原核生物的NHEJ修复途径

DNA双链断裂(DSBs)是严重的DNA损伤形式之一,生物体对DSBs的修复可通过同源重组(HR)或非同源末端连接途径(NHEJ)进行。长期以来,人们普遍认为HR是细菌DSBs修复的惟一途径,但在分支杆菌和其它原核生物体内NHEJ途径的发现,使这一观念得以颠覆。最近的研究表明,细菌NHEJ修复系统是一个双组分系统,包含一个多功能的DNA连接酶(LigD)和DNA末端结合蛋白Ku,具有DSBs修复所需的断裂末段识别、末端加工和连接活性。重点综述细菌NHEJ修复系统的组成、结构以及生理功能。     

DNA双链断裂修复与重症联合免疫缺陷

DNA双链断裂(double-strand breaks, DSBs)是细胞DNA损伤的主要类型,它的修复通过同源重组(HR)和非同源末端连接(NHEJ)两种机制实现.NHEJ是人和哺乳动物细胞DSBs修复的重要通路,主要由DNA依赖性蛋白激酶(DNA-PK)、X射线修复交叉互补蛋白4(XRCC4)、DNA连接酶Ⅳ、Artemis、XLF/Cernunnos和其它DNA损伤修复辅助因子组成.本文重点介绍了NHEJ机制主要成分的特性及其功能,以及这些组分的基因发生突变或缺失所引起的DSBs修复缺陷与辐射敏感性重症联合免疫缺陷(radiosensitive severe combined immunodeficiencies, RS-SCIDs).     

DSBs修复通路的选择及其影响因素

DSBs(DNA双链断裂)是细胞DNA在内外各种因素影响下产生的一种严重损伤,也是包括肿瘤在内的多种疾病发生发展的重要原因之一。为修复该损伤,机体形成了包括同源重组(HR)、非同源末端连接(NHEJ)等在内的多种修复通路;在不同情况下,机体对修复通路的选择受到多种因素的影响。近年来的研究表明,包括细胞类型、末端切除、细胞周期、损伤原因、损伤位置等在内的诸多因素对修复通路的选择均起到了重要的作用。本综述介绍了DSBs修复的常见通路,并对DSBs修复通路的影响因素的最新研究进展进行了综述。     

BRCA1与DSB修复路径取向

乳腺癌易感基因1(BRCA1)是一个肿瘤抑制基因.BRCA1参与DNA末端切除、细胞周期调控以及染色体修饰等来维护基因组的稳定性.有研究表明,它能够促进正确的DNA双链断裂(DSBs)修复,如同源重组修复(HDR)和经典的非同源末端连接(C-NHEJ);而抑制错误性的DSB修复,如单链退火修复(SSA)和非经典的末端连接(A-EJ);其机制是通过与某些DNA修复相关蛋白质的相互作用来引导DSB修复.目前,BRCA1在DSB修复通路中的作用机制尚未完全明确,仍有待进一步的研究.本文主要阐述BRCA1在DSB各修复通路中是如何发挥其引导作用的.     

与真核生物DSBs修复有关的NHEJ途径研究进展

DNA双链断裂是真核生物最严重的DNA损伤形式.如果断裂的DNA双链无法及时修复,将可能导致细胞死亡.非同源末端连接途径在真核生物DSBs修复中起重要作用.综述了真核生物NHEJ途径中核心蛋白质Ku、DNA-PKcs、DNA连接酶IV、XRCC4、ARTEMIS和XIF等因子的结构和功能,并简要介绍了NHEJ修复途径的分子机制,其中涉及到DSBs位点蛋白复合体组装的两种模型.     

