NEIL2-initiated, APE-independent repair of oxidized bases in DNA: Evidence for a repair complex in human cells

DNA glycosylases/AP lyases initiate repair of oxidized bases in the genomes of all organisms by excising these lesions and then cleaving the DNA strand at the resulting abasic (AP) sites and generate 3' phospho alpha,beta-unsaturated aldehyde (3' PUA) or 3' phosphate (3' P) terminus. In Escherichia coli, the AP-endonucleases (APEs) hydrolyze both 3' blocking groups (3' PUA and 3' P) to generate the 3'-OH termini needed for repair synthesis. In mammalian cells, the previously characterized DNA glycosylases, NTH1 and OGG1, produce 3' PUA, which is removed by the only AP-endonuclease, APE1. However, APE1 is barely active in removing 3' phosphate generated by the recently discovered mammalian DNA glycosylases NEIL1 and NEIL2. We showed earlier that the 3' phosphate generated by NEIL1 is efficiently removed by polynucleotide kinase (PNK) and not APE1. Here we show that the NEIL2-initiated repair of 5-hydroxyuracil (5-OHU) similarly requires PNK. We have also observed stable interaction between NEIL2 and other BER proteins DNA polymerase beta (Pol beta), DNA ligase IIIalpha (Lig IIIalpha) and XRCC1. In spite of their limited sequence homology, NEIL1 and NEIL2 interact with the same domains of Pol beta and Lig IIIalpha. Surprisingly, while the catalytically dispensable C-terminal region of NEIL1 is the common interacting domain, the essential N-terminal segment of NEIL2 is involved in analogous interaction. The BER proteins including NEIL2, PNK, Pol beta, Lig IIIalpha and XRCC1 (but not APE1) could be isolated as a complex from human cells, competent for repair of 5-OHU in plasmid DNA.     

When you’re strange: Unusual features of the MUTYH glycosylase and implications in cancer

MUTYH is a base-excision repair glycosylase that removes adenine opposite 8-oxoguanine (OG). Variants of MUTYH defective in functional activity lead to MUTYH-associated polyposis (MAP), which progresses to cancer with very high penetrance. Whole genome and whole exome sequencing studies have found MUTYH deficiencies in an increasing number of cancer types. While the canonical OG:A repair activity of MUTYH is well characterized and similar to bacterial MutY, here we review more recent evidence that MUTYH has activities independent of OG:A repair and appear centered on the interdomain connector (IDC) region of MUTYH. We summarize evidence that MUTYH is involved in rapid DNA damage response (DDR) signaling, including PARP activation, 9-1-1 and ATR signaling, and SIRT6 activity. MUTYH alters survival and DDR to a wide variety of DNA damaging agents in a time course that is not consistent with the formation of OG:A mispairs. Studies that suggest MUTYH inhibits the repair of alkyl-DNA damage and cyclopyrimidine dimers (CPDs) is reviewed, and evidence of a synthetic lethal interaction with mismatch repair (MMR) is summarized. Based on these studies we suggest that MUTYH has evolved from an OG:A mispair glycosylase to a multifunctional scaffold for DNA damage response signaling.     

Evidence for induction of DNA double strand breaks in the bystander response to targeted soft X-rays in CHO cells

This study investigated the role of DNA double strand breaks and DNA base damage in radiation-induced bystander responses in Chinese hamster ovary (CHO) cell lines. Two CHO repair-deficient clones, xrs5 (DNA double strand break repair-deficient) and EM9 (DNA base excision repair-deficient) were used in addition to the wild type (CHO). The Gray Cancer Institute ultrasoft X-ray microprobe is a powerful tool for investigating the bystander response, because it permits the irradiation of only a single nucleus of a cell, as reported previously. In order to investigate the bystander effect in each repair-deficient cell line, we irradiated a single cell within a population and scored the formation of micronuclei. When a single nucleus in the population was targeted with 1 Gy, elevated numbers of micronuclei were induced in the neighbouring unirradiated cells in the EM9 and xrs5 cell lines, whereas induction was not observed in CHO. The induction of micronuclei in xrs5 was significantly higher than that in EM9. Under these conditions, the surviving fraction in the neighbouring cells was significantly lower in xrs5 than in the other cell lines, showing a higher cell killing effect in xrs5. To confirm that bystander factors secreted from irradiated cells caused these effects, we carried out medium transfer experiments using conventional X-irradiation. Medium conditioned for 24 h with irradiated cells was transferred to unirradiated cells and elevated induction of micronuclei was observed in xrs5. These results suggest that DNA double strand breaks rather than base damage are caused by factors secreted in the medium from irradiated cells.     

