DNA damage tolerance: A double-edged sword guarding the genome

Translational Cancer Research

Volumn 2, Issue 3, 2013, Pages 107-129

  Ghosal, Gargi ^a   Chen, Junjie ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS MD ANDERSON CANCER CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

DNA damage tolerance (DDT); Proliferating cell nuclear antigen (PCNA); Replicative DNA polymerase; Stalled replication forks; Translesion polymerase; Translesion synthesis (TLS)

Indexed keywords

EID: 84964057679     PISSN: 2218676X     EISSN: 22196803     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3978/j.issn.2218-676X.2013.04.01     Document Type: Review

References (225)

1. Kasparek TR, Humphrey TC. DNA double-strand break repair pathways, chromosomal rearrangements and cancer. Semin Cell Dev Biol 2011;22:886-97.
2. Bartek J, Bartkova J, Lukas J. DNA damage signalling guards against activated oncogenes and tumour progression. Oncogene 2007;26:7773-9.
3. Moraes MC, Neto JB, Menck CF. DNA repair mechanisms protect our genome from carcinogenesis. Front Biosci 2012;17:1362-88.
4. Hoeijmakers JH. DNA damage, aging, and cancer. N Engl J Med 2009;361:1475-85.
5. Lindahl T. Instability and decay of the primary structure of DNA. Nature 1993;362:709-15.
6. Jena NR. DNA damage by reactive species: Mechanisms, mutation and repair. J Biosci 2012;37:503-17.
7. Joenje H. Metabolism: alcohol, DNA and disease. Nature 2011;475:45-6.
8. Keeney S, Neale MJ. Initiation of meiotic recombination by formation of DNA double-strand breaks: mechanism and regulation. Biochem Soc Trans 2006;34:523-5.
9. Lieber MR, Chang CP, Gallo M, et al. The mechanism of V(D)J recombination: site-specificity, reaction fidelity and immunologic diversity. Semin Immunol 1994;6:143-53.
10. Symington LS, Gautier J. Double-strand break end resection and repair pathway choice. Annu Rev Genet 2011;45:247-71.
11. Dianov GL, Hübscher U. Mammalian Base Excision Repair: the Forgotten Archangel. Nucleic Acids Res 2013;41:3483-90.
12. Kamileri I, Karakasilioti I, Garinis GA. Nucleotide excision repair: new tricks with old bricks. Trends Genet 2012;28:566-73.
13. Kottemann MC, Smogorzewska A. Fanconi anaemia and the repair of Watson and Crick DNA crosslinks. Nature 2013;493:356-63.
14. Ciccia A, Elledge SJ. The DNA damage response: making it safe to play with knives. Mol Cell 2010;40:179-204.
15. Chang DJ, Cimprich KA. DNA damage tolerance: when it's OK to make mistakes. Nat Chem Biol 2009;5:82-90.
16. Sharma S, Helchowski CM, Canman CE. The roles of DNA polymerase ζ and the Y family DNA polymerases in promoting or preventing genome instability. Mutat Res 2013;743-744:97-110.
17. Matsuoka S, Rotman G, Ogawa A, et al. Ataxia telangiectasia-mutated phosphorylates Chk2 in vivo and in vitro. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2000;97:10389-94.
18. Yazdi PT, Wang Y, Zhao S, et al. SMC1 is a downstream effector in the ATM/NBS1 branch of the human S-phase checkpoint. Genes Dev 2002;16:571-82.
19. Uziel T, Lerenthal Y, Moyal L, et al. Requirement of the MRN complex for ATM activation by DNA damage. EMBO J 2003;22:5612-21.
20. Burma S, Chen BP, Murphy M, et al. ATM phosphorylates histone H2AX in response to DNA double-strand breaks. J Biol Chem 2001;276:42462-7.
21. Smith J, Tho LM, Xu N, et al. The ATM-Chk2 and ATR-Chk1 pathways in DNA damage signaling and cancer. Adv Cancer Res 2010;108:73-112.
22. Caldecott KW. Single-strand break repair and genetic disease. Nat Rev Genet 2008;9:619-31.
23. Miwa M, Masutani M. PolyADP-ribosylation and cancer. Cancer Sci 2007;98:1528-35.
24. Sousa FG, Matuo R, Soares DG, et al. PARPs and the DNA damage response. Carcinogenesis 2012;33:1433-40.
25. Luo X, Kraus WL. On PAR with PARP: cellular stress signaling through poly(ADP-ribose) and PARP-1. Genes Dev 2012;26:417-32.