聚腺苷二磷酸-核糖聚合酶1与DNA双链断裂修复的相关性

DNA双链断裂(double strand breaks,DSBs)是细胞最严重的DNA损伤形式。细胞通过同源重组(homologous recombination,HR)和非同源末端连接(non-homologous end joining,NHEJ)途径修复DNA双链断裂损伤。聚腺苷二磷酸核糖基化(poly(ADP-ribosyl)ation,PARylation)是蛋白质翻译后修饰过程,这个过程由聚腺苷二磷酸 核糖聚合酶家族(poly(ADP-ribose)polymerases,PARPs)催化完成。PARP1作为PARPs家族最重要的成员,其在DNA损伤应答方面发挥重要作用。研究显示,PARP1在DSBs修复过程中发挥关键作用,参与DSBs的早期应答反应及其具体修复途径,可依据KU蛋白的存在与否发挥不同的特定作用。本文较全面地综述了PARP1在DNA双链断裂修复方面的潜在作用,将为临床疾病的诊治提供新的思路。     

单链退火修复及其在疾病治疗和基因编辑中的作用

DNA双链断裂(double strand breaks,DSBs)对细胞生存是致命的。细胞内经典非同源末端连接(classical non-homologous end joining,C-NHEJ)和选择性非同源末端连接(alternative non-homologous end joining,A-NHEJ)、重组修复(homology-directed repair,HDR)、单链退火修复(single-strand annealing,SSA)等通路可竞争性修复DNA双链断裂损伤。其中,SSA途径不使用同源染色体或姐妹染色单体,仅依赖于重复序列彼此退火配对,并涉及遗传信息的丢失,是容易出错的修复过程,具有诱变性。相比其他修复途径,在细胞周期S和G_2期中,末端切除暴露出更长的同源重复序列(20 bp),有利于细胞选择SSA途径进行修复。在一些SSA活性升高的同源重组(homologous recombination,HR)缺陷癌症中,癌症细胞可利用SSA途径获得耐药性,也预示着疾病风险的提高。因此,靶向SSA途径的抑制剂具有抑制癌症进展,以及逆转肿瘤细胞对聚腺苷二磷酸核糖聚合酶(poly ADP-ribose polymerase,PARP)抑制剂耐药的作用,是一种新型的治疗策略,可能成为特定同源重组缺陷癌症风险评估的有力工具。检测SSA活性将有助于更好区分癌症的发生和进展。同时随着基因编辑技术的发展,基于SSA途径的荧光报告基因方法,用于检测规律成簇的间隔短回文重复序列(clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeats,CRISPR-Cas9)系统中引导RNA(gRNA)的特异性和裂解活性被证明是有效、可靠的策略,同时结合CRISPR-Cas9靶向和SSA诱导的DNA编辑,可以特定模式表达多个gRNA并实现多种细胞类型特异性操作和组合遗传靶向。尽管对SSA途径的研究与基于SSA途径的技术应用已取得不错的进展,但仍有许多问题有待阐明。     

DNA双链断裂的非同源末端连接修复

细胞内普遍存在的DNA双链断裂(DSB)可通过同源重组(HR)或非同源末端连接(NHEJ)修复。由于HR仅在存在相同染色体作为模板的时候进行,因此,NHEJ通常为主要的修复方式。在NHEJ中,DSB末端首先由Ku识别,接着由核酸酶、聚合酶在Ku与DNA-PKcs协助下加工,并由连接酶IVXRCC4-XLF连接。NHEJ底物类型多样,末端的修复常包含反复加工的过程,导致修复产物通常无法复原损伤前的序列。虽然无法确保准确修复DNA,NHEJ仍对维持基因组的稳定性具有重要的意义。对NHEJ的研究有助于理解癌症的发生机制并将促进癌症的治疗。     

RNA干扰猪NHEJ通路修复因子对HR效率的影响

非同源末端连接(nonhomologous end joining, NHEJ)是动物基因组DNA双链断裂(double-strand break, DSB)修复的优选途径,通过与同源重组(homologous recombination, HR)竞争DSB靶点,进而抑制HR的效率。为提高HR效率,本研究针对猪NHEJ通路修复关键因子PNKP、LIG4和NHEJ1的编码序列,设计并合成相应的靶向小干扰RNA (small interfering RNA, siRNA),组成若干对RNAi (RNA interference)系统,将RNAi系统与报告质粒SSA-GFP reporter、HDR -GFP system和ssODN-GFP system共转染至猪胎儿成纤维细胞(porcine fetal fibroblasts, PFFs),检测敲低上述NHEJ关键修复因子后对HR的影响。RNAi结果显示,针对PNKP、LIG4和NHEJ1设计的siRNA均可显著敲低PNKP、LIG4和NHEJ1基因的表达(P<0.05)。选择干扰效果最好的siRNA与报告载体共转染PFFs,结果表明干扰PNKP基因表达后可显著提高单链退火(single strand annealing, SSA)修复效率、双链或单链DNA介导的同源重组定向修复(homology-directed repair, HDR)效率分别为55.7%、37.4%和73.1% (P<0.05),而干扰LIG4和NHEJ1分别提高双链和单链介导的HDR效率为37.5% 和 76.9% (P<0.05)。     

