Unraveling DNA Repair in Human: Molecular Mechanisms and Consequences of Repair Defect

Cellular genomes are vulnerable to an array of DNA-damaging agents, of both endogenous and environmental origin. Such damage occurs at a frequency too high to be compatible with life. As a result cell death and tissue degeneration, aging and cancer are caused. To avoid this and in order for the genome to be reproduced, these damages must be corrected efficiently by DNA repair mechanisms. Eukaryotic cells have multiple mechanisms for the repair of damaged DNA. These repair systems in humans protect the genome by repairing modified bases, DNA adducts, crosslinks and double-strand breaks. The lesions in DNA are eliminated by mechanisms such as direct reversal, base excision and nucleotide excision. The base excision repair eliminates single damaged-base residues by the action of specialized DNA glycosylases and AP endonucleases. Nucleotide excision repair excises damage within oligomers that are 25 to 32 nucleotides long. This repair utilizes many proteins to remove the major UV-induced photoproducts from DNA, as well as other types of modified nucleotides. Different DNA polymerases and ligases are utilized to complete the separate pathways. The double-strand breaks in DNA are repaired by mechanisms that involve DNA protein kinase and recombination proteins. The defect in one of the repair protein results in three rare recessive syndromes: xeroderma pigmentosum, Cockayne syndrome, and trichothiodystrophy. This review describes the biochemistry of various repair processes and summarizes the clinical features and molecular mechanisms underlying these disorders.     

DNA损伤修复机制——解读2015年诺贝尔化学奖

Tomas Lindahl, Paul Modrich和Aziz Sancar三位科学家因发现“DNA损伤修复机制”获得了2015年诺贝尔化学奖．Lindahl首次发现Escherichia Coli中参与碱基切除修复的第一个蛋白质--尿嘧啶 DNA糖基化酶（UNG）; Modrich重建了错配修复的体外系统,从大肠杆菌到哺乳动物深入探究了错配修复的机制; Sancar利用纯化的UvrA、UvrB、UvrC重建了核苷酸切除修复的关键步骤,阐述了核苷酸切除修复的分子机制．DNA损伤是由生物所处体外环境和体内因素共同导致的,面对不同种类的损伤,机体启动多种不同的修复机制修复损伤,保护基因组稳定性．这些修复机制包括：光修复(light repairing);核苷酸切除修复（nucleotide excision repair, NER）;碱基切除修复（base excision repair, BER）;错配修复（mismatch repair, MMR）;以及DNA双链断裂修复（DNA double strand breaks repair, DSBR）．其中DNA双链断裂修复又分同源重组（homologous recombination, HR）和非同源末端连接（non homologous end joining, NHEJ）两种方式．本文将对上述几种修复的机制进行总结与讨论．     

Genomic approaches to DNA repair and mutagenesis

DNA damage is a constant threat to cells, causing cytotoxicity as well as inducing genetic alterations. The steady-state abundance of DNA lesions in a cell is minimized by a variety of DNA repair mechanisms, including DNA strand break repair, mismatch repair, nucleotide excision repair, base excision repair, and ribonucleotide excision repair. The efficiencies and mechanisms by which these pathways remove damage from chromosomes have been primarily characterized by investigating the processing of lesions at defined genomic loci, among bulk genomic DNA, on episomal DNA constructs, or using in vitro substrates. However, the structure of a chromosome is heterogeneous, consisting of heavily protein-bound heterochromatic regions, open regulatory regions, actively transcribed genes, and even areas of transient single stranded DNA. Consequently, DNA repair pathways function in a much more diverse set of chromosomal contexts than can be readily assessed using previous methods. Recent efforts to develop whole genome maps of DNA damage, repair processes, and even mutations promise to greatly expand our understanding of DNA repair and mutagenesis. Here we review the current efforts to utilize whole genome maps of DNA damage and mutation to understand how different chromosomal contexts affect DNA excision repair pathways.     