26. Byun TS, Pacek M, Yee MC, et al. Functional uncoupling of MCM helicase and DNA polymerase activities activates the ATR-dependent checkpoint. Genes Dev 2005;19:1040-52.
27. Jones RM, Petermann E. Replication fork dynamics and the DNA damage response. Biochem J 2012;443:13-26.
28. Zou L, Elledge SJ. Sensing DNA damage through ATRIP recognition of RPA-ssDNA complexes. Science 2003;300:1542-8.
29. Liu S, Shiotani B, Lahiri M, et al. ATR autophosphorylation as a molecular switch for checkpoint activation. Mol Cell 2011;43:192-202.
30. Yamane K, Wu X, Chen J. A DNA damage-regulated BRCT-containing protein, TopBP1, is required for cell survival. Mol Cell Biol 2002;22:555-66.
31. Kim JE, McAvoy SA, Smith DI, et al. Human TopBP1 ensures genome integrity during normal S phase. Mol Cell Biol 2005;25:10907-15.
32. Kumagai A, Lee J, Yoo HY, et al. TopBP1 activates the ATR-ATRIP complex. Cell 2006;124:943-55.
33. Zou L, Cortez D, Elledge SJ. Regulation of ATR substrate selection by Rad17-dependent loading of Rad9 complexes onto chromatin. Genes Dev 2002;16:198-208.
34. Ward IM, Chen J. Histone H2AX is phosphorylated in an ATR-dependent manner in response to replicational stress. J Biol Chem 2001;276:47759-62.
35. Wang J, Gong Z, Chen J. MDC1 collaborates with TopBP1 in DNA replication checkpoint control. J Cell Biol 2011;193:267-73.
36. Gong Z, Kim JE, Leung CC, et al. BACH1/FANCJ acts with TopBP1 and participates early in DNA replication checkpoint control. Mol Cell 2010;37:438-46.
37. Yan S, Michael WM. TopBP1 and DNA polymerase-alpha directly recruit the 9-1-1 complex to stalled DNA replication forks. J Cell Biol 2009;184:793-804.
38. Zou L, Liu D, Elledge SJ. Replication protein A-mediated recruitment and activation of Rad17 complexes. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2003;100:13827-32.
39. Ellison V, Stillman B. Biochemical characterization of DNA damage checkpoint complexes: clamp loader and clamp complexes with specificity for 5' recessed DNA. PLoS Biol 2003;1:E33.
40. Delacroix S, Wagner JM, Kobayashi M, et al. The Rad9-Hus1-Rad1 (9-1-1) clamp activates checkpoint signaling via TopBP1. Genes Dev 2007;21:1472-7.
41. Lee J, Dunphy WG. Rad17 plays a central role in establishment of the interaction between TopBP1 and the Rad9-Hus1-Rad1 complex at stalled replication forks. Mol Biol Cell 2010;21:926-35.
42. Mordes DA, Glick GG, Zhao R, et al. TopBP1 activates ATR through ATRIP and a PIKK regulatory domain. Genes Dev 2008;22:1478-89.
43. Brush GS, Morrow DM, Hieter P, et al. The ATM homologue MEC1 is required for phosphorylation of replication protein A in yeast. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 1996;93:15075-80.
44. Liu S, Bekker-Jensen S, Mailand N, et al. Claspin operates downstream of TopBP1 to direct ATR signaling towards Chk1 activation. Mol Cell Biol 2006;26:6056-64.
45. Block WD, Yu Y, Lees-Miller SP. Phosphatidyl inositol 3-kinase-like serine/threonine protein kinases (PIKKs) are required for DNA damage-induced phosphorylation of the 32 kDa subunit of replication protein A at threonine 21. Nucleic Acids Res 2004;32:997-1005.
46. Guo Z, Kumagai A, Wang SX, et al. Requirement for Atr in phosphorylation of Chk1 and cell cycle regulation in response to DNA replication blocks and UV-damaged DNA in Xenopus egg extracts. Genes Dev 2000;14:2745-56.
47. Liu Q, Guntuku S, Cui XS, et al. Chk1 is an essential kinase that is regulated by Atr and required for the G(2)/M DNA damage checkpoint. Genes Dev 2000;14:1448-59.
48. Harrison JC, Haber JE. Surviving the breakup: the DNA damage checkpoint. Annu Rev Genet 2006;40:209-35.
49. Gotter AL, Suppa C, Emanuel BS. Mammalian TIMELESS and Tipin are evolutionarily conserved replication fork-associated factors. J Mol Biol 2007;366:36-52.
