The Time for Chronotherapy in Radiation Oncology

Five decades ago, Franz Halberg conceived the idea of ​​a circadian-based therapy for cancer, given the differential tolerance to treatment derived from the intrinsic host rhythms. Nowadays, different experimental models have demonstrated that both the toxicity and efficacy of several anticancer drugs vary by more than 50% as a function of dosing time. Accordingly, it has been shown that chemotherapeutic regimens optimally timed with the circadian cycle have jointly improved patient outcomes both at the preclinical and clinical levels. Along with chemotherapy, radiation therapy is widely used for cancer treatment, but its effectiveness relies mainly on its ability to damage DNA. Notably, the DNA damage response including DNA repair, DNA damage checkpoints, and apoptosis is gated by the circadian clock. Thus, the therapeutic potential of circadian-based radiotherapy against cancer is mainly dependent upon the control that the molecular clock exerts on DNA repair enzymes across the cell cycle. Unfortunately, the time of treatment administration is not usually considered in clinical practice as it varies along the daytime working hours. Currently, only a few studies have evaluated whether the timing of radiotherapy affects the treatment outcome. Several of these studies show that it is possible to reduce the toxicity of the treatment if it is applied at a specific time range, although with some inconsistencies. In this Perspective, we review the main advances in the field of chronoradiotherapy, the possible causes of the inconsistencies observed in the studies so far and provide some recommendations for future trials.

Targeting Lipid Peroxidation for Cancer Treatment

Cancer is one of the highest prevalent diseases in humans. The chances of surviving cancer and its prognosis are very dependent on the affected tissue, body location, and stage at which the disease is diagnosed. Researchers and pharmaceutical companies worldwide are pursuing many attempts to look for compounds to treat this malignancy. Most of the current strategies to fight cancer implicate the use of compounds acting on DNA damage checkpoints, non-receptor tyrosine kinases activities, regulators of the hedgehog signaling pathways, and metabolic adaptations placed in cancer. In the last decade, the finding of a lipid peroxidation increase linked to 15-lipoxygenases isoform 1 (15-LOX-1) activity stimulation has been found in specific successful treatments against cancer. This discovery contrasts with the production of other lipid oxidation signatures generated by stimulation of other lipoxygenases such as 5-LOX and 12-LOX, and cyclooxygenase (COX-2) activities, which have been suggested as cancer biomarkers and which inhibitors present anti-tumoral and antiproliferative activities. These findings support the previously proposed role of lipid hydroperoxides and their metabolites as cancer cell mediators. Depletion or promotion of lipid peroxidation is generally related to a specific production source associated with a cancer stage or tissue in which cancer originates. This review highlights the potential therapeutical use of chemical derivatives to stimulate or block specific cellular routes to generate lipid hydroperoxides to treat this disease.

Caffeine Stabilises Fission Yeast Wee1 in a Rad24-Dependent Manner but Attenuates Its Expression in Response to DNA Damage

The widely consumed neuroactive compound caffeine has generated much interest due to its ability to override the DNA damage and replication checkpoints. Previously Rad3 and its homologues was thought to be the target of caffeine’s inhibitory activity. Later findings indicate that the Target of Rapamycin Complex 1 (TORC1) is the preferred target of caffeine. Effective Cdc2 inhibition requires both the activation of the Wee1 kinase and inhibition of the Cdc25 phosphatase. The TORC1, DNA damage, and environmental stress response pathways all converge on Cdc25 and Wee1. We previously demonstrated that caffeine overrides DNA damage checkpoints by modulating Cdc25 stability. The effect of caffeine on cell cycle progression resembles that of TORC1 inhibition. Furthermore, caffeine activates the Sty1 regulated environmental stress response. Caffeine may thus modulate multiple signalling pathways that regulate Cdc25 and Wee1 levels, localisation and activity. Here we show that the activity of caffeine stabilises both Cdc25 and Wee1. The stabilising effect of caffeine and genotoxic agents on Wee1 was dependent on the Rad24 chaperone. Interestingly, caffeine inhibited the accumulation of Wee1 in response to DNA damage. Caffeine may modulate cell cycle progression through increased Cdc25 activity and Wee1 repression following DNA damage via TORC1 inhibition, as TORC1 inhibition increased DNA damage sensitivity.

