Download PDF
CC BY 4.0 · AIMS Genet 2017; 04(01): 069-083
DOI: 10.3934/genet.2017.1.69
Review

Role of some epigenetic factors in DNA damage response pathway

Mrinalini Tiwari
1   Department of Radiation Genetics and Epigenetics, Institute of Nuclear Medicine and Allied Sciences, Brig SK Mazumdar Road, Timarpur, Delhi 110054 India
,
Suhel Parvez
2   Department of Toxicology, Jamia Hamdard University, Hamdard Nagar, Delhi 110062 India
,
Paban K. Agrawala
1   Department of Radiation Genetics and Epigenetics, Institute of Nuclear Medicine and Allied Sciences, Brig SK Mazumdar Road, Timarpur, Delhi 110054 India
› Author Affiliations
› Further Information
   Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

The current review gives a brief account of the DNA damage response pathway and involvement of various epigenetic mechanisms in DNA damage response pathway. The main focus is on histone modifications leading to structural alterations in chromatin since the compact chromatin structure poses a major limitation in the DNA repair process. Based on this hypothesis, our laboratory has also evaluated certain histone deacetylase inhibitors as potential radiomitigators and the same has been discussed in brief at the end of the review.

Keywords

DNA damage response - epigenetics - histone acetylation - radiomitigation


Publication History

Received: 16 December 2016

Accepted: 17 March 2017

Article published online:
10 May 2021

© 2017. The Author(s). This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, permitting unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction so long as the original work is properly cited. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)

Georg Thieme Verlag KG
Rüdigerstraße 14, 70469 Stuttgart, Germany

 

