scholarly journals DNA Double Strand Break Repair Pathways in Response to Different Types of Ionizing Radiation

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gerarda van de Kamp ◽  
Tim Heemskerk ◽  
Roland Kanaar ◽  
Jeroen Essers
Keyword(s):  
Dna Damage ◽  
Dna Repair ◽  
Spatial Configuration ◽  
Strand Break ◽  
Dna Lesions ◽  
Particle Therapy ◽  
Photon Radiation ◽  
Particle Radiation ◽  
Dna Double Strand Break ◽  
Repair Mechanisms

The superior dose distribution of particle radiation compared to photon radiation makes it a promising therapy for the treatment of tumors. However, the cellular responses to particle therapy and especially the DNA damage response (DDR) is not well characterized. Compared to photons, particles are thought to induce more closely spaced DNA lesions instead of isolated lesions. How this different spatial configuration of the DNA damage directs DNA repair pathway usage, is subject of current investigations. In this review, we describe recent insights into induction of DNA damage by particle radiation and how this shapes DNA end processing and subsequent DNA repair mechanisms. Additionally, we give an overview of promising DDR targets to improve particle therapy.

scholarly journals ADAR-mediated RNA editing of DNA:RNA hybrids is required for DNA double strand break repair

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Sonia Jimeno ◽  
Rosario Prados-Carvajal ◽  
María Jesús Fernández-Ávila ◽  
Sonia Silva ◽  
Domenico Alessandro Silvestris ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Dna Damage ◽  
Dna Repair ◽  
Rna Editing ◽  
Genomic Stability ◽  
Strand Break ◽  
Dna Lesions ◽  
Dna Breaks ◽  
Dna Double Strand Break ◽  
Editing Enzyme

AbstractThe maintenance of genomic stability requires the coordination of multiple cellular tasks upon the appearance of DNA lesions. RNA editing, the post-transcriptional sequence alteration of RNA, has a profound effect on cell homeostasis, but its implication in the response to DNA damage was not previously explored. Here we show that, in response to DNA breaks, an overall change of the Adenosine-to-Inosine RNA editing is observed, a phenomenon we call the RNA Editing DAmage Response (REDAR). REDAR relies on the checkpoint kinase ATR and the recombination factor CtIP. Moreover, depletion of the RNA editing enzyme ADAR2 renders cells hypersensitive to genotoxic agents, increases genomic instability and hampers homologous recombination by impairing DNA resection. Such a role of ADAR2 in DNA repair goes beyond the recoding of specific transcripts, but depends on ADAR2 editing DNA:RNA hybrids to ease their dissolution.

scholarly journals Platinum Complexes in Colorectal Cancer and Other Solid Tumors

Cancers ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (9) ◽  
pp. 2073
Author(s):  
Beate Köberle ◽  
Sarah Schoch
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Dna Damage ◽  
Dna Repair ◽  
Cancer Cells ◽  
Cisplatin Resistance ◽  
Platinum Complexes ◽  
Dna Lesions ◽  
Dna Damage Signaling ◽  
Repair Mechanisms ◽  
P53 Inactivation

Cisplatin is one of the most commonly used drugs for the treatment of various solid neoplasms, including testicular, lung, ovarian, head and neck, and bladder cancers. Unfortunately, the therapeutic efficacy of cisplatin against colorectal cancer is poor. Various mechanisms appear to contribute to cisplatin resistance in cancer cells, including reduced drug accumulation, enhanced drug detoxification, modulation of DNA repair mechanisms, and finally alterations in cisplatin DNA damage signaling preventing apoptosis in cancer cells. Regarding colorectal cancer, defects in mismatch repair and altered p53-mediated DNA damage signaling are the main factors controlling the resistance phenotype. In particular, p53 inactivation appears to be associated with chemoresistance and poor prognosis. To overcome resistance in cancers, several strategies can be envisaged. Improved cisplatin analogues, which retain activity in resistant cancer, might be applied. Targeting p53-mediated DNA damage signaling provides another therapeutic strategy to circumvent cisplatin resistance. This review provides an overview on the DNA repair pathways involved in the processing of cisplatin damage and will describe signal transduction from cisplatin DNA lesions, with special attention given to colorectal cancer cells. Furthermore, examples for improved platinum compounds and biochemical modulators of cisplatin DNA damage signaling will be presented in the context of colon cancer therapy.

scholarly journals Databases and Bioinformatics Tools for the Study of DNA Repair

2011 ◽  
Vol 2011 ◽  
pp. 1-9 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kaja Milanowska ◽  
Kristian Rother ◽  
Janusz M. Bujnicki
Keyword(s):  
Dna Damage ◽  
Dna Repair ◽  
Excision Repair ◽  
Uv Light ◽  
Dna Lesions ◽  
Environmental Chemicals ◽  
Nonhomologous End Joining ◽  
End Joining ◽  
Repair Mechanisms ◽  
Base Excision