50. Nedelcheva MN, Roguev A, Dolapchiev LB, et al. Uncoupling of unwinding from DNA synthesis implies regulation of MCM helicase by Tof1/Mrc1/Csm3 checkpoint complex. J Mol Biol 2005;347:509-21.
51. Chou DM, Elledge SJ. Tipin and Timeless form a mutually protective complex required for genotoxic stress resistance and checkpoint function. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2006;103:18143-7.
52. Yoshizawa-Sugata N, Masai H. Human Tim/Timeless-interacting protein, Tipin, is required for efficient progression of S phase and DNA replication checkpoint. J Biol Chem 2007;282:2729-40.
53. Unsal-Kaçmaz K, Chastain PD, Qu PP, et al. The human Tim/Tipin complex coordinates an Intra-S checkpoint response to UV that slows replication fork displacement. Mol Cell Biol 2007;27:3131-42.
54. Smith KD, Fu MA, Brown EJ. Tim-Tipin dysfunction creates an indispensible reliance on the ATR-Chk1 pathway for continued DNA synthesis. J Cell Biol 2009;187:15-23.
55. Errico A, Costanzo V, Hunt T. Tipin is required for stalled replication forks to resume DNA replication after removal of aphidicolin in Xenopus egg extracts. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2007;104:14929-34.
56. Kondratov RV, Antoch MP. Circadian proteins in the regulation of cell cycle and genotoxic stress responses. Trends Cell Biol 2007;17:311-7.
57. Kemp MG, Akan Z, Yilmaz S, et al. Tipin-replication protein A interaction mediates Chk1 phosphorylation by ATR in response to genotoxic stress. J Biol Chem 2010;285:16562-71.
58. Chini CC, Chen J. Human claspin is required for replication checkpoint control. J Biol Chem 2003;278:30057-62.
59. Lee J, Kumagai A, Dunphy WG. Claspin, a Chk1-regulatory protein, monitors DNA replication on chromatin independently of RPA, ATR, and Rad17. Mol Cell 2003;11:329-40.
60. Jeong SY, Kumagai A, Lee J, et al. Phosphorylated claspin interacts with a phosphate-binding site in the kinase domain of Chk1 during ATR-mediated activation. J Biol Chem 2003;278:46782-8.
61. Walker M, Black EJ, Oehler V, et al. Chk1 C-terminal regulatory phosphorylation mediates checkpoint activation by de-repression of Chk1 catalytic activity. Oncogene 2009;28:2314-23.
62. Niida H, Katsuno Y, Banerjee B, et al. Specific role of Chk1 phosphorylations in cell survival and checkpoint activation. Mol Cell Biol 2007;27:2572-81.
63. Smits VA, Reaper PM, Jackson SP. Rapid PIKK-dependent release of Chk1 from chromatin promotes the DNA-damage checkpoint response. Curr Biol 2006;16:150-9.
64. Bartek J, Lukas J. Mammalian G1-and S-phase checkpoints in response to DNA damage. Curr Opin Cell Biol 2001;13:738-47.
65. Malumbres M, Barbacid M. Cell cycle, CDKs and cancer: a changing paradigm. Nat Rev Cancer 2009;9:153-66.
66. Sørensen CS, Syljuasen RG. Safeguarding genome integrity: the checkpoint kinases ATR, CHK1 and WEE1 restrain CDK activity during normal DNA replication. Nucleic Acids Res 2012;40:477-86.
67. Bartek J, Lukas J. Chk1 and Chk2 kinases in checkpoint control and cancer. Cancer Cell 2003;3:421-9.
68. Kastan MB, Bartek J. Cell-cycle checkpoints and cancer. Nature 2004;432:316-23.
69. Brown EJ, Baltimore D. ATR disruption leads to chromosomal fragmentation and early embryonic lethality. Genes Dev 2000;14:397-402.
70. Takai H, Tominaga K, Motoyama N, et al. Aberrant cell cycle checkpoint function and early embryonic death in Chk1(-/-) mice. Genes Dev 2000;14:1439-47.
71. Xu Y, Ashley T, Brainerd EE, et al. Targeted disruption of ATM leads to growth retardation, chromosomal fragmentation during meiosis, immune defects, and thymic lymphoma. Genes Dev 1996;10:2411-22.
72. Jallepalli PV, Lengauer C, Vogelstein B, et al. The Chk2 tumor suppressor is not required for p53 responses in human cancer cells. J Biol Chem 2003;278:20475-9.
73. Zachos G, Rainey MD, Gillespie DA. Chk1-deficient tumour cells are viable but exhibit multiple checkpoint and survival defects. EMBO J 2003;22:713-23.
