Fifty years since DNA repair was linked to cancer

Dynamic Modelling of DNA Repair Pathway at the Molecular Level: A New Perspective

DNA is the genetic repository for all living organisms, and it is subject to constant changes caused by chemical and physical factors. Any change, if not repaired, erodes the genetic information and causes mutations and diseases. To ensure overall survival, robust DNA repair mechanisms and damage-bypass mechanisms have evolved to ensure that the DNA is constantly protected against potentially deleterious damage while maintaining its integrity. Not surprisingly, defects in DNA repair genes affect metabolic processes, and this can be seen in some types of cancer, where DNA repair pathways are disrupted and deregulated, resulting in genome instability. Mathematically modelling the complex network of genes and processes that make up the DNA repair network will not only provide insight into how cells recognise and react to mutations, but it may also reveal whether or not genes involved in the repair process can be controlled. Due to the complexity of this network and the need for a mathematical model and software platform to simulate different investigation scenarios, there must be an automatic way to convert this network into a mathematical model. In this paper, we present a topological analysis of one of the networks in DNA repair, specifically homologous recombination repair (HR). We propose a method for the automatic construction of a system of rate equations to describe network dynamics and present results of a numerical simulation of the model and model sensitivity analysis to the parameters. In the past, dynamic modelling and sensitivity analysis have been used to study the evolution of tumours in response to drugs in cancer medicine. However, automatic generation of a mathematical model and the study of its sensitivity to parameter have not been applied to research on the DNA repair network so far. Therefore, we present this application as an approach for medical research against cancer, since it could give insight into a possible approach with which central nodes of the networks and repair genes could be identified and controlled with the ultimate goal of aiding cancer therapy to fight the onset of cancer and its progression.

Oxidative stress, aging, antioxidant supplementation and their impact on human health: An overview

Aging is characterized by a progressive loss of tissue and organ function due to genetic and environmental factors, nutrition, and lifestyle. Oxidative stress is one the most important mechanisms of cellular senescence and increased frailty, resulting in several age-linked, noncommunicable diseases. Contributing events include genomic instability, telomere shortening, epigenetic mechanisms, reduced proteome homeostasis, altered stem-cell function, defective intercellular communication, progressive deregulation of nutrient sensing, mitochondrial dysfunction, and metabolic unbalance. These complex events and their interplay can be modulated by dietary habits and the ageing process, acting as potential measures of primary and secondary prevention. Promising nutritional approaches include the Mediterranean diet, the intake of dietary antioxidants, and the restriction of caloric intake. A comprehensive understanding of the ageing processes should promote new biomarkers of risk or diagnosis, but also beneficial treatments oriented to increase lifespan.

DNA damage-how and why we age?

Aging is a complex process that results in loss of the ability to reattain homeostasis following stress, leading, thereby, to increased risk of morbidity and mortality. Many factors contribute to aging, such as the time-dependent accumulation of macromolecular damage, including DNA damage. The integrity of the nuclear genome is essential for cellular, tissue, and organismal health. DNA damage is a constant threat because nucleic acids are chemically unstable under physiological conditions and vulnerable to attack by endogenous and environmental factors. To combat this, all organisms possess highly conserved mechanisms to detect and repair DNA damage. Persistent DNA damage (genotoxic stress) triggers signaling cascades that drive cells into apoptosis or senescence to avoid replicating a damaged genome. The drawback is that these cancer avoidance mechanisms promote aging. Here, we review evidence that DNA damage plays a causal role in aging. We also provide evidence that genotoxic stress is linked to other cellular processes implicated as drivers of aging, including mitochondrial and metabolic dysfunction, altered proteostasis and inflammation. These links between damage to the genetic code and other pillars of aging support the notion that DNA damage could be the root of aging.

A role of the 53BP1 protein in genome protection: structural and functional characteristics of 53BP1-dependent DNA repair

Nuclear architecture plays a significant role in DNA repair mechanisms. It is evident that proteins involved in DNA repair are compartmentalized in not only spontaneously occurring DNA lesions or ionizing radiation-induced foci (IRIF), but a specific clustering of these proteins can also be observed within the whole cell nucleus. For example, 53BP1-positive and BRCA1-positive DNA repair foci decorate chromocenters and can appear close to nuclear speckles. Both 53BP1 and BRCA1 are well-described factors that play an essential role in double-strand break (DSB) repair. These proteins are members of two protein complexes: 53BP1-RIF1-PTIP and BRCA1-CtIP, which make a “decision” determining whether canonical nonhomologous end joining (NHEJ) or homology-directed repair (HDR) is activated. It is generally accepted that 53BP1 mediates the NHEJ mechanism, while HDR is activated via a BRCA1-dependent signaling pathway. Interestingly, the 53BP1 protein appears relatively quickly at DSB sites, while BRCA1 is functional at later stages of DNA repair, as soon as the Mre11-Rad50-Nbs1 complex is recruited to the DNA lesions. A function of the 53BP1 protein is also linked to a specific histone signature, including phosphorylation of histone H2AX (γH2AX) or methylation of histone H4 at the lysine 20 position (H4K20me); therefore, we also discuss an epigenetic landscape of 53BP1-positive DNA lesions.

High expression of SMARCE1 predicts poor prognosis and promotes cell growth and metastasis in gastric cancer

Background: Gastric cancer (GC) is one of the most lethal cancers worldwide with a high risk for recurrence and metastasis. Therefore, further understanding of the metastatic mechanism and the development of treatment strategies are required. Although increasing evidence suggests that SWI/SNF Related, Matrix Associated, Actin Dependent Regulator of Chromatin, Subfamily E, Member 1 (SMARCE1) promotes cancer metastasis, its role in GC remains unclear.

Materials and methods: GC samples (n=122) were used to investigate the association between SMARCE1 expression, patient clinicopathological features, and prognosis. The expression of SMARCE1 in GC tissues was measured using real-time polymerase chain reaction, western blotting, and immunohistochemistry. MGC-803 and AGS cells were transfected with lentivirus to upregulate or downregulate SMARCE1 expression. The roles of SMARCE1 in GC cell proliferation, migration, and invasion were determined using Cell Counting Kit-8 assay, colony formation assay, wound healing, transwell migration, and invasion assay. Nude mice models were established to observe tumorigenesis. The specific mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) inhibitor U0126 was utilized to verify the involved pathway.

Results: SMARCE1 was highly expressed in GC tissues and cell lines. High expression of SMARCE1 was correlated with the malignant clinicopathological characteristics of GC patients, including tumor size, depth of invasion, degree of differentiation, lymph node involvement, and TNM stage (all P<0.05). Kaplan–Meier survival analysis revealed that high SMARCE1 expression predicted poor prognosis in GC patients (P<0.01). Moreover, SMARCE1 was an independent risk factor of poor prognosis (P<0.01). Functional study revealed that overexpression of SMARCE1 markedly promoted the proliferation, migration, and invasion of GC cells in vitro and tumorigenesis in vivo. Furthermore, SMARCE1 activated the MAPK/ERK signaling pathway. U0126 significantly inhibited the SMARCE1-induced proliferation and mobility of GC cells.

Conclusion: SMARCE1 promoted growth and metastasis of GC, indicating its potential usefulness as a prognostic biomarker and target for therapeutic intervention against this disease.