From DNA end chemistry to cell-cycle response: the importance of structure, even when it's broken

Low-fidelity compensatory backup alternative DNA repair pathways may unify current carcinogenesis theories

The somatic mutation carcinogenesis theory has dominated for decades. The alternative theory, tissue organization field theory, argues that the development of cancer is determined by the surrounding microenvironment. However, neither theory can explain all features of cancer. As cancers share the features of uncontrolled proliferation and genomic instability, they are likely to have the same pathogenesis. It has been found that various DNA repair pathways within a cell crosstalk with one another, forming a DNA repair network. When one DNA repair pathways is defective, the others may work as compensatory backups. The latter pathways are explored for synthetic lethal anticancer therapy. In this article, we extend the concept of compensatory alternative DNA repair to unify the theories. We propose that the microenvironmental stress can activate low-fidelity compensatory alternative DNA repair, causing mutations. If the mutation occurs to a DNA repair gene, this secondarily mutated gene can lead to even more mutated genes, including those related to other DNA repair pathways, eventually destabilizing the genome. Therefore, the low-fidelity compensatory alternative DNA repair may mediate microenvironment-dependent carcinogenesis. The proposal seems consistent with the view of evolution: the environmental stress causes mutations to adapt to the changing environment.

Ku70 and Rad51 vary in their importance for the repair of doxorubicin- versus etoposide-induced DNA damage

For DNA targeting anticancer drugs, cellular DNA repair mechanisms may cause resistance and hamper the therapeutic outcome. DNA damage induced by topoisomerase IIα inhibitors like etoposide and anthracyclines, which are a mainstay of cancer therapy, is also repaired in many cell types, but the impact and precise mechanisms of this repair are still obscure. To investigate the DNA damage response of human adenocarcinoma HT29-cells to doxorubicin and to compare the involvement of Ku70 and Rad51 in the repair of doxorubicin- versus etoposide-induced DNA damage, we assessed cell cycle distribution and cell death, DNA damage, proteins relevant for repair by homologous recombination and non-homologous end-joining, and clonogenicity following exposure to doxorubicin at clinically achievable concentrations. Also, we assessed changes in the repair kinetics after siRNA-mediated attenuation of Ku70 or Rad51 expression. We found that exposure to doxorubicin for 24 h induced a substantial amount of DNA damage that was largely repaired when doxorubicin was removed and the cells were maintained in drug-free medium. Nevertheless, a pronounced G(2)/M arrest occurred at times when repair was maximal. This was followed by a distinct increase in cell death and loss of clonogenicity. In this regard, responses to doxorubicin and etoposide were similar. However, distinct differences in the repair process following doxorubicin versus etoposide were seen in concentration dependency, time-course and requirement of Ku70 and Rad51 proteins. In spite of the shared molecular target of doxorubicin and etoposide, DNA lesions induced by these compounds are repaired differently.

ATM and Artemis promote homologous recombination of radiation-induced DNA double-strand breaks in G2

Homologous recombination (HR) and non-homologous end joining (NHEJ) represent distinct pathways for repairing DNA double-strand breaks (DSBs). Previous work implicated Artemis and ATM in an NHEJ-dependent process, which repairs a defined subset of radiation-induced DSBs in G1-phase. Here, we show that in G2, as in G1, NHEJ represents the major DSB-repair pathway whereas HR is only essential for repair of approximately 15% of X- or gamma-ray-induced DSBs. In addition to requiring the known HR proteins, Brca2, Rad51 and Rad54, repair of radiation-induced DSBs by HR in G2 also involves Artemis and ATM suggesting that they promote NHEJ during G1 but HR during G2. The dependency for ATM for repair is relieved by depleting KAP-1, providing evidence that HR in G2 repairs heterochromatin-associated DSBs. Although not core HR proteins, ATM and Artemis are required for efficient formation of single-stranded DNA and Rad51 foci at radiation-induced DSBs in G2 with Artemis function requiring its endonuclease activity. We suggest that Artemis endonuclease removes lesions or secondary structures, which inhibit end resection and preclude the completion of HR or NHEJ.

Genome-wide analyses of recombination prone regions predict role of DNA structural motif in recombination

HapMap findings reveal surprisingly asymmetric distribution of recombinogenic regions. Short recombinogenic regions (hotspots) are interspersed between large relatively non-recombinogenic regions. This raises the interesting possibility of DNA sequence and/or other cis- elements as determinants of recombination. We hypothesized the involvement of non-canonical sequences that can result in local non-B DNA structures and tested this using the G-quadruplex DNA as a model. G-quadruplex or G4 DNA is a unique form of four-stranded non-B DNA structure that engages certain G-rich sequences, presence of such motifs has been noted within telomeres. In support of this hypothesis, genome-wide computational analyses presented here reveal enrichment of potential G4 (PG4) DNA forming sequences within 25618 human hotspots relative to 9290 coldspots (p<0.0001). Furthermore, co-occurrence of PG4 DNA within several short sequence elements that are associated with recombinogenic regions was found to be significantly more than randomly expected. Interestingly, analyses of more than 50 DNA binding factors revealed that co-occurrence of PG4 DNA with target DNA binding sites of transcription factors c-Rel, NF-kappa B (p50 and p65) and Evi-1 was significantly enriched in recombination-prone regions. These observations support involvement of G4 DNA in recombination, predicting a functional model that is consistent with duplex-strand separation induced by formation of G4 motifs in supercoiled DNA and/or when assisted by other cellular factors.

Engineering a DNA damage response without DNA damage

DNA damage response signaling has been achieved experimentally in the absence of double-strand DNA breaks.

Recent work has achieved the feat of activating the DNA damage checkpoint in the absence of DNA damage, revealing the importance of protein-chromatin associations for the activation, amplification and maintenance of the DNA damage response.