74. Yuan J, Ghosal G, Chen J. The annealing helicase HARP protects stalled replication forks. Genes Dev 2009;23:2394-9.
75. Bansbach CE, Betous R, Lovejoy CA, et al. The annealing helicase SMARCAL1 maintains genome integrity at stalled replication forks. Genes Dev 2009;23:2405-14.
76. Yusufzai T, Kong X, Yokomori K, et al. The annealing helicase HARP is recruited to DNA repair sites via an interaction with RPA. Genes Dev 2009;23:2400-4.
77. Ciccia A, Bredemeyer AL, Sowa ME, et al. The SIOD disorder protein SMARCAL1 is an RPA-interacting protein involved in replication fork restart. Genes Dev 2009;23:2415-25.
78. Postow L, Woo EM, Chait BT, et al. Identification of SMARCAL1 as a component of the DNA damage response. J Biol Chem 2009;284:35951-61.
79. Ghosal G, Yuan J, Chen J. The HARP domain dictates the annealing helicase activity of HARP/SMARCAL1. EMBO Rep 2011;12:574-80.
80. Yuan J, Ghosal G, Chen J. The HARP-like domain-containing protein AH2/ZRANB3 binds to PCNA and participates in cellular response to replication stress. Mol Cell 2012;47:410-21.
81. Weston R, Peeters H, Ahel D. ZRANB3 is a structure-specific ATP-dependent endonuclease involved in replication stress response. Genes Dev 2012;26:1558-72.
82. Ciccia A, Nimonkar AV, Hu Y, et al. Polyubiquitinated PCNA recruits the ZRANB3 translocase to maintain genomic integrity after replication stress. Mol Cell 2012;47:396-409.
83. Bachrati CZ, Hickson ID. RecQ helicases: guardian angels of the DNA replication fork. Chromosoma 2008;117:219-33.
84. Luke-Glaser S, Luke B, Grossi S, et al. FANCM regulates DNA chain elongation and is stabilized by S-phase checkpoint signalling. EMBO J 2010;29:795-805.
85. Unk I, Hajdu I, Blastyak A, et al. Role of yeast Rad5 and its human orthologs, HLTF and SHPRH in DNA damage tolerance. DNA Repair (Amst) 2010;9:257-67.
86. Atkinson J, McGlynn P. Replication fork reversal and the maintenance of genome stability. Nucleic Acids Res 2009;37:3475-92.
87. Blastyák A, Pinter L, Unk I, et al. Yeast Rad5 protein required for postreplication repair has a DNA helicase activity specific for replication fork regression. Mol Cell 2007;28:167-75.
88. Branzei D, Foiani M. Maintaining genome stability at the replication fork. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol 2010;11:208-19.
89. Lee KY, Myung K. PCNA modifications for regulation of post-replication repair pathways. Mol Cells 2008;26:5-11.
90. Klarer AC, McGregor W. Replication of damaged genomes. Crit Rev Eukaryot Gene Expr 2011;21:323-36.
91. Lange SS, Takata K, Wood RD. DNA polymerases and cancer. Nat Rev Cancer 2011;11:96-110.
92. Makridakis NM, Reichardt JK. Translesion DNA polymerases and cancer. Front Genet 2012;3:174.
93. Johnson RE, Prakash S, Prakash L. Efficient bypass of a thymine-thymine dimer by yeast DNA polymerase, Poleta. Science 1999;283:1001-4.
94. Ogi T, Shinkai Y, Tanaka K, et al. Polkappa protects mammalian cells against the lethal and mutagenic effects of benzo[a]pyrene. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2002;99:15548-53.
95. Johnson RE, Washington MT, Haracska L, et al. Eukaryotic polymerases iota and zeta act sequentially to bypass DNA lesions. Nature 2000;406:1015-9.
96. Prakash S, Johnson RE, Prakash L. Eukaryotic translesion synthesis DNA polymerases: specificity of structure and function. Annu Rev Biochem 2005;74:317-53.
97. Waters LS, Minesinger BK, Wiltrout ME, et al. Eukaryotic translesion polymerases and their roles and regulation in DNA damage tolerance. Microbiol Mol Biol Rev 2009;73:134-54.
98. Ulrich HD. Regulating post-translational modifications of the eukaryotic replication clamp PCNA. DNA Repair (Amst) 2009;8:461-9.
99. Hoege C, Pfander B, Moldovan GL, et al. RAD6-dependent DNA repair is linked to modification of PCNA by ubiquitin and SUMO. Nature 2002;419:135-41.
