The topodynamics of incision of UV-irradiated covalently closed DNA by the Escherichia coli Uvr(A)BC endonuclease

Therapeutic intervention by the simultaneous inhibition of DNA repair and type I or type II DNA topoisomerases: one strategy, many outcomes

Many anticancer drugs reduce the integrity of DNA, forming strand breaks. This can cause mutations and cancer or cell death if the lesions are not repaired. Interestingly, DNA repair-deficient cancer cells (e.g., those with BRCA1/2 mutations) have been shown to exhibit increased sensitivity to chemotherapy. Based on this observation, a new therapeutic approach termed 'synthetic lethality' has been developed, in which radiation therapy or cytotoxic anticancer agents are employed in conjunction with selective inhibitors of poly(ADP-ribose)polymerase-1 (PARP-1). Such combinations can cause severe genomic instability in transformed cells resulting in cell death. The synergistic effects of combining PARP-1 inhibition with anticancer drugs have been demonstrated. However, the outcome of this therapeutic strategy varies significantly between cancer types, suggesting that synthetic lethality may be influenced by additional cellular factors. This review focuses on the outcomes of the combined action of PARP-1 inhibitors and agents that affect the activity of DNA topoisomerases.

MOLECULAR AND EVOLUTIONARY BASIS OF THE CELLULAR STRESS RESPONSE

The cellular stress response is a universal mechanism of extraordinary physiological/pathophysiological significance. It represents a defense reaction of cells to damage that environmental forces inflict on macromolecules. Many aspects of the cellular stress response are not stressor specific because cells monitor stress based on macromolecular damage without regard to the type of stress that causes such damage. Cellular mechanisms activated by DNA damage and protein damage are interconnected and share common elements. Other cellular responses directed at re-establishing homeostasis are stressor specific and often activated in parallel to the cellular stress response. All organisms have stress proteins, and universally conserved stress proteins can be regarded as the minimal stress proteome. Functional analysis of the minimal stress proteome yields information about key aspects of the cellular stress response, including physiological mechanisms of sensing membrane lipid, protein, and DNA damage; redox sensing and regulation; cell cycle control; macromolecular stabilization/repair; and control of energy metabolism. In addition, cells can quantify stress and activate a death program (apoptosis) when tolerance limits are exceeded.

UV-induced DNA damage and repair: a review

Increases in ultraviolet radiation at the Earth's surface due to the depletion of the stratospheric ozone layer have recently fuelled interest in the mechanisms of various effects it might have on organisms. DNA is certainly one of the key targets for UV-induced damage in a variety of organisms ranging from bacteria to humans. UV radiation induces two of the most abundant mutagenic and cytotoxic DNA lesions such as cyclobutane-pyrimidine dimers (CPDs) and 6-4 photoproducts (6-4PPs) and their Dewar valence Isomers. However, cells have developed a number of repair or tolerance mechanism to counteract the DNA damage caused by UV or any other stressors. Photoreactivation with the help of the enzyme photolyase is one of the most important and frequently occurring repair mechanisms in a variety of organisms. Excision repair, which can be distinguished into base excision repair (BER) and nucleotide excision repair (NER), also plays an important role in DNA repair in several organisms with the help of a number of glycosylases and polymerases, respectively. In addition, mechanisms such as mutagenic repair or dimer bypass, recombinational repair, cell-cycle checkpoints, apoptosis and certain alternative repair pathways are also operative in various organisms. This review deals with UV-induced DNA damage and the associated repair mechanisms as well as methods of detecting DNA damage and its future perspectives.

The nucleotide excision repair protein UvrB, a helicase-like enzyme with a catch

Nucleotide excision repair (NER) is a universal DNA repair mechanism found in all three kingdoms of life. Its ability to repair a broad range of DNA lesions sets NER apart from other repair mechanisms. NER systems recognize the damaged DNA strand and cleave it 3', then 5' to the lesion. After the oligonucleotide containing the lesion is removed, repair synthesis fills the resulting gap. UvrB is the central component of bacterial NER. It is directly involved in distinguishing damaged from undamaged DNA and guides the DNA from recognition to repair synthesis. Recently solved structures of UvrB from different organisms represent the first high-resolution view into bacterial NER. The structures provide detailed insight into the domain architecture of UvrB and, through comparison, suggest possible domain movements. The structure of UvrB consists of five domains. Domains 1a and 3 bind ATP at the inter-domain interface and share high structural similarity to helicases of superfamilies I and II. Not related to helicase structures, domains 2 and 4 are involved in interactions with either UvrA or UvrC, whereas domain 1b was implicated for DNA binding. The structures indicate that ATP binding and hydrolysis is associated with domain motions. UvrB's ATPase activity, however, is not coupled to the separation of long DNA duplexes as in helicases, but rather leads to the formation of the preincision complex with the damaged DNA substrate. The location of conserved residues and structural comparisons with helicase-DNA structures suggest how UvrB might bind to DNA. A model of the UvrB-DNA interaction in which a beta-hairpin of UvrB inserts between the DNA double strand has been proposed recently. This padlock model is developed further to suggest two distinct consequences of domain motion: in the UvrA(2)B-DNA complex, domain motions lead to translocation along the DNA, whereas in the tight UvrB-DNA pre-incision complex, they lead to distortion of the 3' incision site.

Effect of DNA topology on plasmid DNA repair in vivo

Escherichia coli nucleotide excision repair (NER) is responsible for removing bulky DNA adducts by dual incisions of the UvrABC endonuclease. Although the activity of the UvrAB complex which can induce DNA conformational change is employed in NER, the involvement of DNA topology and DNA topoisomerases remains unclear. We examined the effect of topoisomerase inhibitions on a NER in vivo system. The repair analysis of intracellular plasmid revealed that the DNA damage on positive supercoils generated by gyrase inhibition remained unrepaired, whereas the DNA damage was repaired in topoisomerase I mutants. These results suggest that DNA topology affects the NER process and the removal of positive supercoils by gyrase is vital for the efficiency of the E. coli NER system.

Quality control by DNA repair

Faithful maintenance of the genome is crucial to the individual and to species. DNA damage arises from both endogenous sources such as water and oxygen and exogenous sources such as sunlight and tobacco smoke. In human cells, base alterations are generally removed by excision repair pathways that counteract the mutagenic effects of DNA lesions. This serves to maintain the integrity of the genetic information, although not all of the pathways are absolutely error-free. In some cases, DNA damage is not repaired but is instead bypassed by specialized DNA polymerases.

DNA translocation blockage, a general mechanism of cleavage site selection by type I restriction enzymes

Type I restriction enzymes bind to a specific DNA sequence and subsequently translocate DNA past the complex to reach a non-specific cleavage site. We have examined several potential blocks to DNA translocation, such as positive supercoiling or a Holliday junction, for their ability to trigger DNA cleavage by type I restriction enzymes. Introduction of positive supercoiling into plasmid DNA did not have a significant effect on the rate of DNA cleavage by EcoAI endonuclease nor on the enzyme's ability to select cleavage sites randomly throughout the DNA molecule. Thus, positive supercoiling does not prevent DNA translocation. EcoR124II endonuclease cleaved DNA at Holliday junctions present on both linear and negatively supercoiled substrates. The latter substrate was cleaved by a single enzyme molecule at two sites, one on either side of the junction, consistent with a bi-directional translocation model. Linear DNA molecules with two recognition sites for endonucleases from different type I families were cut between the sites when both enzymes were added simultaneously but not when a single enzyme was added. We propose that type I restriction enzymes can track along a DNA substrate irrespective of its topology and cleave DNA at any barrier that is able to halt the translocation process.