  • References

  • 1 Giglia-Mari G, Zotter A, Vermeulen W. DNA Damage Response. Cold Spring Harb Perspect Biol 2011; 3: a000745
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Hoeijmakers JHJ. DNA Damage, Aging, and Cancer. N Engl J Med 2009; 361: 1475-1485
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Bakkenist CJ, Kastan MB. Initiating cellular stress responses. Cell 2004; 118: 9-17
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Bartek J, Lukas C, Lukas J. Checking on DNA damage in Sphase. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol 2004; 5: 792-804
    Google Scholar
  • 5 Lukas J, Lukas C, Bartek J. Mammalian cell cycle checkpoints:signalling pathways and their organization in space and time. DNA Repair (Amst) 2004; 3: 997-1007
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Shiloh Y. ATM and related protein kinases: safeguarding genome integrity. Nat Rev Cancer 2003; 3: 155-168
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Petrini JH, Stracker TH. The cellular response to DNA double-strand breaks: defining the sensors and mediators. Trends Cell Biol 2003; 13: 458-462
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 You Z, Chahwan C, Bailis J. et al. ATM activation and its recruitment to damaged DNA require binding to the C terminus of Nbs1. Mol Cell Biol 2005; 25: 5363-5379
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Bakkenist CJ, Kastan MB. DNA damage activates ATM through intermolecular autophosphorylation and dimer dissociation. Nature 2003; 421: 499-506
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Kozlov SV, Graham ME, Peng C. et al. Involvement of novel autophosphorylation sites in ATM activation. Embo J 2006; 25: 3504-3514
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Bartek J, Lukas J. DNA damage checkpoints: from initiation to recovery or adaptation. Curr Opin Cell Biol 2007; 19: 238-245
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Farmer H, McCabe N, Lord CJ. et al. Targeting the DNA repair defect in BRCA mutant cells as a therapeutic strategy. Nature 2005; 434: 917-921
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Krokan HE, Bjoras M. Base excision repair. Cold Spring Haeb Perspect Biol 2013; 5: a012583
    Google Scholar
  • 14 de Boer J, Hoeijmakers JHJ. Nucleotide excision repair and human syndromes. Carcinogenesis 1999; 21: 453-460
    Google Scholar
  • 15 Masutani C, Suqasawa K, Yanaqisawa J. et al. Purification and cloning of a nucleotide excision repair complex involving the xeroderma pigmentosum group C protein and a human homologue of yeast RAD23. EMBO J 1994; 13: 1831-1843
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Watanabe T, Sukegawa J, Sukegawa I. et al. A 127-kDA Protein (UV-DDB) binds to the cytoplasmic domain of the Alzheimer's Amyloid precursor protein. J Neurochem 1999; 72: 549-556
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Nishi R, Alekseev S, Dinant C. et al. UV-DDB- dependent regulation of nucleotide excision repair kinetics in living cells. DNA Repair 2009; 8: 767-776
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Stevnsner T, Muftuoglu M, Aamann MD. et al. The role of Cockayne Syndrome group b (CSB) protein in base excision repair and aging. Mech Ageing dev 2008; 129: 441-448
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 de Laat WL, Jaspers NGJ, Hoeijmakers JHJ. Molecular mechanism of nucleotide excision repair. Genes Dev 1999; 13: 768-785
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Sung P, Klein H. Mechanism of homologous recombination: mediators and helicases take on regulatory functions. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol 2006; 7: 739-750
    Google Scholar
  • 21 Ma CJ, Gibb B, Kwon Y. et al. Protein dynamics of human RPA and RAD51 on ssDNA during assembly and disassembly of the RAD51 filament. Nucleic acids res 2016; pii: gkw1125
    Google Scholar
  • 22 Van Gent DC, Burg MVD. Non-homologous end-joining, a sticky affair. Oncogene 2007; 26: 7731-7740
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Smerdon MJ. DNA repair and the role of chromatin structure. Current Opinion in Cell Biology 1991; 3: 422-428
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Rogakou EP, Pilch DR, Orr AH. et al. DNA double-stranded breaks induce histone H2AX phosphorylation on serine 139. J Biolchem 1998; 273: 5858-5868
    Google Scholar
  • 25 Stucki M, Jackson SP. ΓH2AX and MDC1: anchoring the DNA-damage-response machinery to broken chromosome. DNA Repair (Amst) 2006; 5: 534-543
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Bekker-Jensen S, Lukas C, Kitagawa R. et al. Spatial organization of the mammalian genome surveillance machinery in response to DNA strand breaks. J Cell Biol 2006; 173: 195-206
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Celeste A, Fernandez-Capetillo O, Kruhlak MJ. et al. Histone H2AX phosphorylation is dispensable for the initial recognition of DNA breaks. Nature Cell Biology 2003; 5: 675-679
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Iacovoni JS, Caron P, Lassadi I. et al. High-resolution profiling of gammaH2AX around DNA double strand breaks in the mammalian genome. EMBO J 2010; 29: 1446-1457
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Xu Y, Ayrapetov MK, Xu C. et al. Histone H2A.Z controls a critical chromatin remodeling step required for DNA double-strand break repair. Mol Cell 2012; 48: 723-33
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Celeste A, Petersen S, Romanienko PJ. et al. Genomic instability in mice lackinghistone H2AX. Science 2002; 296: 922-927
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Shimada M, Niida H, Zineldeen DH. et al. Chk1 is a histone H3 threonine 11 kinase that regulates DNA damage-induced transcriptional repression. Cell 2008; 132: 221-232