100. Stelter P, Ulrich HD. Control of spontaneous and damage-induced mutagenesis by SUMO and ubiquitin conjugation. Nature 2003;425:188-91.
101. Bienko M, Green CM, Crosetto N, et al. Ubiquitin-binding domains in Y-family polymerases regulate translesion synthesis. Science 2005;310:1821-4.
102. Kannouche PL, Lehmann AR. Ubiquitination of PCNA and the polymerase switch in human cells. Cell Cycle 2004;3:1011-3.
103. Kannouche P, Fernandez de Henestrosa AR, Coull B, et al. Localization of DNA polymerases eta and iota to the replication machinery is tightly co-ordinated in human cells. EMBO J 2002;21:6246-56.
104. Daigaku Y, Davies AA, Ulrich HD. Ubiquitin-dependent DNA damage bypass is separable from genome replication. Nature 2010;465:951-5.
105. Karras GI, Jentsch S. The RAD6 DNA damage tolerance pathway operates uncoupled from the replication fork and is functional beyond S phase. Cell 2010;141:255-67.
106. Broomfield S, Hryciw T, Xiao W. DNA postreplication repair and mutagenesis in Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Mutat Res 2001;486:167-84.
107. Watanabe K, Tateishi S, Kawasuji M, et al. Rad18 guides poleta to replication stalling sites through physical interaction and PCNA monoubiquitination. EMBO J 2004;23:3886-96.
108. Motegi A, Liaw HJ, Lee KY, et al. Polyubiquitination of proliferating cell nuclear antigen by HLTF and SHPRH prevents genomic instability from stalled replication forks. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2008;105:12411-6.
109. Masuda Y, Suzuki M, Kawai H, et al. En bloc transfer of polyubiquitin chains to PCNA in vitro is mediated by two different human E2-E3 pairs. Nucleic Acids Res 2012;40:10394-407.
110. Davies AA, Huttner D, Daigaku Y, et al. Activation of ubiquitin-dependent DNA damage bypass is mediated by replication protein a. Mol Cell 2008;29:625-36.
111. Chang DJ, Lupardus PJ, Cimprich KA. Monoubiquitination of proliferating cell nuclear antigen induced by stalled replication requires uncoupling of DNA polymerase and mini-chromosome maintenance helicase activities. J Biol Chem 2006;281:32081-8.
112. Yang XH, Shiotani B, Classon M, et al. Chk1 and Claspin potentiate PCNA ubiquitination. Genes Dev 2008;22:1147-52.
113. Niimi A, Brown S, Sabbioneda S, et al. Regulation of proliferating cell nuclear antigen ubiquitination in mammalian cells. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2008;105:16125-30.
114. Andersen PL, Xu F, Xiao W. Eukaryotic DNA damage tolerance and translesion synthesis through covalent modifications of PCNA. Cell Res 2008;18:162-73.
115. Nam EA, Cortez D. ATR signalling: more than meeting at the fork. Biochem J 2011;436:527-36.
116. Zou L. Single- and double-stranded DNA: building a trigger of ATR-mediated DNA damage response. Genes Dev 2007;21:879-85.
117. Moldovan GL, Pfander B, Jentsch S. PCNA, the maestro of the replication fork. Cell 2007;129:665-79.
118. Hirano Y, Sugimoto K. ATR homolog Mec1 controls association of DNA polymerase zeta-Rev1 complex with regions near a double-strand break. Curr Biol 2006;16:586-90.
119. Kai M, Wang TS. Checkpoint activation regulates mutagenic translesion synthesis. Genes Dev 2003;17:64-76.
120. Guo C, Sonoda E, Tang TS, et al. REV1 protein interacts with PCNA: significance of the REV1 BRCT domain in vitro and in vivo. Mol Cell 2006;23:265-71.
121. Kannouche PL, Wing J, Lehmann AR. Interaction of human DNA polymerase eta with monoubiquitinated PCNA: a possible mechanism for the polymerase switch in response to DNA damage. Mol Cell 2004;14:491-500.
122. Plosky BS, Woodgate R. Switching from high-fidelity replicases to low-fidelity lesion-bypass polymerases. Curr Opin Genet Dev 2004;14:113-9.
123. Guo C, Tang TS, Bienko M, et al. Ubiquitin-binding motifs in REV1 protein are required for its role in the tolerance of DNA damage. Mol Cell Biol 2006;26:8892-900.
124. Friedberg EC, Lehmann AR, Fuchs RP. Trading places: how do DNA polymerases switch during translesion DNA synthesis? Mol Cell 2005;18:499-505.