Caffeine stabilises fission yeast Wee1 in a Rad24-dependent manner but attenuates its expression in response to DNA damage identifying a putative role for TORC1 in mediating its effects on cell cycle progression

The widely consumed neuroactive compound caffeine has generated much interest due to its ability to override the DNA damage and replication checkpoints. Previously Rad3 and its homologues was thought to be the target of caffeine’s inhibitory activity. Later findings indicate that the Target of Rapamycin Complex 1 (TORC1) is the preferred target of caffeine. Effective Cdc2 inhibition requires both the activation of the Wee1 kinase and inhibition of the Cdc25 phosphatase. The TORC1, DNA damage, and environmental stress response pathways all converge on Cdc25 and Wee1. We previously demonstrated that caffeine overrides DNA damage checkpoints by modulating Cdc25 stability. The effect of caffeine on cell cycle progression resembles that of TORC1 inhibition. Furthermore, caffeine activates the Sty1 regulated environmental stress response. Caffeine may thus modulate multiple signalling pathways that regulate Cdc25 and Wee1 levels, localisation and activity. Here we show that the activity of caffeine stabilises both Cdc25 and Wee1. The stabilising effect of caffeine and genotoxic agents on Wee1 was dependent on the Rad24 chaperone. Interestingly, caffeine inhibited the accumulation of Wee1 in response to DNA damage. Caffeine therefore modulates cell cycle progression contextually through increased Cdc25 activity and Wee1 repression following DNA damage via TORC1 inhibition.

Overexpression of rice jacalin-related mannose-binding lectin (OsJAC1) enhances resistance to ionizing radiation in Arabidopsis

Background Jacalin-related lectins in plants are important in defense signaling and regulate growth, development, and response to abiotic stress. We characterized the function of a rice mannose-binding jacalin-related lectin (OsJAC1) in the response to DNA damage from gamma radiation. Results Time- and dose-dependent changes of OsJAC1 expression in rice were detected in response to gamma radiation. To identify OsJAC1 function, OsJAC1-overexpressing transgenic Arabidopsis plants were generated. Interestingly, OsJAC1 overexpression conferred hyper-resistance to gamma radiation in these plants. Using comparative transcriptome analysis, genes related to pathogen defense were identified among 22 differentially expressed genes in OsJAC1-overexpressing Arabidopsis lines following gamma irradiation. Furthermore, expression profiles of genes associated with the plant response to DNA damage were determined in these transgenic lines, revealing expression changes of important DNA damage checkpoint and perception regulatory components, namely MCMs, RPA, ATM, and MRE11. Conclusions OsJAC1 overexpression may confer hyper-resistance to gamma radiation via activation of DNA damage perception and DNA damage checkpoints in Arabidopsis, implicating OsJAC1 as a key player in DNA damage response in plants. This study is the first report of a role for mannose-binding jacalin-related lectin in DNA damage.

DNA damage checkpoint dynamics drive cell cycle phase transitions

ABSTRACTDNA damage checkpoints are cellular mechanisms that protect the integrity of the genome during cell cycle progression. In response to genotoxic stress, these checkpoints halt cell cycle progression until the damage is repaired, allowing cells enough time to recover from damage before resuming normal proliferation. Here, we investigate the temporal dynamics of DNA damage checkpoints in individual proliferating cells by observing cell cycle phase transitions following acute DNA damage. We find that in gap phases (G1 and G2), DNA damage triggers an abrupt halt to cell cycle progression in which the duration of arrest correlates with the severity of damage. However, cells that have already progressed beyond a proposed “commitment point” within a given cell cycle phase readily transition to the next phase, revealing a relaxation of checkpoint stringency during later stages of certain cell cycle phases. In contrast to G1 and G2, cell cycle progression in S phase is significantly less sensitive to DNA damage. Instead of exhibiting a complete halt, we find that increasing DNA damage doses leads to decreased rates of S-phase progression followed by arrest in the subsequent G2. Moreover, these phase-specific differences in DNA damage checkpoint dynamics are associated with corresponding differences in the proportions of irreversibly arrested cells. Thus, the precise timing of DNA damage determines the sensitivity, rate of cell cycle progression, and functional outcomes for damaged cells. These findings should inform our understanding of cell fate decisions after treatment with common cancer therapeutics such as genotoxins or spindle poisons, which often target cells in a specific cell cycle phase.