The checkpoint response to replication stress

Genome instability is a hallmark of cancer cells, and defective DNA replication, repair and recombination have been linked to its etiology. Increasing evidence suggests that proteins influencing S-phase processes such as replication fork movement and stability, repair events and replication completion, have significant roles in maintaining genome stability. DNA damage and replication stress activate a signal transduction cascade, often referred to as the checkpoint response. A central goal of the replication checkpoint is to maintain the integrity of the replication forks while facilitating replication completion and DNA repair and coordinating these events with cell cycle transitions. Progression through the cell cycle in spite of defective or incomplete DNA synthesis or unrepaired DNA lesions may result in broken chromosomes, genome aberrations, and an accumulation of mutations. In this review we discuss the multiple roles of the replication checkpoint during replication and in response to replication stress, as well as the enzymatic activities that cooperate with the checkpoint pathway to promote fork resumption and repair of DNA lesions thereby contributing to genome integrity.     

DNA Repair Mechanisms and the Bypass of DNA Damage in Saccharomyces cerevisiae

DNA repair mechanisms are critical for maintaining the integrity of genomic DNA, and their loss is associated with cancer predisposition syndromes. Studies in Saccharomyces cerevisiae have played a central role in elucidating the highly conserved mechanisms that promote eukaryotic genome stability. This review will focus on repair mechanisms that involve excision of a single strand from duplex DNA with the intact, complementary strand serving as a template to fill the resulting gap. These mechanisms are of two general types: those that remove damage from DNA and those that repair errors made during DNA synthesis. The major DNA-damage repair pathways are base excision repair and nucleotide excision repair, which, in the most simple terms, are distinguished by the extent of single-strand DNA removed together with the lesion. Mistakes made by DNA polymerases are corrected by the mismatch repair pathway, which also corrects mismatches generated when single strands of non-identical duplexes are exchanged during homologous recombination. In addition to the true repair pathways, the postreplication repair pathway allows lesions or structural aberrations that block replicative DNA polymerases to be tolerated. There are two bypass mechanisms: an error-free mechanism that involves a switch to an undamaged template for synthesis past the lesion and an error-prone mechanism that utilizes specialized translesion synthesis DNA polymerases to directly synthesize DNA across the lesion. A high level of functional redundancy exists among the pathways that deal with lesions, which minimizes the detrimental effects of endogenous and exogenous DNA damage.     

Checkpoint kinase 2 is required for efficient immunoglobulin diversification

Maintenance of genome integrity relies on multiple DNA repair pathways as well as on checkpoint regulation. Activation of the checkpoint kinases Chk1 and Chk2 by DNA damage triggers cell cycle arrest and improved DNA repair, or apoptosis in case of excessive damage. Chk1 and Chk2 have been reported to act in a complementary or redundant fashion, depending on the physiological context. During secondary immunoglobulin (Ig) diversification in B lymphocytes, DNA damage is abundantly introduced by activation-induced cytidine deaminase (AID) and processed to mutations in a locus-specific manner by several error-prone DNA repair pathways. We have previously shown that Chk1 negatively regulates Ig somatic hypermutation by promoting error-free homologous recombination and Ig gene conversion. We now report that Chk2 shows opposite effects to Chk1 in the regulation of these processes. Chk2 inactivation in B cells leads to decreased Ig hypermutation and Ig class switching, and increased Ig gene conversion activity. This is linked to defects in non-homologous end joining and increased Chk1 activation upon interference with Chk2 function. Intriguingly, in the context of physiological introduction of substantial DNA damage into the genome during Ig diversification, the 2 checkpoint kinases thus function in an opposing manner, rather than redundantly or cooperatively.     

DNA Damage Checkpoint, Damage Repair, and Genome Stability

Genomic DNA is under constant attack from both endogenous and exogenous sources of DNA damaging agents. Without proper care, the ensuing DNA damages would lead to alteration of genomic structure thus affecting the faithful transmission of genetic information. During the process of evolution, organisms have acquired a series of mechanisms responding to and repairing DNA damage, thus assuring the maintenance of genome stability and faithful transmission of genetic information. DNA damage checkpoint is one such important mechanism by which, in the face of DNA damage, a cell can respond to amplified damage signals, either by actively halting the cell cycle until it ensures that critical processes such as DNA replication or mitosis are complete or by initiating apoptosis as a last resort. Over the last decade, complex hierarchical interactions between the key components like ATM/ATR in the checkpoint pathway and various other mediators, effectors including DNA damage repair proteins have begun to emerge. In the meantime, an intimate relationship between mechanisms of damage checkpoint pathway, DNA damage repair, and genome stability was also uncovered. Reviewed hereinare the recent findings on both the mechanisms of activation of checkpoint pathways and their coordination with DNA damage repair machinery as well as their effect on genomic integrity.     