125. Fujii S, Fuchs RP. Interplay among replicative and specialized DNA polymerases determines failure or success of translesion synthesis pathways. J Mol Biol 2007;372:883-93.
126. Centore RC, Yazinski SA, Tse A, et al. Spartan/C1orf124, a reader of PCNA ubiquitylation and a regulator of UV-induced DNA damage response. Mol Cell 2012;46:625-35.
127. Machida Y, Kim MS, Machida YJ. Spartan/C1orf124 is important to prevent UV-induced mutagenesis. Cell Cycle 2012;11:3395-402.
128. Ghosal G, Leung JW, Nair BC, et al. Proliferating cell nuclear antigen (PCNA)-binding protein C1orf124 is a regulator of translesion synthesis. J Biol Chem 2012;287:34225-33.
129. Juhasz S, Balogh D, Hajdu I, et al. Characterization of human Spartan/C1orf124, an ubiquitin-PCNA interacting regulator of DNA damage tolerance. Nucleic Acids Res 2012;40:10795-808.
130. Mosbech A, Gibbs-Seymour I, Kagias K, et al. DVC1 (C1orf124) is a DNA damage-targeting p97 adaptor that promotes ubiquitin-dependent responses to replication blocks. Nat Struct Mol Biol 2012;19:1084-92.
131. Davis EJ, Lachaud C, Appleton P, et al. DVC1 (C1orf124) recruits the p97 protein segregase to sites of DNA damage. Nat Struct Mol Biol 2012;19:1093-100.
132. Kim MS, Machida Y, Vashisht AA, et al. Regulation of error-prone translesion synthesis by Spartan/C1orf124. Nucleic Acids Res 2013;41:1661-8.
133. Povlsen LK, Beli P, Wagner SA, et al. Systems-wide analysis of ubiquitylation dynamics reveals a key role for PAF15 ubiquitylation in DNA-damage bypass. Nat Cell Biol 2012;14:1089-98.
134. Friedberg EC. Reversible monoubiquitination of PCNA: A novel slant on regulating translesion DNA synthesis. Mol Cell 2006;22:150-2.
135. Van Sloun PP, Varlet I, Sonneveld E, et al. Involvement of mouse Rev3 in tolerance of endogenous and exogenous DNA damage. Mol Cell Biol 2002;22:2159-69.
136. Hicks JK, Chute CL, Paulsen MT, et al. Differential roles for DNA polymerases eta, zeta, and REV1 in lesion bypass of intrastrand versus interstrand DNA cross-links. Mol Cell Biol 2010;30:1217-30.
137. Sharma S, Hicks JK, Chute CL, et al. REV1 and polymerase zeta facilitate homologous recombination repair. Nucleic Acids Res 2012;40:682-91.
138. Okada T, Sonoda E, Yoshimura M, et al. Multiple roles of vertebrate REV genes in DNA repair and recombination. Mol Cell Biol 2005;25:6103-11.
139. Wu F, Lin X, Okuda T, et al. DNA polymerase zeta regulates cisplatin cytotoxicity, mutagenicity, and the rate of development of cisplatin resistance. Cancer Res 2004;64:8029-35.
140. Roos WP, Tsaalbi-Shtylik A, Tsaryk R, et al. The translesion polymerase Rev3L in the tolerance of alkylating anticancer drugs. Mol Pharmacol 2009;76:927-34.
141. Sharma S, Shah NA, Joiner AM, et al. DNA polymerase zeta is a major determinant of resistance to platinum-based chemotherapeutic agents. Mol Pharmacol 2012;81:778-87.
142. Kim H, D'Andrea AD. Regulation of DNA cross-link repair by the Fanconi anemia/BRCA pathway. Genes Dev 2012;26:1393-408.
143. Meetei AR, de Winter JP, Medhurst AL, et al. A novel ubiquitin ligase is deficient in Fanconi anemia. Nat Genet 2003;35:165-70.
144. MacKay C, Declais AC, Lundin C, et al. Identification of KIAA1018/FAN1, a DNA repair nuclease recruited to DNA damage by monoubiquitinated FANCD2. Cell 2010;142:65-76.
145. Kratz K, Schopf B, Kaden S, et al. Deficiency of FANCD2-associated nuclease KIAA1018/FAN1 sensitizes cells to interstrand crosslinking agents. Cell 2010;142:77-88.
146. Liu T, Ghosal G, Yuan J, et al. FAN1 acts with FANCI-FANCD2 to promote DNA interstrand cross-link repair. Science 2010;329:693-6.
