interferon Gamma Inducible Protein 16 (IFI16), as major PRRs involved in the detection of aberrant nucleic acid species, and components of the DNA-dependent protein kinase (DNA-PK) complex, involved in the repair of double strand breaks that were recently described to qualify as potential PRRs. Finally, we discuss how the crosstalk between DDR and nucleic acid-associated Interferon responses cooperate for the fine-tuning of innate immune activation, and therefore dictate pathological outcomes. Understanding the molecular determinants of such cooperation will be paramount to the design of future therapeutic approaches.
Topics: Cytosol; DNA Damage; Humans; Immunity, Innate; Membrane Proteins; Nucleic Acids; Receptors, Pattern Recognition; Signal Transduction
PubMed: 33981307
DOI: 10.3389/fimmu.2021.660560 -
Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) May 2020Epigenetic research has rapidly evolved into a dynamic field of genome biology. Chromatin regulation has been proved to be an essential aspect for all genomic processes,... (Review)
Review
Epigenetic research has rapidly evolved into a dynamic field of genome biology. Chromatin regulation has been proved to be an essential aspect for all genomic processes, including DNA repair. Chromatin structure is modified by enzymes and factors that deposit, erase, and interact with epigenetic marks such as DNA and histone modifications, as well as by complexes that remodel nucleosomes. In this review we discuss recent advances on how the chromatin state is modulated during this multi-step process of damage recognition, signaling, and repair. Moreover, we examine how chromatin is regulated when different pathways of DNA repair are utilized. Furthermore, we review additional modes of regulation of DNA repair, such as through the role of global and localized chromatin states in maintaining expression of DNA repair genes, as well as through the activity of epigenetic enzymes on non-nucleosome substrates. Finally, we discuss current and future applications of the mechanistic interplays between chromatin regulation and DNA repair in the context cancer treatment.
Topics: Chromatin Assembly and Disassembly; DNA Damage; DNA Repair; Epigenesis, Genetic; Humans
PubMed: 32471288
DOI: 10.3390/molecules25112496 -
Genes Dec 2022Double-strand breaks (DSBs) are toxic lesions that can be generated by exposure to genotoxic agents or during physiological processes, such as during V(D)J... (Review)
Review
Double-strand breaks (DSBs) are toxic lesions that can be generated by exposure to genotoxic agents or during physiological processes, such as during V(D)J recombination. The repair of these DSBs is crucial to prevent genomic instability and to maintain cellular homeostasis. Two main pathways participate in repairing DSBs, namely, non-homologous end joining (NHEJ) and homologous recombination (HR). The P53-binding protein 1 (53BP1) plays a pivotal role in the choice of DSB repair mechanism, promotes checkpoint activation and preserves genome stability upon DSBs. By preventing DSB end resection, 53BP1 promotes NHEJ over HR. Nonetheless, the balance between DSB repair pathways remains crucial, as unscheduled NHEJ or HR events at different phases of the cell cycle may lead to genomic instability. Therefore, the recruitment of 53BP1 to chromatin is tightly regulated and has been widely studied. However, less is known about the mechanism regulating 53BP1 recruitment at a distance from the DNA damage. The present review focuses on the mechanism of 53BP1 recruitment to damage and on recent studies describing novel mechanisms keeping 53BP1 at a distance from DSBs.
Topics: Humans; DNA Breaks, Double-Stranded; DNA End-Joining Repair; DNA Damage; Chromatin; Genomic Instability
PubMed: 36553657
DOI: 10.3390/genes13122390 -
Current Opinion in Biotechnology Feb 2019Detection and characterization of DNA damage is essential for evaluating genotoxicity, monitoring DNA repair, developing biomarkers for exposures, and evaluating the... (Review)
Review
Detection and characterization of DNA damage is essential for evaluating genotoxicity, monitoring DNA repair, developing biomarkers for exposures, and evaluating the efficacy of chemotherapies. These diverse applications for DNA damage measurements have spurred the continual development and refinement of methodologies for detecting, characterizing, and quantifying DNA damage from isolated DNA and in cells and tissues. Current damage detection methods cover a wide range of techniques from radiolabeling to mass spectrometry, and use of these techniques varies widely based on expense, expertise, and knowledge of adduct formation. More generalizable, easy-to-use methods for detecting and quantifying DNA damage are needed, and there has been an emergence of fluorescence-based methodologies to address this need. Developments in these fluorescence-based strategies are reviewed here.
Topics: Biomarkers; DNA Adducts; DNA Damage; DNA Repair; Enzyme Assays; Fluorescence; Humans
PubMed: 30114673
DOI: 10.1016/j.copbio.2018.08.001 -
Proceedings of the National Academy of... Jun 2023Understanding and predicting the outcome of the interaction of light with DNA has a significant impact on the study of DNA repair and radiotherapy. We report on a...