RIF1: A novel regulatory factor for DNA replication and DNA damage response signaling

DNA double strand breaks (DSBs) are highly toxic to the cells and accumulation of DSBs results in several detrimental effects in various cellular processes which can lead to neurological, immunological and developmental disorders. Failure of the repair of DSBs spurs mutagenesis and is a driver of tumorigenesis, thus underscoring the importance of the accurate repair of DSBs. Two major canonical DSB repair pathways are the non-homologous end joining (NHEJ) and homologous recombination (HR) pathways. 53BP1 and BRCA1 are the key mediator proteins which coordinate with other components of the DNA repair machinery in the NHEJ and HR pathways respectively, and their exclusive recruitment to DNA breaks/ends potentially decides the choice of repair by either NHEJ or HR. Recently, Rap1 interacting factor 1 has been identified as an important component of the DNA repair pathway which acts downstream of the ATM/53BP1 to inhibit the 5′–3′ end resection of broken DNA ends, in-turn facilitating NHEJ repair and inhibiting homology directed repair. Rif1 is conserved from yeast to humans but its function has evolved from telomere length regulation in yeast to the maintenance of genome integrity in mammalian cells. Recently its role in the maintenance of genomic integrity has been expanded to include the regulation of chromatin structure, replication timing and intra-S phase checkpoint. We present a summary of these important findings highlighting the various aspects of Rif1 functions and discuss the key implications for genomic integrity.     

DNA损伤检验点与损伤修复及基因组稳定性

生物有机体基因组DNA经常会受到内源或外源因素的影响而导致结构发生变化,产生损伤;在长期进化过程中,有机体也相应形成了一系列应对与修复损伤DNA,并维持染色体基因组正常结构功能的机制。其中DNA损伤检验点（DNA damage checkpoint）就是在感应DNA损伤的基础上,对损伤感应信号进行转导,或引起细胞周期的暂停,从而使细胞有足够的时间对损伤DNA进行修复,或最终导致细胞发生凋亡。DNA损伤检验点信号转导途径是一个高度保守的信号感应过程,整个途径大致可以分为损伤感应、信号传递及信号效应3个组成部分。其中3-磷脂酰肌醇激酶家族类成员ATM（ataxia-telangiectasia mutated）和ATR（ataxia-telangiectasia and Rad3-related）活性的增加构成整个途径活化的第一步。它们通过激活下游的效应激酶,Chk2／Chk1,通过协同作用许多其他调控细胞周期、DNA复制、DNA损伤修复及细胞凋亡等过程的蛋白质因子来实现细胞对DNA损伤的高度协调反应。近十几年,随着此领域研究的不断深入,人们逐步揭示了DNA损伤检验点途径发生过程中,各种核心组分通过与不同调节因子、效应因子及DNA损伤修复蛋白间的复杂相互作用,以实现监测感应异常DNA结构并实施相应反应的机制;其中,检验点衔接因子（mediators）及染色质结构,尤其是核小体组蛋白的共价修饰在调控ATM／ATR活性,促进ATM／ATR与底物间的相互作用以及介导DNA损伤位点周围染色质区域上多蛋白复合物在时间与空间上的动态形成发挥着重要的作用。同时,人们也开始发现DNA损伤检验点途径与DNA损伤修复、基因组稳定性以及肿瘤发生等过程之间某些内在的联系。该反应途径在通过协调细胞针对DNA损伤做出各种反应的基础上,直接或间接地参与或调控DNA损伤修复过程,并与DNA损伤修复途径协同作用最终保证染色体基凶组结构的完整性,而检验点途径的改变,则会引起基因组不稳定的发生,包括从突变频率的提高到大范围的染色体重排,以及染色体数量的畸变。如：突变发生在肿瘤形成早期,会大大增加肿瘤发生的几率。文章将对DNA损伤检验点途径机制及其对DNA损伤修复、基因组稳定性影响的最新进展进行综述。     

Collaboration and competition between DNA double-strand break repair pathways

DNA double-strand breaks resulting from normal cellular processes including replication and exogenous sources such as ionizing radiation pose a serious risk to genome stability, and cells have evolved different mechanisms for their efficient repair. The two major pathways involved in the repair of double-strand breaks in eukaryotic cells are non-homologous end joining and homologous recombination. Numerous factors affect the decision to repair a double-strand break via these pathways, and accumulating evidence suggests these major repair pathways both cooperate and compete with each other at double-strand break sites to facilitate efficient repair and promote genomic integrity.     