DNA is continuously exposed to many different damaging agents such as environmental chemicals, UV light, ionizing radiation, and reactive cellular metabolites. DNA lesions can result in different phenotypical consequences ranging from a number of diseases, including cancer, to cellular malfunction, cell death, or aging. To counteract the deleterious effects of DNA damage, cells have developed various repair systems, including biochemical pathways responsible for the removal of single-strand lesions such as base excision repair (BER) and nucleotide excision repair (NER) or specialized polymerases temporarily taking over lesion-arrested DNA polymerases during the S phase in translesion synthesis (TLS). There are also other mechanisms of DNA repair such as homologous recombination repair (HRR), nonhomologous end-joining repair (NHEJ), or DNA damage response system (DDR). This paper reviews bioinformatics resources specialized in disseminating information about DNA repair pathways, proteins involved in repair mechanisms, damaging agents, and DNA lesions.

scholarly journals Akt/PKB suppresses DNA damage processing and checkpoint activation in late G2

2010 ◽  
Vol 190 (3) ◽  
pp. 297-305 ◽  
Author(s):  
Naihan Xu ◽  
Nadia Hegarat ◽  
Elizabeth J. Black ◽  
Mary T. Scott ◽  
Helfrid Hochegger ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Dna Damage ◽  
Dna Repair ◽  
Protein A ◽  
Strand Break ◽  
Checkpoint Activation ◽  
Interacting Protein ◽  
Dna Double Strand Break ◽  
Radiation Induced ◽  
G2 Cells ◽  
Tumor Types

Using chemical genetics to reversibly inhibit Cdk1, we find that cells arrested in late G2 are unable to delay mitotic entry after irradiation. Late G2 cells detect DNA damage lesions and form γ-H2AX foci but fail to activate Chk1. This reflects a lack of DNA double-strand break processing because late G2 cells fail to recruit RPA (replication protein A), ATR (ataxia telangiectasia and Rad3 related), Rad51, or CtIP (C-terminal interacting protein) to sites of radiation-induced damage, events essential for both checkpoint activation and initiation of DNA repair by homologous recombination. Remarkably, inhibition of Akt/PKB (protein kinase B) restores DNA damage processing and Chk1 activation after irradiation in late G2. These data demonstrate a previously unrecognized role for Akt in cell cycle regulation of DNA repair and checkpoint activation. Because Akt/PKB is frequently activated in many tumor types, these findings have important implications for the evolution and therapy of such cancers.

scholarly journals SETD2 is required for DNA double-strand break repair and activation of the p53-mediated checkpoint

eLife ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 3 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sílvia Carvalho ◽  
Alexandra C Vítor ◽  
Sreerama C Sridhara ◽  
Filipa B Martins ◽  
Ana C Raposo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Dna Damage ◽  
Strand Break ◽  
Dna Lesions ◽  
Alternative Mechanism ◽  
Dna Double Strand Breaks ◽  
Cell Renal Cell Carcinoma ◽  
Strand Breaks ◽  
Dna Damage Signaling ◽  
Dna Double Strand Break ◽  
Recombination Repair

Histone modifications establish the chromatin states that coordinate the DNA damage response. In this study, we show that SETD2, the enzyme that trimethylates histone H3 lysine 36 (H3K36me3), is required for ATM activation upon DNA double-strand breaks (DSBs). Moreover, we find that SETD2 is necessary for homologous recombination repair of DSBs by promoting the formation of RAD51 presynaptic filaments. In agreement, SETD2-mutant clear cell renal cell carcinoma (ccRCC) cells displayed impaired DNA damage signaling. However, despite the persistence of DNA lesions, SETD2-deficient cells failed to activate p53, a master guardian of the genome rarely mutated in ccRCC and showed decreased cell survival after DNA damage. We propose that this novel SETD2-dependent role provides a chromatin bookmarking instrument that facilitates signaling and repair of DSBs. In ccRCC, loss of SETD2 may afford an alternative mechanism for the inactivation of the p53-mediated checkpoint without the need for additional genetic mutations in TP53.

scholarly journals DNA Damage/Repair Management in Cancers

Cancers ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (4) ◽  
pp. 1050 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jehad F. Alhmoud ◽  
John F. Woolley ◽  
Ala-Eddin Al Moustafa ◽  
Mohammed Imad Malki
Keyword(s):  
Dna Damage ◽  
Dna Repair ◽  
Dna Damage Repair ◽  
Critical Factor ◽  
Dna Lesions ◽  
Cancer Development ◽  
Dna Damaging Agents ◽  
Damage Repair ◽  
Repair Mechanisms ◽  
Dna Strand

DNA damage is well recognized as a critical factor in cancer development and progression. DNA lesions create an abnormal nucleotide or nucleotide fragment, causing a break in one or both chains of the DNA strand. When DNA damage occurs, the possibility of generated mutations increases. Genomic instability is one of the most important factors that lead to cancer development. DNA repair pathways perform the essential role of correcting the DNA lesions that occur from DNA damaging agents or carcinogens, thus maintaining genomic stability. Inefficient DNA repair is a critical driving force behind cancer establishment, progression and evolution. A thorough understanding of DNA repair mechanisms in cancer will allow for better therapeutic intervention. In this review we will discuss the relationship between DNA damage/repair mechanisms and cancer, and how we can target these pathways.