Understanding and predicting the outcome of the interaction of light with DNA has a significant impact on the study of DNA repair and radiotherapy. We report on a combination of femtosecond pulsed laser microirradiation at different wavelengths, quantitative imaging, and numerical modeling that yields a comprehensive picture of photon-mediated and free-electron-mediated DNA damage pathways in live cells. Laser irradiation was performed under highly standardized conditions at four wavelengths between 515 nm and 1,030 nm, enabling to study two-photon photochemical and free-electron-mediated DNA damage in situ. We quantitatively assessed cyclobutane pyrimidine dimer (CPD) and γH2AX-specific immunofluorescence signals to calibrate the damage threshold dose at these wavelengths and performed a comparative analysis of the recruitment of DNA repair factors xeroderma pigmentosum complementation group C (XPC) and Nijmegen breakage syndrome 1 (Nbs1). Our results show that two-photon-induced photochemical CPD generation dominates at 515 nm, while electron-mediated damage dominates at wavelengths ≥620 nm. The recruitment analysis revealed a cross talk between nucleotide excision and homologous recombination DNA repair pathways at 515 nm. Numerical simulations predicted electron densities and electron energy spectra, which govern the yield functions of a variety of direct electron-mediated DNA damage pathways and of indirect damage by OH radicals resulting from laser and electron interactions with water. Combining these data with information on free electron-DNA interactions gained in artificial systems, we provide a conceptual framework for the interpretation of the wavelength dependence of laser-induced DNA damage that may guide the selection of irradiation parameters in studies and applications that require the selective induction of DNA lesions.
Topics: Electrons; DNA Damage; Pyrimidine Dimers; DNA Repair; Lasers
PubMed: 37307476
DOI: 10.1073/pnas.2220132120 -
Cold Spring Harbor Perspectives in... Jul 2013Under favorable conditions DNA can survive for thousands of years in the remains of dead organisms. The DNA extracted from such remains is invariably degraded to a small... (Review)
Review
Under favorable conditions DNA can survive for thousands of years in the remains of dead organisms. The DNA extracted from such remains is invariably degraded to a small average size by processes that at least partly involve depurination. It also contains large amounts of deaminated cytosine residues that are accumulated toward the ends of the molecules, as well as several other lesions that are less well characterized.
Topics: DNA; DNA Damage; DNA Fragmentation; Deamination; Sequence Analysis, DNA; Time Factors
PubMed: 23729639
DOI: 10.1101/cshperspect.a012567 -
Cold Spring Harbor Perspectives in... Jun 2013Alternative excision repair (AER) is a category of excision repair initiated by a single nick, made by an endonuclease, near the site of DNA damage, and followed by... (Review)
Review
Alternative excision repair (AER) is a category of excision repair initiated by a single nick, made by an endonuclease, near the site of DNA damage, and followed by excision of the damaged DNA, repair synthesis, and ligation. The ultraviolet (UV) damage endonuclease in fungi and bacteria introduces a nick immediately 5' to various types of UV damage and initiates its excision repair that is independent of nucleotide excision repair (NER). Endo IV-type apurinic/apyrimidinic (AP) endonucleases from Escherichia coli and yeast and human Exo III-type AP endonuclease APEX1 introduce a nick directly and immediately 5' to various types of oxidative base damage besides the AP site, initiating excision repair. Another endonuclease, endonuclease V from bacteria to humans, binds deaminated bases and cleaves the phosphodiester bond located 1 nucleotide 3' of the base, leading to excision repair. A single-strand break in DNA is one of the most frequent types of DNA damage within cells and is repaired efficiently. AER makes use of such repair capability of single-strand breaks, removes DNA damage, and has an important role in complementing BER and NER.
Topics: Animals; DNA Breaks, Single-Stranded; DNA Damage; DNA Repair; DNA Repair Enzymes; Endonucleases; Humans; Models, Biological; Species Specificity; Yeasts
PubMed: 23645854
DOI: 10.1101/cshperspect.a012617 -
Acta Biochimica Et Biophysica Sinica May 2022DNA damage repair and innate immunity are two conserved mechanisms that both function in cellular stress responses. Recently, an increasing amount of evidence has... (Review)
Review
DNA damage repair and innate immunity are two conserved mechanisms that both function in cellular stress responses. Recently, an increasing amount of evidence has uncovered the close relationship between these two ancient biological processes. Here, we review the classical function of factors involved in DNA repair, and especially double-strand break repair, in innate immunity; more importantly, we discuss the novel roles of DNA repair factors in regulating innate immunity and . In addition, we also review the roles of DNA repair, innate immunity and their crosstalk in human diseases, which suggest that these two pathways may be compelling targets for disease prevention and treatment.
Topics: DNA; DNA Breaks, Double-Stranded; DNA Damage; DNA Repair; Humans; Nucleic Acids
PubMed: 35975605
DOI: 10.3724/abbs.2022061