DNA base repair – recognition and initiation of catalysis

Endogenous DNA damage induced by hydrolysis, reactive oxygen species and alkylation modifies DNA bases and the structure of the DNA duplex. Numerous mechanisms have evolved to protect cells from these deleterious effects. Base excision repair is the major pathway for removing base lesions. However, several mechanisms of direct base damage reversal, involving enzymes such as transferases, photolyases and oxidative demethylases, are specialized to remove certain types of photoproducts and alkylated bases. Mismatch excision repair corrects for misincorporation of bases by replicative DNA polymerases. The determination of the 3D structure and visualization of DNA repair proteins and their interactions with damaged DNA have considerably aided our understanding of the molecular basis for DNA base lesion repair and genome stability. Here, we review the structural biochemistry of base lesion recognition and initiation of one-step direct reversal (DR) of damage as well as the multistep pathways of base excision repair (BER), nucleotide incision repair (NIR) and mismatch repair (MMR).     

DNA excision repair at telomeres

DNA damage is caused by either endogenous cellular metabolic processes such as hydrolysis, oxidation, alkylation, and DNA base mismatches, or exogenous sources including ultraviolet (UV) light, ionizing radiation, and chemical agents. Damaged DNA that is not properly repaired can lead to genomic instability, driving tumorigenesis. To protect genomic stability, mammalian cells have evolved highly conserved DNA repair mechanisms to remove and repair DNA lesions. Telomeres are composed of long tandem TTAGGG repeats located at the ends of chromosomes. Maintenance of functional telomeres is critical for preventing genome instability. The telomeric sequence possesses unique features that predispose telomeres to a variety of DNA damage induced by environmental genotoxins. This review briefly describes the relevance of excision repair pathways in telomere maintenance, with the focus on base excision repair (BER), nucleotide excision repair (NER), and mismatch repair (MMR). By summarizing current knowledge on excision repair of telomere damage and outlining many unanswered questions, it is our hope to stimulate further interest in a better understanding of excision repair processes at telomeres and in how these processes contribute to telomere maintenance.     

跨损伤合成的DNA聚合酶——一类新的DNA聚合酶

细胞虽然拥有多种修复途径,但有些DNA损伤仍不可避免地会逃避修复而在基因组上保留下来,细胞跨损伤DNA合成的分子机制一直是DNA修复中主要的未解决问题之一.最近通过对一类结构相关性UmuC/DinB蛋白质超家族成员的研究发现它们具有DNA聚合酶功能.这类新发现的DNA聚合酶不同于经典的复制性DNA聚合酶,它们能以易误/突变(error-prone/mutagenic)或无误(error-free)方式进行跨损伤(translesion)DNA合成,并且从细菌到人在进化上功能保守.     

Beyond base excision repair: an evolving picture of mitochondrial DNA repair

Mitochondria are highly specialised organelles required for key cellular processes including ATP production through cellular respiration and controlling cell death via apoptosis. Unlike other organelles, mitochondria contain their own DNA genome which encodes both protein and RNA required for cellular respiration. Each cell may contain hundreds to thousands of copies of the mitochondrial genome, which is essential for normal cellular function – deviation of mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) copy number is associated with cellular ageing and disease. Furthermore, mtDNA lesions can arise from both endogenous or exogenous sources and must either be tolerated or corrected to preserve mitochondrial function. Importantly, replication of damaged mtDNA can lead to stalling and introduction of mutations or genetic loss, mitochondria have adapted mechanisms to repair damaged DNA. These mechanisms rely on nuclear-encoded DNA repair proteins that are translocated into the mitochondria.Despite the presence of many known nuclear DNA repair proteins being found in the mitochondrial proteome, it remains to be established which DNA repair mechanisms are functional in mammalian mitochondria. Here, we summarise the existing and emerging research, alongside examining proteomic evidence, demonstrating that mtDNA damage can be repaired using Base Excision Repair (BER), Homologous Recombination (HR) and Microhomology-mediated End Joining (MMEJ). Critically, these repair mechanisms do not operate in isolation and evidence for interplay between pathways and repair associated with replication is discussed. Importantly, characterising non-canonical functions of key proteins and understanding the bespoke pathways used to tolerate, repair or bypass DNA damage will be fundamental in fully understanding the causes of mitochondrial genome mutations and mitochondrial dysfunction.     