Ku基因在微生物中的研究进展

ku基因介导的非同源末端连接(NHEJ)途径是DNA双链断裂(DSBs)的一种修复机制,它不依赖于同源重组,且通过与之竞争而削弱同源重组。由于ku基因在生物进化过程中的高度保守性,其功能在很多微生物中已经得到研究,尤其在丝状真菌中,将ku基因敲除,在NHEJ途径缺陷的背景下,同源重组发挥主要作用,基因敲除的频率大为提高,从而方便了对基因功能的研究。     

Microhomology-mediated end joining in fission yeast is repressed by pku70 and relies on genes involved in homologous recombination

Two DNA repair pathways are known to mediate DNA double-strand-break (DSB) repair: homologous recombination (HR) and nonhomologous end joining (NHEJ). In addition, a nonconservative backup pathway showing extensive nucleotide loss and relying on microhomologies at repair junctions was identified in NHEJ-deficient cells from a variety of organisms and found to be involved in chromosomal translocations. Here, an extrachromosomal assay was used to characterize this microhomology-mediated end-joining (MMEJ) mechanism in fission yeast. MMEJ was found to require at least five homologous nucleotides and its efficiency was decreased by the presence of nonhomologous nucleotides either within the overlapping sequences or at DSB ends. Exo1 exonuclease and Rad22, a Rad52 homolog, were required for repair, suggesting that MMEJ is related to the single-strand-annealing (SSA) pathway of HR. In addition, MMEJ-dependent repair of DSBs with discontinuous microhomologies was strictly dependent on Pol4, a PolX DNA polymerase. Although not strictly required, Msh2 and Pms1 mismatch repair proteins affected the pattern of MMEJ repair. Strikingly, Pku70 inhibited MMEJ and increased the minimal homology length required for efficient MMEJ. Overall, this study strongly suggests that MMEJ does not define a distinct DSB repair mechanism but reflects "micro-SSA."     

Saccharomyces cerevisiae Sae2- and Tel1-dependent single-strand DNA formation at DNA break promotes microhomology-mediated end joining

Microhomology-mediated end joining (MMEJ) joins DNA ends via short stretches [5-20 nucleotides (nt)] of direct repeat sequences, yielding deletions of intervening sequences. Non-homologous end joining (NHEJ) and single-strand annealing (SSA) are other error prone processes that anneal single-stranded DNA (ssDNA) via a few bases (<5 nt) or extensive direct repeat homologies (>20 nt). Although the genetic components involved in MMEJ are largely unknown, those in NHEJ and SSA are characterized in some detail. Here, we surveyed the role of NHEJ or SSA factors in joining of double-strand breaks (DSBs) with no complementary DNA ends that rely primarily on MMEJ repair. We found that MMEJ requires the nuclease activity of Mre11/Rad50/Xrs2, 3' flap removal by Rad1/Rad10, Nej1, and DNA synthesis by multiple polymerases including Pol4, Rad30, Rev3, and Pol32. The mismatch repair proteins, Rad52 group genes, and Rad27 are dispensable for MMEJ. Sae2 and Tel1 promote MMEJ but inhibit NHEJ, likely by regulating Mre11-dependent ssDNA accumulation at DNA break. Our data support the role of Sae2 and Tel1 in MMEJ and genome integrity.     

