Suppr超能文献

致甲基化试剂阈反应的生物学基础。

Biological Basis for Threshold Responses to Methylating Agents.

机构信息

Centre for Research in Biosciences, University of the West of England, Frenchay Campus, Bristol BS16 1QY, United Kingdom.

出版信息

Chem Res Toxicol. 2020 Sep 21;33(9):2219-2224. doi: 10.1021/acs.chemrestox.0c00052. Epub 2020 May 27.

Abstract

The cellular outcomes of chemical exposure are as much about the cellular to the chemical as it is an of the chemical. We are growing in our understanding of the genotoxic interaction between chemistry and biology. For example, recent data has revealed the biological basis for mutation induction curves for a methylating chemical, which has been shown to be dependent on the repair capacity of the cells. However, this is just one end point in the toxicity pathway from chemical exposure to cell death. Much remains to be known in order for us to predict how cells will respond to a certain dose. Methylating agents, a subset of alkylating agents, are of particular interest, because of the variety of adverse genetic end points that can result, not only at increasing doses, but also over time. For instance, methylating agents are mutagenic, their potency, for this end point, is determined by the cellular repair capacity of an enzyme called methylguanine DNA-methyltransferase (MGMT) and its ability to repair the induceed methyl adducts. However, methyl adducts can become clastogenic. Erroneous biological processing will convert mutagenic adducts to clastogenic events in the form of double strand breaks (DSBs). How the cell responds to DSBs is via a cascade of protein kinases, which is called the DNA damage response (DDR), which will determine if the damage is repaired effectively, via homologous recombination, or with errors, via nonhomologous end joining, or whether the cell dies via apoptosis or enters senescence. The fate of cells may be determined by the extent of damage and the resulting strength of DDR signaling. Therefore, thresholds of damage may exist that determine cell fate. Such thresholds would be dependent on each of the repair and response mechanisms that these methyl adducts stimulate. The molecular mechanism of how methyl adducts kill cells is still to be fully resolved. If we are able to quantify each of these thresholds of damage for a given cell, then we can ascertain, of the many adducts that are induced, what proportion of them are mutagenic, what proportion are clastogenic, and how many of these clastogenic events are toxic. This review examines the possibility of dose and damage thresholds for methylating agents, from the perspective of the underlying evolutionary mechanisms that may be accountable.

摘要

化学暴露的细胞后果与其说是化学物质的作用,不如说是化学物质的作用。我们对化学物质与生物学之间的遗传毒性相互作用的理解正在不断加深。例如,最近的数据揭示了一种甲基化化学物质的致突变诱导曲线的生物学基础,这一曲线已被证明取决于细胞的修复能力。然而,这只是化学暴露导致细胞死亡的毒性途径的一个终点。为了预测细胞对特定剂量的反应,还有很多需要了解。甲基化剂是烷化剂的一个子集,由于可能导致多种不良遗传终点,因此特别令人关注,不仅在剂量增加时,而且随着时间的推移也是如此。例如,甲基化剂具有诱变作用,其对于这一终点的效力取决于一种称为甲基鸟嘌呤 DNA-甲基转移酶 (MGMT) 的酶的细胞修复能力及其修复诱导的甲基加合物的能力。然而,甲基加合物可能具有断裂诱导性。错误的生物处理会将致突变加合物转化为双链断裂 (DSB) 的断裂诱导事件。细胞如何应对 DSB 是通过一系列蛋白激酶的级联反应,称为 DNA 损伤反应 (DDR),这将决定损伤是否通过同源重组有效修复,或者通过非同源末端连接错误修复,或者细胞是否通过凋亡或衰老死亡。细胞的命运可能取决于损伤的程度和 DDR 信号的强度。因此,可能存在决定细胞命运的损伤阈值。这些阈值将取决于这些甲基加合物刺激的每种修复和反应机制。甲基加合物如何杀死细胞的分子机制仍有待完全解决。如果我们能够量化给定细胞的每种损伤阈值,那么我们就可以确定在诱导的许多加合物中,有多少是致突变的,有多少是断裂诱导的,以及这些断裂诱导事件中有多少是有毒的。本综述从可能负责的潜在进化机制的角度探讨了甲基化剂的剂量和损伤阈值的可能性。

相似文献

1
Biological Basis for Threshold Responses to Methylating Agents.致甲基化试剂阈反应的生物学基础。
Chem Res Toxicol. 2020 Sep 21;33(9):2219-2224. doi: 10.1021/acs.chemrestox.0c00052. Epub 2020 May 27.
6
The dual role of DNA repair protein MGMT in cancer prevention and treatment.MGMT 蛋白在癌症防治中的双重作用。
DNA Repair (Amst). 2023 Mar;123:103449. doi: 10.1016/j.dnarep.2023.103449. Epub 2023 Jan 14.
8
Dose response to methylating agents in the γH2AX, SCE and colony formation assays: Effect of MGMT and MPG overexpression.
Mutat Res Genet Toxicol Environ Mutagen. 2022 Apr-May;876-877:503462. doi: 10.1016/j.mrgentox.2022.503462. Epub 2022 Feb 3.

本文引用的文献

7
Homologous recombination and the repair of DNA double-strand breaks.同源重组和 DNA 双链断裂的修复。
J Biol Chem. 2018 Jul 6;293(27):10524-10535. doi: 10.1074/jbc.TM118.000372. Epub 2018 Mar 29.
8
Nonhomologous DNA end-joining for repair of DNA double-strand breaks.非同源 DNA 末端连接修复 DNA 双链断裂。
J Biol Chem. 2018 Jul 6;293(27):10512-10523. doi: 10.1074/jbc.TM117.000374. Epub 2017 Dec 14.
9
Mechanisms of glycosylase induced genomic instability.糖基化酶诱导基因组不稳定的机制。
PLoS One. 2017 Mar 23;12(3):e0174041. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0174041. eCollection 2017.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验