147. Smogorzewska A, Desetty R, Saito TT, et al. A genetic screen identifies FAN1, a Fanconi anemia-associated nuclease necessary for DNA interstrand crosslink repair. Mol Cell 2010;39:36-47.
148. de Laat WL, Appeldoorn E, Jaspers NG, et al. DNA structural elements required for ERCC1-XPF endonuclease activity. J Biol Chem 1998;273:7835-42.
149. Enzlin JH, Scharer OD. The active site of the DNA repair endonuclease XPF-ERCC1 forms a highly conserved nuclease motif. EMBO J 2002;21:2045-53.
150. Ciccia A, McDonald N, West SC. Structural and functional relationships of the XPF/MUS81 family of proteins. Annu Rev Biochem 2008;77:259-87.
151. Chen XB, Melchionna R, Denis CM, et al. Human Mus81-associated endonuclease cleaves Holliday junctions in vitro. Mol Cell 2001;8:1117-27.
152. Wang AT, Sengerová B, Cattell E, et al. Human SNM1A and XPF-ERCC1 collaborate to initiate DNA interstrand cross-link repair. Genes Dev 2011;25:1859-70.
153. Fekairi S, Scaglione S, Chahwan C, et al. Human SLX4 is a Holliday junction resolvase subunit that binds multiple DNA repair/recombination endonucleases. Cell 2009;138:78-89.
154. Svendsen JM, Smogorzewska A, Sowa ME, et al. Mammalian BTBD12/SLX4 assembles a Holliday junction resolvase and is required for DNA repair. Cell 2009;138:63-77.
155. Muñoz IM, Hain K, Declais AC, et al. Coordination of structure-specific nucleases by human SLX4/BTBD12 is required for DNA repair. Mol Cell 2009;35:116-27.
156. Andersen SL, Bergstralh DT, Kohl KP, et al. Drosophila MUS312 and the vertebrate ortholog BTBD12 interact with DNA structure-specific endonucleases in DNA repair and recombination. Mol Cell 2009;35:128-35.
157. Wang AT, Sengerova B, Cattell E, et al. Human SNM1A and XPF-ERCC1 collaborate to initiate DNA interstrand cross-link repair. Genes Dev 2011;25:1859-70.
158. Knipscheer P, Raschle M, Smogorzewska A, et al. The Fanconi anemia pathway promotes replication-dependent DNA interstrand cross-link repair. Science 2009;326:1698-701.
159. Räschle M, Knipscheer P, Enoiu M, et al. Mechanism of replication-coupled DNA interstrand crosslink repair. Cell 2008;134:969-80.
160. Papadopoulo D, Guillouf C, Mohrenweiser H, et al. Hypomutability in Fanconi anemia cells is associated with increased deletion frequency at the HPRT locus. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 1990;87:8383-7.
161. Niedzwiedz W, Mosedale G, Johnson M, et al. The Fanconi anaemia gene FANCC promotes homologous recombination and error-prone DNA repair. Mol Cell 2004;15:607-20.
162. Mirchandani KD, McCaffrey RM, D'Andrea AD. The Fanconi anemia core complex is required for efficient point mutagenesis and Rev1 foci assembly. DNA Repair (Amst) 2008;7:902-11.
163. Kim H, Yang K, Dejsuphong D, et al. Regulation of Rev1 by the Fanconi anemia core complex. Nat Struct Mol Biol 2012;19:164-70.
164. Ali AM, Pradhan A, Singh TR, et al. FAAP20: a novel ubiquitin-binding FA nuclear core-complex protein required for functional integrity of the FA-BRCA DNA repair pathway. Blood 2012;119:3285-94.
165. Moldovan GL, Madhavan MV, Mirchandani KD, et al. DNA polymerase POLN participates in cross-link repair and homologous recombination. Mol Cell Biol 2010;30:1088-96.
166. O'Driscoll M. Diseases associated with defective responses to DNA damage. Cold Spring Harb Perspect Biol 2012;4:a012773.
167. Colnaghi R, Carpenter G, Volker M, et al. The consequences of structural genomic alterations in humans: genomic disorders, genomic instability and cancer. Semin Cell Dev Biol 2011;22:875-85.
168. Biton S, Barzilai A, Shiloh Y. The neurological phenotype of ataxia-telangiectasia: solving a persistent puzzle. DNA Repair (Amst) 2008;7:1028-38.
169. Jackson SP, Bartek J. The DNA-damage response in human biology and disease. Nature 2009;461:1071-8.
170. Jeppesen DK, Bohr VA, Stevnsner T. DNA repair deficiency in neurodegeneration. Prog Neurobiol 2011;94:166-200.
171. DiGiovanna JJ, Kraemer KH. Shining a light on xeroderma pigmentosum. J Invest Dermatol 2012;132:785-96.
172. Turnbull C, Rahman N. Genetic predisposition to breast cancer: past, present, and future. Annu Rev Genomics Hum Genet 2008;9:321-45.