Assays for DNA double-strand break repair by microhomology-based end-joining repair mechanisms

DNA double stranded breaks (DSBs) are one of the most deleterious types of DNA lesions. The main pathways responsible for repairing these breaks in eukaryotic cells are homologous recombination (HR) and non-homologous end-joining (NHEJ). However, a third group of still poorly characterized DSB repair pathways, collectively termed microhomology-mediated end-joining (MMEJ), relies on short homologies for the end-joining process. Here, we constructed GFP reporter assays to characterize and distinguish MMEJ variant pathways, namely the simple MMEJ and the DNA synthesis-dependent (SD)-MMEJ mechanisms. Transfection of these assay vectors in Chinese hamster ovary (CHO) cells and characterization of the repaired DNA sequences indicated that while simple MMEJ is able to mediate relatively efficient DSB repair if longer microhomologies are present, the majority of DSBs were repaired using the highly error-prone SD-MMEJ pathway. To validate the involvement of DNA synthesis in the repair process, siRNA knock-down of different genes proposed to play a role in MMEJ were performed, revealing that the knock-down of DNA polymerase θ inhibited DNA end resection and repair through simple MMEJ, thus favoring the other repair pathway. Overall, we conclude that this approach provides a convenient assay to study MMEJ-related DNA repair pathways.     

Alternative-NHEJ is a mechanistically distinct pathway of mammalian chromosome break repair

Characterizing the functional overlap and mutagenic potential of different pathways of chromosomal double-strand break (DSB) repair is important to understand how mutations arise during cancer development and treatment. To this end, we have compared the role of individual factors in three different pathways of mammalian DSB repair: alternative-nonhomologous end joining (alt-NHEJ), single-strand annealing (SSA), and homology directed repair (HDR/GC). Considering early steps of repair, we found that the DSB end-processing factors KU and CtIP affect all three pathways similarly, in that repair is suppressed by KU and promoted by CtIP. In contrast, both KU and CtIP appear dispensable for the absolute level of total-NHEJ between two tandem I-SceI–induced DSBs. During later steps of repair, we find that while the annealing and processing factors RAD52 and ERCC1 are important to promote SSA, both HDR/GC and alt-NHEJ are significantly less dependent upon these factors. As well, while disruption of RAD51 causes a decrease in HDR/GC and an increase in SSA, inhibition of this factor did not affect alt-NHEJ. These results suggest that the regulation of DSB end-processing via KU/CtIP is a common step during alt-NHEJ, SSA, and HDR/GC. However, at later steps of repair, alt-NHEJ is a mechanistically distinct pathway of DSB repair, and thus may play a unique role in mutagenesis during cancer development and therapy.     

Homologous Recombination Is a Primary Pathway to Repair DNA Double-Strand Breaks Generated during DNA Rereplication

Re-initiation of DNA replication at origins within a given cell cycle would result in DNA rereplication, which can lead to genome instability and tumorigenesis. DNA rereplication can be induced by loss of licensing control at cellular replication origins, or by viral protein-driven multiple rounds of replication initiation at viral origins. DNA double-strand breaks (DSBs) are generated during rereplication, but the mechanisms of how these DSBs are repaired to maintain genome stability and cell viability are poorly understood in mammalian cells. We generated novel EGFP-based DSB repair substrates, which specifically monitor the repair of rereplication-associated DSBs. We demonstrated that homologous recombination (HR) is an important mechanism to repair rereplication-associated DSBs, and sister chromatids are used as templates for such HR-mediated DSB repair. Micro-homology-mediated non-homologous end joining (MMEJ) can also be used but to a lesser extent compared to HR, whereas Ku-dependent classical non-homologous end joining (C-NHEJ) has a minimal role to repair rereplication-associated DSBs. In addition, loss of HR activity leads to severe cell death when rereplication is induced. Therefore, our studies identify HR, the most conservative repair pathway, as the primary mechanism to repair DSBs upon rereplication.     

