Chromium(VI) causes interstrand DNA cross-linking in vitro but shows no hypersensitivity in cross-link repair-deficient human cells

Forming a chromium-based interstrand DNA crosslink: Implications for carcinogenicity

The reduction of the carcinogen chromate has been proposed to lead to three Cr(III)-containing DNA lesions: binary adducts (Cr(III) and DNA), interstrand crosslinks, and ternary adducts (Cr(III) linking DNA to a small molecule or protein). Although the structures of binary adducts have recently been elucidated, the structures of interstrand crosslinks and ternary adducts are not known. Analysis of Cr(III) binding to an oligonucleotide duplex containing a 5'-CG site allows elucidation of the structure of an oxide- or hydroxide-bridged binuclear Cr(III) assembly bridging the two strands of DNA. One Cr(III) is directly coordinated by the N-7 atom of a guanine residue, and the complex straddles the helix to form a hydrogen bond between another guanine residue and a Cr(III)-bound aquo ligand. No involvement of the phosphate backbone was observed. The properties and stability of this Cr-O(H)-Cr-bridged complex differ significantly from those reported for Cr-induced interstrand crosslinks, suggesting that interstrand crosslinks resulting from chromate reduction may be organic in nature.

Interactions between chromium species and DNA in vitro and their potential role in the toxicity of hexavalent chromium

Epidemiological and animal studies have supported the carcinogenicity of hexavalent chromium [Cr(VI)]; however, molecular changes responsible for the induction of cancer by Cr(VI) are not entirely understood. Numerous mechanistic studies suggested the role of oxidative stress and genotoxicity in Cr(VI)-mediated carcinogenesis; however, specific types of DNA damage have not yet been conclusively attributed to specific chromium species or other reactive byproducts generated in biological systems exposed to Cr(VI). Due to the remarkably complex chemistry and biological effects of chromium species generated through the intracellular reduction of Cr(VI), their relevance for Cr(VI)-mediated carcinogenesis has not yet been fully elucidated and continues to be a subject of ongoing discussions in the field. In this report, we describe a complex world of chromium species and their reactivity with DNA and other biologically relevant molecules in vitro to inform a more complete understanding of Cr(VI)-mediated toxicity. In addition, we discuss previous results in the context of in vitro models and analytical methods to reconcile some conflicting findings on the biological role of chromium species.

Chemical mechanisms of DNA damage by carcinogenic chromium(VI)

Hexavalent chromium is a firmly established human carcinogen with documented exposures in many professional groups. Environmental exposure to Cr(VI) is also a significant public health concern. Cr(VI) exists in aqueous solutions as chromate anion that is unreactive with DNA and requires reductive activation inside the cells to produce genotoxic and mutagenic effects. Reduction of Cr(VI) in cells is nonenzymatic and in vivo principally driven by ascorbate with a secondary contribution from nonprotein thiols glutathione and cysteine. In addition to its much faster rate of reduction, ascorbate-driven metabolism avoids the formation of Cr(V) which is the first intermediate in Cr(VI) reduction by thiols. The end-product of Cr(VI) reduction is Cr(III) which forms several types of Cr-DNA adducts that are collectively responsible for all mutagenic and genotoxic effects in Cr(VI) reactions with ascorbate and thiols. Some Cr(V) forms can react with H2O2 to produce DNA-oxidizing peroxo species although this genotoxic pathway is suppressed in cells with physiological levels of ascorbate. Chemical reactions of Cr(VI) with ascorbate or thiols lack directly DNA-oxidizing metabolites. The formation of oxidative DNA breaks in early studies of these reactions was caused by iron contamination. Production of Cr(III)-DNA adducts in cells showed linear dose-dependence irrespective of the predominant reduction pathway and their processing by mismatch repair generated more toxic secondary genetic lesions in euchromatin. Overall, Cr(III)-DNA adduction is the dominant pathway for the formation of genotoxic and mutagenic DNA damage by carcinogenic Cr(VI).

Perspectives of Genetic Damage and Epigenetic Alterations by Hexavalent Chromium: Time Evolution Based on a Bibliometric Analysis

Compounds containing hexavalent chromium [Cr(VI)] have been classified as Group I human carcinogens in 1990 by the International Agency for Research on Cancer, known to induce human lung cancers. To determine the nature of Cr(VI) carcinogenesis, much has been learned about genetic damage and epigenetic alterations. On the basis of bibliometric analysis of the available literature found between 1966 and 2020, the present study investigated the evolution of author keywords; provided a summary of relevant studies focused on populations, animals/plants, or cells; and depicted the co-operation among countries or institutions and research group development. Additionally, multiomics technology and bioinformatics analysis can be a valuable tool for figuring out new biomarkers from different molecular levels like gene, RNA, protein, and metabolite and ascertaining the mechanism pathways of Cr(VI) genotoxicity and carcinogenesis.