Srs2 mediates PCNA‐SUMO‐dependent inhibition of DNA repair synthesis

Completion of DNA replication needs to be ensured even when challenged with fork progression problems or DNA damage. PCNA and its modifications constitute a molecular switch to control distinct repair pathways. In yeast, SUMOylated PCNA (S‐PCNA) recruits Srs2 to sites of replication where Srs2 can disrupt Rad51 filaments and prevent homologous recombination (HR). We report here an unexpected additional mechanism by which S‐PCNA and Srs2 block the synthesis‐dependent extension of a recombination intermediate, thus limiting its potentially hazardous resolution in association with a cross‐over. This new Srs2 activity requires the SUMO interaction motif at its C‐terminus, but neither its translocase activity nor its interaction with Rad51. Srs2 binding to S‐PCNA dissociates Polδ and Polη from the repair synthesis machinery, thus revealing a novel regulatory mechanism controlling spontaneous genome rearrangements. Our results suggest that cycling cells use the Siz1‐dependent SUMOylation of PCNA to limit the extension of repair synthesis during template switch or HR and attenuate reciprocal DNA strand exchanges to maintain genome stability.     

DNA Repair Pathways in Trypanosomatids: from DNA Repair to Drug Resistance

SUMMARY

All living organisms are continuously faced with endogenous or exogenous stress conditions affecting genome stability. DNA repair pathways act as a defense mechanism, which is essential to maintain DNA integrity. There is much to learn about the regulation and functions of these mechanisms, not only in human cells but also equally in divergent organisms. In trypanosomatids, DNA repair pathways protect the genome against mutations but also act as an adaptive mechanism to promote drug resistance. In this review, we scrutinize the molecular mechanisms and DNA repair pathways which are conserved in trypanosomatids. The recent advances made by the genome consortiums reveal the complete genomic sequences of several pathogens. Therefore, using bioinformatics and genomic sequences, we analyze the conservation of DNA repair proteins and their key protein motifs in trypanosomatids. We thus present a comprehensive view of DNA repair processes in trypanosomatids at the crossroads of DNA repair and drug resistance.     

Base excision repair but not DNA double‐strand break repair is impaired in aged human adipose‐derived stem cells

The decline in DNA repair capacity contributes to the age‐associated decrease in genome integrity in somatic cells of different species. However, due to the lack of clinical samples and appropriate tools for studying DNA repair, whether and how age‐associated changes in DNA repair result in a loss of genome integrity of human adult stem cells remains incompletely characterized. Here, we isolated 20 eyelid adipose‐derived stem cell (ADSC) lines from healthy individuals (young: 10 donors with ages ranging 17–25 years; old: 10 donors with ages ranging 50–59 years). Using these cell lines, we systematically compared the efficiency of base excision repair (BER) and two DNA double‐strand break (DSB) repair pathways—nonhomologous end joining (NHEJ) and homologous recombination (HR)—between the young and old groups. Surprisingly, we found that the efficiency of BER but not NHEJ or HR is impaired in aged human ADSCs, which is in contrast to previous findings that DSB repair declines with age in human fibroblasts. We also demonstrated that BER efficiency is negatively associated with tail moment, which reflects a loss of genome integrity in human ADSCs. Mechanistic studies indicated that at the protein level XRCC1, but not other BER factors, exhibited age‐associated decline. Overexpression of XRCC1 reversed the decline of BER efficiency and genome integrity, indicating that XRCC1 is a potential therapeutic target for stabilizing genomes in aged ADSCs.