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Ramanathan B, Smerdon MJ. Enhanced DNA repair synthesis in hyperacetylated nucleosomes. J BiolChem 1989; 264: 11026-11034
    Google Scholar
  • 33 Guo R, Chen J, Mitchell DL. et al. GCN5 and E2F1 stimulate nucleotide excision repair by promoting H3K9 acetylation at sites of damage. Nucleic acids res 2011; 39: 1390-1397
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 34 Luijsterburg MS, van Attikum H. Chromatin and the DNA damage response: The cancer connection. Mol Oncol 2011; 5: 349-367
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 35 Jiang X, Ye Xu, Price BD. Acetylation of H2AX on Lysine 36 plays a key role in the DNA double – strand break repair pathway. FEBS PRESS 2010; 584: 2926-2930
    Google Scholar
  • 36 Ogiwara H, Ui A, Otsuka A. et al. Histone acetylation by CBP and p300 at double-strand sites facilitates SWI/SNF chromatin remodeling and the recruitment of non-homologous end joining factors. Oncogene 2011; 30: 2135-2145
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 37 Yamamoto T, Horikoshi M. Novel Substrate specificity of the Histone Acetyltransferase Activity of HIV-1-Tat Interactive Protein Tip60. J Biol Chem 1997; 272: 30595-30598
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 38 Ikura T, Ogryzko VV, Grigoriev M. et al. Involvement of the TIP60 Histone Acetylase Complex in DNA Repair and Apoptosis. Cell 2000; 102: 463-473
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 39 Doyon Y, CÔtÉ J. The highly conserved and multifunctional NuA4 HAT complex. CurrOpin Genet Dev 2004; 14: 147-154
    Google Scholar
  • 40 Kim YC, Gerlitz G, Furusawa T. et al. Activation of ATM depends on chromatin interactions occurring before induction of DNA damage. Nature Cell biology 2008; 11: 92-96
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 41 Bernard P, Maure JF, Partridge JF. et al. Requirement of heterochromatin for cohesion at centromeres. Science 2001; 294: 2539-2542
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 42 Nonaka N, Kitajima T, Yokobayashi S. et al. Recruitment of cohesin to heterochromatic regions by Swi6/HP1 in fission yeast. Nat Cell Biol 2002; 4: 89-93
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 43 Partridge JF, Scott KS, Bannister AJ. et al. cis-acting DNA from fission yeast centromeres mediates histone H3 methylation and recruitment of silencing factors and cohesion to an ectopic site. Curr Biol 2002; 12: 1652-1660
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 44 Wysocki R, Javaheri A, Allard S. et al. Role of Dot1- dependent histone H3 methylation in G1 and S phase DNA damage checkpoint functions of Rad9. Mol Cell Biol 2005; 25: 8430-8443
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 45 Giannattasio M, Lazzaro F, Plevani P. et al. The DNA damage checkpoint response requires histone H2B ubiquitination by Rad6-Bre1 and H3 methylation by Dot1. J Biol Chem 2005; 280: 9879-9886
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 46 Faucher D, Wellinger RJ. Methylated H3K4, a Transcription-Associated Histone Modification, Is Involved in the DNA Damage Response Pathway. Plos Genet 2010; 6: e1001082
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 47 PeĄa PV, Hom RA, Hung T. et al. Histone H3K4me3 binding is required for the DNA repair and apoptotic activities of ING1 tumor suppressor. J Mol Biol 2008; 380: 303-312
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 48 Sun Y, Xu Y, Roy K. et al. DNA damage-induced acetylation of lysine 3016 of ATM activates ATM kinase activity. Mol Cell Biol 2007; 27: 8502-8509
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 49 Ayrapetov MK, Gursoy-Yuzugullu O, Xu C. et al. DNA double-strand breaks promote methylation of histone H3 on lysine 9 and transient formation of repressive chromatin. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2014; 111: 9169-9174
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 50 Dulev S, Tkach J, Lin S. et al. SET8 methyltransfersae activity during the DNA double-strand break response is required for the recruitment of 53BP1. EMBO Rep 2014; 15: 1163-1174
    Google Scholar
  • 51 Doil C, Mainland N, Bekker-Jensen S. et al. RNF 168 binds and amplifies ubiquitin conjugates on damaged chromosomes to allow accumulation of repair proteins. Cell 2009; 136: 435-446
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 52 Huen MS, Grant R, Manke I. et al. RNF8 transduces the DNA-damage signal via histone ubiquitinylation and checkpoint protein assembly. Cell 2007; 131: 901-914
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 53 Bergink S, Salomons FA, Hoogstraten D. et al. DNA damage triggers nucleotide excision repair dependent monoubiquitylation of histone H2A. Genes Dev 2006; 20: 1343-1352
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 54 Moyal L, Lerenthal Y, Gana-Weisz M. et al. Requirement of ATM- dependent monoubiquitylation of histone H2B for timely repair of DNA double-strand breaks. Mol Cell 2011; 41: 529-542
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 55 Wang H, Zhai L, Xu J. et al. Histone H3 and H4 ubiquitylation by the CUL4-DDB-ROC1 ubiquitin ligase facilitates cellular response to DNA damage. Mol Cell 2006; 22: 383-394
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 56 Katoch O, Dwarakanath BS, Agrawala PK. HDAC inhibitors: application in oncology and beyond. HOAJ Biol 2013; 2: 2
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 57 Katoch O, Kumar A, Adhikari JS. et al. Sulforaphane mitigates genotoxicity induced by radiation and anticancer drugs in human lymphocytes. Mutat Res 2013; 758: 29-34
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 58 Katoch O, Khan GA, Dwarakanath BS. et al. Mitigation of hematopoietic radiation injury by diallyl sulfide. JEPTO 2012; 31: 357-365
    PubMedGoogle Scholar