Chromium-catechin complex, synthesis and toxicity check using bacterial models

Chromium-catechin complex was synthesized by reacting [Cr(H2O)6]2+ (hexa-aqua) with catechin as a ligand. Toxicity studies were carried out for the complex using bacterial models for safer application of this complex in the future as a drug. Chromium-catechin complex was characterized using ESI Mass spectrometry, electronic spectroscopy, FT-IR spectroscopy and cyclic voltammetry. The complex was found mildly inhibitory towards B. subtilis with the mode of action being oxidative damage, targeting cell membrane. The complex was supportive towards E. coli, which was evident from the growth profile and inhibition studies. SEM analysis supported the results of membrane integrity studies, where the bacterial liposomes upon treatment with the complex revealed slight morphological changes in the case of B. subtilis, without any change in the case of E. coli. The toxicity studies on chromium-catechin complex using bacterial model saves time, as well as resources by providing quick and reliable results, which could ease up the work to be done in future with higher group of organisms like animal model. Therefore, in the future, this complex can be used as an antidiabetic drug after performing toxicity studies with animal model.

Chromium exposure disrupts chromatin architecture upsetting the mechanisms that regulate transcription

IMPACT STATEMENT

This mini-review highlights current evidence on the mechanisms through which hexavalent chromium (Cr(VI)) disrupts transcriptional regulation, an emerging area of interest and one of the central processes by which chromium induces carcinogenesis. Several studies have shown that Cr(VI) causes widespread DNA damage and disrupts epigenetic signatures, suggesting that chromatin may be a direct Cr(VI) target. The findings discussed here suggest that Cr(VI) disrupts transcriptional regulation by causing genomic architecture changes.

Tdp1 processes chromate-induced single-strand DNA breaks that collapse replication forks

Hexavalent chromium [Cr(VI)] damages DNA and causes cancer, but it is unclear which DNA damage responses (DDRs) most critically protect cells from chromate toxicity. Here, genome-wide quantitative functional profiling, DDR measurements and genetic interaction assays in Schizosaccharomyces pombe reveal a chromate toxicogenomic profile that closely resembles the cancer chemotherapeutic drug camptothecin (CPT), which traps Topoisomerase 1 (Top1)-DNA covalent complex (Top1cc) at the 3’ end of single-stand breaks (SSBs), resulting in replication fork collapse. ATR/Rad3-dependent checkpoints that detect stalled and collapsed replication forks are crucial in Cr(VI)-treated cells, as is Mus81-dependent sister chromatid recombination (SCR) that repairs single-ended double-strand breaks (seDSBs) at broken replication forks. Surprisingly, chromate resistance does not require base excision repair (BER) or interstrand crosslink (ICL) repair, nor does co-elimination of XPA-dependent nucleotide excision repair (NER) and Rad18-mediated post-replication repair (PRR) confer chromate sensitivity in fission yeast. However, co-elimination of Tdp1 tyrosyl-DNA phosphodiesterase and Rad16-Swi10 (XPF-ERCC1) NER endonuclease synergistically enhances chromate toxicity in top1Δ cells. Pnk1 polynucleotide kinase phosphatase (PNKP), which restores 3’-hydroxyl ends to SSBs processed by Tdp1, is also critical for chromate resistance. Loss of Tdp1 ameliorates pnk1Δ chromate sensitivity while enhancing the requirement for Mus81. Thus, Tdp1 and PNKP, which prevent neurodegeneration in humans, repair an important class of Cr-induced SSBs that collapse replication forks.

Hexavalent chromium is a carcinogen that is found at toxic waste sites and in some groundwater supplies. Cellular metabolism converts chromium into DNA-damaging chromate, but it is unclear which types of chromate-DNA lesions are most dangerous, and which cellular mechanisms most critically prevent chromium toxicity. This study uses whole-genome profiling to identify DNA repair pathways that are crucial for chromate resistance in fission yeast. The resulting ‘toxicogenomic’ profile of chromate closely matches camptothecin, a natural product representing a class of chemotherapeutic drugs that cause replication fork collapse by poisoning Topoisomerase 1 (Top1), which relaxes supercoiled DNA by creating and resealing single-strand breaks (SSBs). Genetic interaction analyses uncover important roles for Tdp1 tyrosyl-DNA phosphodiesterase and Pnk1 polynucleotide 5’-kinase 3’-phosphatase (PNKP), which repair camptothecin-induced SSBs and prevent neurological disease in humans. However, chromium toxicity does not involve Top1. As Tdp1 and Pnk1 repair SSBs with 3’-blocked termini, these data suggest that Top1-independent 3’-blocked SSBs contribute to the carcinogenic and mutagenic properties of chromium.