Human NEIL3 is mainly a monofunctional DNA glycosylase removing spiroimindiohydantoin and guanidinohydantoin

Base excision repair is the major pathway for removal of oxidative DNA base damage. This pathway is initiated by DNA glycosylases, which recognize and excise damaged bases from DNA. In this work, we have purified the glycosylase domain (GD) of human DNA glycosylase NEIL3. The substrate specificity has been characterized and we have elucidated the catalytic mechanisms. GD NEIL3 excised the hydantoin lesions spiroiminodihydantoin (Sp) and guanidinohydantoin (Gh) in single-stranded (ss) and double-stranded (ds) DNA efficiently. NEIL3 also removed 5-hydroxy-2′-deoxycytidine (5OHC) and 5-hydroxy-2′-deoxyuridine (5OHU) in ssDNA, but less efficiently than hydantoins. Unlike NEIL1 and NEIL2, which possess a β,δ-elimination activity, NEIL3 mainly incised damaged DNA by β-elimination. Further, the base excision and strand incision activities of NEIL3 exhibited a non-concerted action, indicating that NEIL3 mainly operate as a monofunctional DNA glycosylase. The site-specific NEIL3 mutant V2P, however, showed a concerted action, suggesting that the N-terminal amino group in Val2 is critical for the monofunctional modus. Finally, we demonstrated that residue Lys81 is essential for catalysis.     

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.     

Clusterin and DNA repair: a new function in cancer for a key player in apoptosis and cell cycle control

The glycoprotein clusterin (CLU), has two known isoforms generated in human cells. A nuclear form of CLU protein (nCLU) is pro-apoptotic, while a secretory form (sCLU) is pro-survival. Both forms are implicated in various cell functions, including DNA repair, cell cycle regulation, and apoptotic cell death. CLU expression has been associated with tumorigenesis and the progression of various malignancies. In response to DNA damage, cell survival can be enhanced by activation of DNA repair mechanisms, while simultaneously stimulating energy-expensive cell cycle checkpoints that delay the cell cycle progression to allow more time for DNA repair. This review summarizes our current understanding of the role of clusterin in DNA repair, apoptosis, and cell cycle control and the relevance.     

Slow accumulation of mutations in Xpc−/− mice upon induction of oxidative stress

XPC is one of the key DNA damage recognition proteins in the global genome repair route of the nucleotide excision repair (NER) pathway. Previously, we demonstrated that NER-deficient mouse models Xpa^?/? and Xpc^?/? exhibit a divergent spontaneous tumor spectrum and proposed that XPC might be functionally involved in the defense against oxidative DNA damage. Others have mechanistically dissected several functionalities of XPC to oxidative DNA damage sensitivity using in vitro studies. XPC has been linked to regulation of base excision repair (BER) activity, redox homeostasis and recruitment of ATM and ATR to damage sites, thereby possibly regulating cell cycle checkpoints and apoptosis. XPC has additionally been implicated in recognition of bulky (e.g. cyclopurines) and non-bulky DNA damage (8-oxodG). However, the ultimate contribution of the XPC functionality in vivo in the oxidative DNA damage response and subsequent mutagenesis process remains unclear. Our study indicates that Xpc^?/? mice, in contrary to Xpa^?/? and wild type mice, have an increased mutational load upon induction of oxidative stress and that mutations arise in a slowly accumulative fashion. The effect of non-functional XPC in vivo upon oxidative stress exposure appears to have implications in mutagenesis, which can contribute to the carcinogenesis process. The levels and rate of mutagenesis upon oxidative stress correlate with previous findings that lung tumors in Xpc^?/? mice overall arise late in the lifespan and that the incidence of internal tumors in XP-C patients is relatively low in comparison to skin cancer incidence.     

APLF promotes the assembly and activity of non‐homologous end joining protein complexes

Non‐homologous end joining (NHEJ) is critical for the maintenance of genetic integrity and DNA double‐strand break (DSB) repair. NHEJ is regulated by a series of interactions between core components of the pathway, including Ku heterodimer, XLF/Cernunnos, and XRCC4/DNA Ligase 4 (Lig4). However, the mechanisms by which these proteins assemble into functional protein–DNA complexes are not fully understood. Here, we show that the von Willebrand (vWA) domain of Ku80 fulfills a critical role in this process by recruiting Aprataxin‐and‐PNK‐Like Factor (APLF) into Ku‐DNA complexes. APLF, in turn, functions as a scaffold protein and promotes the recruitment and/or retention of XRCC4‐Lig4 and XLF, thereby assembling multi‐protein Ku complexes capable of efficient DNA ligation in vitro and in cells. Disruption of the interactions between APLF and either Ku80 or XRCC4‐Lig4 disrupts the assembly and activity of Ku complexes, and confers cellular hypersensitivity and reduced rates of chromosomal DSB repair in avian and human cells, respectively. Collectively, these data identify a role for the vWA domain of Ku80 and a molecular mechanism by which DNA ligase proficient complexes are assembled during NHEJ in mammalian cells, and reveal APLF to be a structural component of this critical DSB repair pathway.     

Roles of chromatin remodellers in DNA double strand break repair

Now that we have a good understanding of the DNA double strand break (DSB) repair mechanisms and DSB-induced damage signalling, attention is focusing on the changes to the chromatin environment needed for efficient DSB repair. Mutations in chromatin remodelling complexes have been identified in cancers, making it important to evaluate how they impact upon genomic stability. Our current understanding of the DSB repair pathways suggests that each one has distinct requirements for chromatin remodelling. Moreover, restricting the extent of chromatin modifications could be a significant factor regulating the decision of pathway usage. In this review, we evaluate the distinct DSB repair pathways for their potential need for chromatin remodelling and review the roles of ATP-driven chromatin remodellers in the pathways.