Heavy Metal Exposure Influences Double Strand Break DNA Repair Outcomes

Heavy metals such as cadmium, arsenic and nickel are classified as carcinogens. Although the precise mechanism of carcinogenesis is undefined, heavy metal exposure can contribute to genetic damage by inducing double strand breaks (DSBs) as well as inhibiting critical proteins from different DNA repair pathways. Here we take advantage of two previously published culture assay systems developed to address mechanistic aspects of DNA repair to evaluate the effects of heavy metal exposures on competing DNA repair outcomes. Our results demonstrate that exposure to heavy metals significantly alters how cells repair double strand breaks. The effects observed are both specific to the particular metal and dose dependent. Low doses of NiCl₂ favored resolution of DSBs through homologous recombination (HR) and single strand annealing (SSA), which were inhibited by higher NiCl₂ doses. In contrast, cells exposed to arsenic trioxide preferentially repaired using the “error prone” non-homologous end joining (alt-NHEJ) while inhibiting repair by HR. In addition, we determined that low doses of nickel and cadmium contributed to an increase in mutagenic recombination-mediated by Alu elements, the most numerous family of repetitive elements in humans. Sequence verification confirmed that the majority of the genetic deletions were the result of Alu-mediated non-allelic recombination events that predominantly arose from repair by SSA. All heavy metals showed a shift in the outcomes of alt-NHEJ repair with a significant increase of non-templated sequence insertions at the DSB repair site. Our data suggest that exposure to heavy metals will alter the choice of DNA repair pathway changing the genetic outcome of DSBs repair.     

Mechanisms of DNA double strand break repair and chromosome aberration formation

It is widely accepted that unrepaired or misrepaired DNA double strand breaks (DSBs) lead to the formation of chromosome aberrations. DSBs induced in the DNA of higher eukaryotes by endogenous processes or exogenous agents can in principle be repaired either by non-homologous endjoining (NHEJ), or homology directed repair (HDR). The basis on which the selection of the DSB repair pathway is made remains unknown but may depend on the inducing agent, or process. Evaluation of the relative contribution of NHEJ and HDR specifically to the repair of ionizing radiation (IR) induced DSBs is important for our understanding of the mechanisms leading to chromosome aberration formation. Here, we review recent work from our laboratories contributing to this line of inquiry. Analysis of DSB rejoining in irradiated cells using pulsed-field gel electrophoresis reveals a fast component operating with half times of 10-30 min. This component of DSB rejoining is severely compromised in cells with mutations in DNA-PKcs, Ku, DNA ligase IV, or XRCC4, as well as after chemical inhibition of DNA-PK, indicating that it reflects classical NHEJ; we termed this form of DSB rejoining D-NHEJ to signify its dependence on DNA-PK. Although chemical inhibition, or mutation, in any of these factors delays processing, cells ultimately remove the majority of DSBs using an alternative pathway operating with slower kinetics (half time 2-10 h). This alternative, slow pathway of DSB rejoining remains unaffected in mutants deficient in several genes of the RAD52 epistasis group, suggesting that it may not reflect HDR. We proposed that it reflects an alternative form of NHEJ that operates as a backup (B-NHEJ) to the DNA-PK-dependent (D-NHEJ) pathway. Biochemical studies confirm the presence in cell extracts of DNA end joining activities operating in the absence of DNA-PK and indicate the dominant role for D-NHEJ, when active. These observations in aggregate suggest that NHEJ, operating via two complementary pathways, B-NHEJ and D-NHEJ, is the main mechanism through which IR-induced DSBs are removed from the DNA of higher eukaryotes. HDR is considered to either act on a small fraction of IR induced DSBs, or to engage in the repair process at a step after the initial end joining. We propose that high speed D-NHEJ is an evolutionary development in higher eukaryotes orchestrated around the newly evolved DNA-PKcs and pre-existing factors. It achieves within a few minutes restoration of chromosome integrity through an optimized synapsis mechanism operating by a sequence of protein-protein interactions in the context of chromatin and the nuclear matrix. As a consequence D-NHEJ mostly joins the correct DNA ends and suppresses the formation of chromosome aberrations, albeit, without ensuring restoration of DNA sequence around the break. B-NHEJ is likely to be an evolutionarily older pathway with less optimized synapsis mechanisms that rejoins DNA ends with kinetics of several hours. The slow kinetics and suboptimal synapsis mechanisms of B-NHEJ allow more time for exchanges through the joining of incorrect ends and cause the formation of chromosome aberrations in wild type and D-NHEJ mutant cells.     