Homologous Recombination and Translesion DNA Synthesis Play Critical Roles on Tolerating DNA Damage Caused by Trace Levels of Hexavalent Chromium

Contamination of potentially carcinogenic hexavalent chromium (Cr(VI)) in the drinking water is a major public health concern worldwide. However, little information is available regarding the biological effects of a nanomoler amount of Cr(VI). Here, we investigated the genotoxic effects of Cr(VI) at nanomoler levels and their repair pathways. We found that DNA damage response analyzed based on differential toxicity of isogenic cells deficient in various DNA repair proteins is observed after a three-day incubation with K₂CrO₄ in REV1-deficient DT40 cells at 19.2 μg/L or higher as well as in TK6 cells deficient in polymerase delta subunit 3 (POLD3) at 9.8 μg/L or higher. The genotoxicity of Cr(VI) decreased ~3000 times when the incubation time was reduced from three days to ten minutes. TK mutation rate also significantly decreased from 6 day to 1 day exposure to Cr(VI). The DNA damage response analysis suggest that DNA repair pathways, including the homologous recombination and REV1- and POLD3-mediated error-prone translesion synthesis pathways, are critical for the cells to tolerate to DNA damage caused by trace amount of Cr(VI).

Remediation of Cr(VI)-Contaminated Soil Using the Acidified Hydrazine Hydrate

Acidified hydrazine hydrate was used to remediate Cr(VI)-contaminated soil. The content of water-soluble Cr(VI) in contaminated soil was 4977.53 mg/kg. The optimal initial pH of hydrazine hydrate solution, soil to solution ratio and molar ratio of Cr(VI) to hydrazine hydrate for remediation of Cr(VI)-contaminated soil were 5.0, 3:1 and 1:3, respectively. Over 99.50 % of water-soluble Cr(VI) in the contaminated soil was reduced at the optimal condition within 30 min. The remediated soil can keep stable within 4 months. Meanwhile the total phosphorus increased from 0.47 to 4.29 g/kg, indicating that using of acidified hydrazine hydrate is an effective method to remediate Cr(VI)-contaminated soil.

Alleviation of toxic hexavalent chromium using indigenous aerobic bacteria isolated from contaminated tannery industry sites

In the last decade, much attention has been paid to bioremediation of Cr(VI) using various bacterial species. Cr(VI) remediation by indegeneous bacteria isolated from contaminated sites of a tannery industry located in Tamil Nadu, India, was investigated in this study. Three Cr(VI) resistant bacterial strains (TES-1, TEf-1, and TES-2) were isolated and selected based on their Cr(VI) reduction ability in minimal salt medium. Among these three bacterial strains, TES-1 was found to be most efficient in bioreduction, while TES-2 was only found to be Cr(VI) resistant and showed negligible bioreduction, whereas TEf-1 was observed to be most Cr(VI) tolerant. Potential for bioremediation of TES-1 and TEf-1 was further investigated at different concentrations of Cr(VI) in the range of 50 to 350 mg L(-1). TEf-1 showed prominent synchronous growth throughout the experiment, whereas TES-1 took a longer acclimatization time. Minimum inhibitory concentrations (MIC) of Cr(VI) for TES-1 and TEf-1 were approximated as 600 mg L(-1) and 750 mg L(-1), respectively. The kinetic behavior of Cr(VI) reduction by TES-1 and TEf-1 exhibited zero- and first-order removal kinetics for Cr(VI), respectively. The most efficient strain TES-1 was identified as Streptomyces sp. by gene sequencing of 16S rRNA.

Formaldehyde-Assisted Isolation of Regulatory Elements (FAIRE) analysis uncovers broad changes in chromatin structure resulting from hexavalent chromium exposure

The ability of chromatin to switch back and forth from open euchromatin to closed heterochromatin is vital for transcriptional regulation and genomic stability, but its dynamic structure is subject to disruption by exposure to environmental agents such as hexavalent chromium. Cr(VI) exposure disrupts chromatin remodeling mechanisms and causes chromosomal damage through formation of free radicals, Cr-DNA adducts, and DNA-Cr-protein cross-links. In addition, acute, high-concentration, and chronic, low-concentration exposures to Cr(VI) lead to significantly different transcriptional and genomic stability outcomes. We used mouse hepatoma Hepa-1c1c7 cells to investigate how transcriptional responses to chromium treatment might correlate with structural chromatin changes. We used Formaldehyde-Assisted Isolation of Regulatory Elements (FAIRE) analysis coupled with deep sequencing to identify regions of the genome that may switch between open and closed chromatin in response to exposure to varying Cr(VI) concentrations. At either Cr(VI) concentration, chromatin domains surrounding binding sites for AP-1 transcription factors become significantly open, whereas BACH2 and CTCF binding sites are open solely at the low and high concentrations, respectively. Parallel gene expression profiling using RNA-seq indicates that the structural chromatin changes caused by Cr(VI) affect gene expression levels in the target areas that vary depending on Cr(VI) concentration, but show no correlation between global changes in the overall transcriptional response and Cr(VI) concentration. Our results suggest that FAIRE may be a useful technique to map chromatin elements targeted by DNA damaging agents for which there is no prior knowledge of their specificity, and to identify subsequent transcriptomic changes induced by those agents.