Kozack R, Seo K Y, Jelinsky S A, Loechler E L
Department of Biology, Boston University, Boston, MA 02215, USA.
Mutat Res. 2000 May 30;450(1-2):41-59. doi: 10.1016/s0027-5107(00)00015-4.
The process of carcinogenesis is initiated by mutagenesis, which often involves replication past damaged DNA. One question - what exactly is a DNA polymerase seeing when it incorrectly copies a damaged DNA base (e.g., inserting dATP opposite a dG adduct)? - has not been answered in any case. Herein, we reflect on this question, principally by considering the mutagenicity of one activated form of benzo[a]pyrene, (+)-anti-B[a]PDE, and its major adduct [+ta]-B[a]P-N(2)-dG. In previous work, [+ta]-B[a]P-N(2)-dG was shown to be capable of inducing>95% G-->T mutations in one sequence context (5'-TGC), and approximately 95% G-->A mutations in another (5'-AGA). This raises the question - how can a single chemical entity induce different mutations depending upon DNA sequence context? Our current working hypothesis is that adduct conformational complexity causes adduct mutational complexity, where DNA sequence context can affect the former, thereby influencing the latter. Evidence supporting this hypothesis was discussed recently (Seo et al., Mutation Res. [in press]). Assuming this hypothesis is correct (at least in some cases), one goal is to consider what these mutagenic conformations might be. Based on molecular modeling studies, 16 possible conformations for [+ta]-B[a]P-N(2)-dG are proposed. A correlation between molecular modeling and mutagenesis work suggests a hypothesis (Hypothesis 3): a base displaced conformation with the dG moiety of the adduct in the major vs. minor groove gives G-->T vs. G-->A mutations, respectively. (Hypothesis 4, which is a generalized version of Hypothesis 3, is also proposed, and can potentially rationalize aspects of both [+ta]-B[a]P-N(2)-dG and AP-site mutagenesis, as well as the so-called "A-rule".) Finally, there is a discussion of how conformational complexity might explain some unusual mutagenesis results that suggest [+ta]-B[a]P-N(2)-dG can become trapped in different conformations, and why we think it makes sense to interpret adduct mutagenesis results by modeling ds-DNA (at least in some cases), even though the mutagenic event must occur at a ss/ds-DNA junction in the presence of a DNA polymerase.
致癌过程由诱变引发,这通常涉及越过受损DNA进行复制。一个问题——当DNA聚合酶错误地复制受损DNA碱基时(例如,在与dG加合物相对的位置插入dATP),它究竟看到了什么?——在任何情况下都尚未得到解答。在此,我们思考这个问题,主要是通过考虑苯并[a]芘的一种活化形式(+)-反式-B[a]PDE及其主要加合物[+ta]-B[a]P-N(2)-dG的诱变性。在之前的工作中,[+ta]-B[a]P-N(2)-dG被证明在一种序列环境(5'-TGC)中能够诱导>95%的G→T突变,而在另一种序列环境(5'-AGA)中则能诱导约95%的G→A突变。这就引出了一个问题——一个单一的化学实体如何根据DNA序列环境诱导不同的突变?我们当前的工作假设是加合物构象复杂性导致加合物突变复杂性,其中DNA序列环境可以影响前者,从而影响后者。最近讨论了支持这一假设的证据(Seo等人,《突变研究》[即将发表])。假设这个假设是正确的(至少在某些情况下),一个目标是考虑这些诱变构象可能是什么。基于分子建模研究,提出了[+ta]-B[a]P-N(2)-dG的16种可能构象。分子建模与诱变工作之间的相关性提出了一个假设(假设3):加合物的dG部分位于大沟与小沟中的碱基移位构象分别导致G→T和G→A突变。(还提出了假设4,它是假设3的广义版本,有可能解释[+ta]-B[a]P-N(2)-dG和AP位点诱变的各个方面,以及所谓的“A规则”。)最后,讨论了构象复杂性如何解释一些不寻常的诱变结果,这些结果表明[+ta]-B[a]P-N(2)-dG可能被困在不同的构象中,以及为什么我们认为通过对双链DNA进行建模来解释加合物诱变结果是有意义的(至少在某些情况下),尽管诱变事件必须在DNA聚合酶存在的情况下在单链/双链DNA交界处发生。