The requirement for recombination factors differs considerably between different pathways of homologous double‐strand break repair in somatic plant cells

In recent years, multiple factors involved in DNA double‐strand break (DSB) repair have been characterised in Arabidopsis thaliana. Using homologous sequences in somatic cells, DSBs are mainly repaired by two different pathways: synthesis‐dependent strand annealing (SDSA) and single‐strand annealing (SSA). By applying recombination substrates in which recombination is initiated by the induction of a site‐specific DSB by the homing endonuclease I‐SceI, we were able to characterise the involvement of different factors in both pathways. The nucleases MRE11 and COM1, both involved in DSB end processing, were not required for either SDSA or SSA in our assay system. Both SDSA and SSA were even more efficient without MRE11, in accordance with the fact that a loss of MRE11 might negatively affect the efficiency of non‐homologous end joining. Loss of the classical recombinase RAD51 or its two paralogues RAD51C and XRCC3, as well as the SWI2/SNF2 remodelling factor RAD54, resulted in a drastic deficiency in SDSA but had hardly any influence on SSA, confirming that a strand exchange reaction is only required for SDSA. The helicase FANCM, which is postulated to be involved in the stabilisation of recombination intermediates, is surprisingly not only needed for SDSA but to a lesser extent also for SSA. Both SSA and SDSA were affected only weakly when the SMC6B protein, implicated in sister chromatid recombination, was absent, indicating that SSA and SDSA are in most cases intrachromatid recombination reactions.     

Induction and repair of DNA double strand breaks: the increasing spectrum of non-homologous end joining pathways

A defining characteristic of damage induced in the DNA by ionizing radiation (IR) is its clustered character that leads to the formation of complex lesions challenging the cellular repair mechanisms. The most widely investigated such complex lesion is the DNA double strand break (DSB). DSBs undermine chromatin stability and challenge the repair machinery because an intact template strand is lacking to assist restoration of integrity and sequence in the DNA molecule. Therefore, cells have evolved a sophisticated machinery to detect DSBs and coordinate a response on the basis of inputs from various sources. A central function of cellular responses to DSBs is the coordination of DSB repair. Two conceptually different mechanisms can in principle remove DSBs from the genome of cells of higher eukaryotes. Homologous recombination repair (HRR) uses as template a homologous DNA molecule and is therefore error-free; it functions preferentially in the S and G2 phases. Non-homologous end joining (NHEJ), on the other hand, simply restores DNA integrity by joining the two ends, is error prone as sequence is only fortuitously preserved and active throughout the cell cycle. The basis of DSB repair pathway choice remains unknown, but cells of higher eukaryotes appear programmed to utilize preferentially NHEJ. Recent work suggests that when the canonical DNA-PK dependent pathway of NHEJ (D-NHEJ), becomes compromised an alternative NHEJ pathway and not HRR substitutes in a quasi-backup function (B-NHEJ). Here, we outline aspects of DSB induction by IR and review the mechanisms of their processing in cells of higher eukaryotes. We place particular emphasis on backup pathways of NHEJ and summarize their increasing significance in various cellular processes, as well as their potential contribution to carcinogenesis.     

Microhomology-mediated end joining is the principal mediator of double-strand break repair during mitochondrial DNA lesions

Mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) deletions are associated with various mitochondrial disorders. The deletions identified in humans are flanked by short, directly repeated mitochondrial DNA sequences; however, the mechanism of such DNA rearrangements has yet to be elucidated. In contrast to nuclear DNA (nDNA), mtDNA is more exposed to oxidative damage, which may result in double-strand breaks (DSBs). Although DSB repair in nDNA is well studied, repair mechanisms in mitochondria are not characterized. In the present study, we investigate the mechanisms of DSB repair in mitochondria using in vitro and ex vivo assays. Whereas classical NHEJ (C-NHEJ) is undetectable, microhomology-mediated alternative NHEJ efficiently repairs DSBs in mitochondria. Of interest, robust microhomology-mediated end joining (MMEJ) was observed with DNA substrates bearing 5-, 8-, 10-, 13-, 16-, 19-, and 22-nt microhomology. Furthermore, MMEJ efficiency was enhanced with an increase in the length of homology. Western blotting, immunoprecipitation, and protein inhibition assays suggest the involvement of CtIP, FEN1, MRE11, and PARP1 in mitochondrial MMEJ. Knockdown studies, in conjunction with other experiments, demonstrated that DNA ligase III, but not ligase IV or ligase I, is primarily responsible for the final sealing of DSBs during mitochondrial MMEJ. These observations highlight the central role of MMEJ in maintenance of mammalian mitochondrial genome integrity and is likely relevant for deletions observed in many human mitochondrial disorders.