Multi-omics Data Reveal the Effect of Sodium Butyrate on Gene Expression and Protein Modification in Streptomyces

Manipulation and epigenetic control of silent biosynthetic pathways in actinobacteria

Most biosynthetic gene clusters (BGCs) of Actinobacteria are either silent or expressed less than the detectable level. The non-genetic approaches including biological interactions, chemical agents, and physical stresses that can be used to awaken silenced pathways are compared in this paper. These non-genetic induction strategies often need screening approaches, including one strain many compounds (OSMAC), reporter-guided mutant selection, and high throughput elicitor screening (HiTES) have been developed. Different types of genetic manipulations applied in the induction of cryptic BGCs of Actinobacteria can be categorized as genome-wide pleiotropic and targeted approaches like manipulation of global regulatory systems, modulation of regulatory genes, ribosome and engineering of RNA polymerase or phosphopantheteine transferases. Targeted approaches including genome editing by CRISPR, mutation in transcription factors and modification of BGCs promoters, inactivation of the highly expressed biosynthetic pathways, deleting the suppressors or awakening the activators, heterologous expression, or refactoring of gene clusters can be applied for activation of pathways which are predicted to synthesize new bioactive structures in genome mining studies of Acinobacteria. In this review, the challenges and advantages of employing these approaches in induction of Actinobacteria BGCs are discussed. Further, novel natural products needed as drug for pharmaceutical industry or as biofertilizers in agricultural industry can be discovered even from known species of Actinobactera by the innovative approaches of metabolite biosynthesis elicitation.

Tumor-specific radiosensitizing effect of the ATM inhibitor AZD0156 in melanoma cells with low toxicity to healthy fibroblasts

PURPOSE

Despite new treatment options, melanoma continues to have an unfavorable prognosis. DNA damage response (DDR) inhibitors are a promising drug class, especially in combination with chemotherapy (CT) or radiotherapy (RT). Manipulating DNA damage repair during RT is an opportunity to exploit the genomic instability of cancer cells and may lead to radiosensitizing effects in tumors that could improve cancer therapy.

METHODS

A panel of melanoma-derived cell lines of different origin were used to investigate toxicity-related clonogenic survival, cell death, and cell cycle distribution after treatment with a kinase inhibitor (KI) against ATM (AZD0156) or ATR (VE-822, berzosertib), irradiation with 2 Gy, or a combination of KI plus ionizing radiation (IR). Two fibroblast cell lines generated from healthy skin tissue were used as controls.

RESULTS

Clonogenic survival indicated a clear radiosensitizing effect of the ATM inhibitor (ATMi) AZD0156 in all melanoma cells in a synergistic manner, but not in healthy tissue fibroblasts. In contrast, the ATR inhibitor (ATRi) VE-822 led to additive enhancement of IR-related toxicity in most of the melanoma cells. Both inhibitors mainly increased cell death induction in combination with IR. In healthy fibroblasts, VE-822 plus IR led to higher cell death rates compared to AZD0156. A significant G2/M block was particularly induced in cancer cells when combining AZD0156 with IR.

CONCLUSION

ATMi, in contrast to ATRi, resulted in synergistic radiosensitization regarding colony formation in melanoma cancer cells, while healthy tissue fibroblasts were merely affected with respect to cell death induction. In connection with an increased number of melanoma cells in the G2/M phase after ATMi plus IR treatment, ATMi seems to be superior to ATRi in melanoma cancer cell treatments when combined with RT.