Perfecting DNA double-strand break repair on transcribed chromatin

2020 ◽  
Vol 64 (5) ◽  
pp. 705-719 ◽  
Author(s):  
Xin Yi Tan ◽  
Michael S.Y. Huen
Keyword(s):  
Dna Damage ◽  
Dna Repair ◽  
Chromosomal Aberrations ◽  
Chromatin Structure ◽  
Genome Stability ◽  
Transcriptional Control ◽  
Strand Break ◽  
Double Strand Break ◽  
Dna Double Strand Break ◽  
Molecular Bases

Abstract Timely repair of DNA double-strand break (DSB) entails coordination with the local higher order chromatin structure and its transaction activities, including transcription. Recent studies are uncovering how DSBs trigger transient suppression of nearby transcription to permit faithful DNA repair, failing of which leads to elevated chromosomal aberrations and cell hypersensitivity to DNA damage. Here, we summarize the molecular bases for transcriptional control during DSB metabolism, and discuss how the exquisite coordination between the two DNA-templated processes may underlie maintenance of genome stability and cell homeostasis.

scholarly journals RIF1 acts in DNA repair through phosphopeptide recognition of 53BP1

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dheva Setiaputra ◽  
Cristina Escribano-Diaz ◽  
Julia K. Reinert ◽  
Pooja Sadana ◽  
Dali Zong ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Dna Damage ◽  
Dna Repair ◽  
Binding Sites ◽  
Binding Protein ◽  
Strand Break ◽  
Chromatin Binding ◽  
Alternative Mode ◽  
Downstream Effectors ◽  
Dna Double Strand Break ◽  
Radiation Induced

SummaryThe chromatin-binding protein 53BP1 promotes DNA repair by orchestrating the recruitment of downstream effectors including PTIP, RIF1 and shieldin to DNA double-strand break sites. While how PTIP recognizes 53BP1 is known, the molecular details of RIF1 recruitment to DNA damage sites remains undefined. Here, we report that RIF1 is a phosphopeptide-binding protein that directly interacts with three phosphorylated 53BP1 epitopes. The RIF1-binding sites on 53BP1 share an essential LxL motif followed by two closely apposed phosphorylated residues. Simultaneous mutation of these sites on 53BP1 abrogates RIF1 accumulation into ionizing radiation-induced foci, but surprisingly only fully compromises 53BP1-dependent DNA repair when an alternative mode of shieldin recruitment to DNA damage sites is also disabled. Intriguingly, this alternative mode of recruitment still depends on RIF1 but does not require its interaction with 53BP1. RIF1 therefore employs phosphopeptide recognition to promote DNA repair but also modifies shieldin action independently of 53BP1 binding.

scholarly journals Poly(ADP-ribosyl)ation temporally confines SUMO-dependent ataxin-3 recruitment to control DNA double-strand break repair

2021 ◽  
pp. jcs.247809
Author(s):  
Annika Pfeiffer ◽  
Laura K. Herzog ◽  
Martijn S. Luijsterburg ◽  
Rashmi G. Shah ◽  
Magdalena B. Rother ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Dna Damage ◽  
Dna Repair ◽  
Time Window ◽  
Strand Break ◽  
Dna Double Strand Breaks ◽  
Strand Breaks ◽  
Dna Double Strand Break ◽  
Dna Repair Proteins ◽  
Short Time Window ◽  
Short Time

DNA damage-induced SUMOylation serves as a signal for two antagonizing proteins that both stimulate repair of DNA double strand breaks (DSBs). Here, we demonstrate that the SUMO-dependent recruitment of the deubiquitylating enzyme ataxin-3 to DSBs, unlike recruitment of the ubiquitin ligase RNF4, additionally depends on PARP1-mediated poly(ADP-ribosyl)ation (PARylation). The co-dependence of ataxin-3 recruitment on PARylation and SUMOylation temporally confines its presence at DSBs to a short time window directly following detection of the DNA damage. We propose that this mechanism ensures that ataxin-3 prevents the premature removal of DNA repair proteins only during the early phase of the DSB response and does not interfere with the subsequent timely displacement of DNA repair proteins by RNF4. Thus, our data show that PARylation differentially regulates SUMO-dependent recruitment of ataxin-3 and RNF4 to DSBs, explaining how both proteins can play a stimulatory role at DSBs despite their opposing activities.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document