Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2019 Sep:81:102645.
doi: 10.1016/j.dnarep.2019.102645. Epub 2019 Jul 8.

Organization of DNA damage, excision repair, and mutagenesis in chromatin: A genomic perspective

Affiliations
Review

Organization of DNA damage, excision repair, and mutagenesis in chromatin: A genomic perspective

Peng Mao et al. DNA Repair (Amst). 2019 Sep.

Abstract

Genomic DNA is constantly assaulted by both endogenous and exogenous damaging agents. The resulting DNA damage, if left unrepaired, can interfere with DNA replication and be converted into mutations. Genomic DNA is packaged into a highly compact yet dynamic chromatin structure, in order to fit into the limited space available in the nucleus of eukaryotic cells. This hierarchical chromatin organization serves as both the target of DNA damaging agents and the context for DNA repair enzymes. Biochemical studies have suggested that both the formation and repair of DNA damage are significantly modulated by chromatin. Our understanding of the impact of chromatin on damage and repair has been significantly enhanced by recent studies. We focus on the nucleosome, the primary building block of chromatin, and discuss how the intrinsic structural properties of nucleosomes, and their associated epigenetic modifications, affect damage formation and DNA repair, as well as subsequent mutagenesis in cancer.

Keywords: Base excision repair; Mutagenesis; Nucleosome; Nucleotide excision repair; Skin cancer; UV damage.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Figures

Figure 1:
Figure 1:. Nucleosome translational and rotational settings regulate UV damage formation, DNA repair, and cancer mutagenesis.
NER activity is inhibited at the nucleosome dyad center, which is associated with increased mutation density in melanoma. At inward-facing rotational settings (‘in’), where the DNA minor groove faces toward histones, both UV damage formation and deamination of methylated cytosine in CPDs are reduced, which is associated with decreased mutations at ‘in’ rotational positions in melanoma. BER activity is decreased at ‘in’ rotational settings, which may contribute to the high mutation frequency at ‘in’ positions in esophageal and gastric cancer. However, further studies are needed to establish the direct correlation between BER and cancer mutation variations in the nucleosome. In contrast to the ‘in’ positions, UV damage formation, deamination of methylated cytosine in CPDs, and BER activity are elevated at ‘out’ rotational settings.
Figure 2:
Figure 2:. ETS binding promotes UV damage formation and melanoma mutations.
DNA binding by ETS transcription factors significantly induces UV damage formation. The UV damage hotspots at ETS binding sites are associated with highly recurrent non-coding mutations in melanoma, which may alter transcription of ETS target genes.
Figure 3:
Figure 3:. Open and closed chromatin states significantly affect excision repair and cancer mutation distribution.
DNA damage (e.g., UV, cisplatin, or benzo[a]pyrene adducts) in open chromatin regions is repaired more efficiently, while damage in closed chromatin such as heterochromatin is repaired less efficiently. Consequently, high mutation densities in cancer are frequently found in closed chromatin, while low mutation densities are associated with an open chromatin state.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Friedberg EC, Walker GC, Siede W, Wood RD, Schultz RA, Ellenburger T, DNA repair and mutagenesis, in: DNA Repair and Mutagenesis., ASM Press, 2006.
    1. De Bont R, van Larebeke N, Endogenous DNA damage in humans: a review of quantitative data, Mutagenesis. 19 (2004) 169–185. - PubMed
    1. Krokan HE, Bjørås M, Base excision repair, Cold Spring Harb Perspect Biol. 5 (2013) a012583. doi: 10.1101/cshperspect.a012583. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Prasad R, Beard WA, Batra VK, Liu Y, Shock DD, Wilson SH, A Review of Recent Experiments on Step-to-Step “Hand-off” of the DNA Intermediates in Mammalian Base Excision Repair Pathways, Mol Biol (Mosk). 45 (2011) 586–600. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Marteijn JA, Lans H, Vermeulen W, Hoeijmakers JHJ, Understanding nucleotide excision repair and its roles in cancer and ageing, Nature Reviews Molecular Cell Biology. 15 (2014) 465–481. doi:10.1038/nrm3822. - DOI - PubMed

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources