4.5 Article

Chronic hypoxia compromises repair of DNA double-strand breaks to drive genetic instability

期刊

JOURNAL OF CELL SCIENCE
卷 125, 期 1, 页码 189-199

出版社

COMPANY BIOLOGISTS LTD
DOI: 10.1242/jcs.092262

关键词

DNA double-strand breaks; hypoxia; non-homologous end joining; DNA double-strand break sensors; gamma-H2AX; genetic instability

资金

  1. Terry Fox Foundation-NCIC Hypoxia PMH [15004]
  2. NCIC [17154]
  3. Ontario Ministry of Health and Long Term Care
  4. CIHR

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Hypoxic cells have been linked to genetic instability and tumor progression. However, little is known about the exact relationship between DNA repair and genetic instability in hypoxic cells. We therefore tested whether the sensing and repair of DNA double-strand breaks (DNA-dsbs) is altered in irradiated cells kept under continual oxic, hypoxic or anoxic conditions. Synchronized G0-G1 human fibroblasts were irradiated (0-10 Gy) after initial gassing with 0% O-2 (anoxia), 0.2% O2 (hypoxia) or 21% O-2 (oxia) for 16 hours. The response of phosphorylated histone H2AX (gamma-H2AX), phosphorylated ataxia telangiectasia mutated [ATM(Ser1981)], and the p53 binding protein 1 (53BP1) was quantified by intranuclear DNA repair foci and western blotting. At 24 hours following DNA damage, residual gamma-H2AX, ATM(Ser1981) and 53BP1 foci were observed in hypoxic cells. This increase in residual DNA-dsbs under hypoxic conditions was confirmed using neutral comet assays. Clonogenic survival was also reduced in chronically hypoxic cells, which is consistent with the observation of elevated G1-associated residual DNA-dsbs. We also observed an increase in the frequency of chromosomal aberrations in chronically hypoxic cells. We conclude that DNA repair under continued hypoxia leads to decreased repair of G1-associated DNA-dsbs, resulting in increased chromosomal instability. Our findings suggest that aberrant DNA-dsb repair under hypoxia is a potential factor in hypoxia-mediated genetic instability.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据