173. Byrnes GB, Southey MC, Hopper JL. Are the so-called low penetrance breast cancer genes, ATM, BRIP1, PALB2 and CHEK2, high risk for women with strong family histories? Breast Cancer Res 2008;10:208.
174. Spry M, Scott T, Pierce H, et al. DNA repair pathways and hereditary cancer susceptibility syndromes. Front Biosci 2007;12:4191-207.
175. Colas C, Coulet F, Svrcek M, et al. Lynch or not Lynch? Is that always a question? Adv Cancer Res 2012;113:121-66.
176. Hall MJ, Reid JE, Burbidge LA, et al. BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations in women of different ethnicities undergoing testing for hereditary breast-ovarian cancer. Cancer 2009;115:2222-33.
177. Fackenthal JD, Olopade OI. Breast cancer risk associated with BRCA1 and BRCA2 in diverse populations. Nat Rev Cancer 2007;7:937-48.
178. Moynahan ME, Jasin M. Mitotic homologous recombination maintains genomic stability and suppresses tumorigenesis. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol 2010;11:196-207.
179. Meindl A, Hellebrand H, Wiek C, et al. Germline mutations in breast and ovarian cancer pedigrees establish RAD51C as a human cancer susceptibility gene. Nat Genet 2010;42:410-4.
180. Gage M, Wattendorf D, Henry LR. Translational advances regarding hereditary breast cancer syndromes. J Surg Oncol 2012;105:444-51.
181. Masutani C, Kusumoto R, Yamada A, et al. The XPV (xeroderma pigmentosum variant) gene encodes human DNA polymerase eta. Nature 1999;399:700-4.
182. Kunkel TA, Pavlov YI, Bebenek K. Functions of human DNA polymerases eta, kappa and iota suggested by their properties, including fidelity with undamaged DNA templates. DNA Repair (Amst) 2003;2:135-49.
183. Stary A, Kannouche P, Lehmann AR, et al. Role of DNA polymerase eta in the UV mutation spectrum in human cells. J Biol Chem 2003;278:18767-75.
184. Pan Q, Fang Y, Xu Y, et al. Down-regulation of DNA polymerases kappa, eta, iota, and zeta in human lung, stomach, and colorectal cancers. Cancer Lett 2005;217:139-47.
185. Ceppi P, Novello S, Cambieri A, et al. Polymerase eta mRNA expression predicts survival of non-small cell lung cancer patients treated with platinum-based chemotherapy. Clin Cancer Res 2009;15:1039-45.
186. Albertella MR, Lau A, O'Connor MJ. The overexpression of specialized DNA polymerases in cancer. DNA Repair (Amst) 2005;4:583-93.
187. Tan XH, Zhao M, Pan KF, et al. Frequent mutation related with overexpression of DNA polymerase beta in primary tumors and precancerous lesions of human stomach. Cancer Lett 2005;220:101-14.
188. Yoshizawa K, Jelezcova E, Brown AR, et al. Gastrointestinal hyperplasia with altered expression of DNA polymerase beta. PLoS One 2009;4:e6493.
189. Lemée F, Bergoglio V, Fernandez-Vidal A, et al. DNA polymerase theta up-regulation is associated with poor survival in breast cancer, perturbs DNA replication, and promotes genetic instability. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2010;107:13390-5.
190. Palles C, Cazier JB, Howarth KM, et al. Germline mutations affecting the proofreading domains of POLE and POLD1 predispose to colorectal adenomas and carcinomas. Nat Genet 2013;45:136-44.
191. Bouwman P, Jonkers J. The effects of deregulated DNA damage signalling on cancer chemotherapy response and resistance. Nat Rev Cancer 2012;12:587-98.
192. Curtin NJ. DNA repair dysregulation from cancer driver to therapeutic target. Nat Rev Cancer 2012;12:801-17.
193. Vassilev LT, Vu BT, Graves B, et al. In vivo activation of the p53 pathway by small-molecule antagonists of MDM2. Science 2004;303:844-8.
194. Issaeva N, Bozko P, Enge M, et al. Small molecule RITA binds to p53, blocks p53-HDM-2 interaction and activates p53 function in tumors. Nat Med 2004;10:1321-8.
195. Cheok CF, Verma CS, Baselga J, et al. Translating p53 into the clinic. Nat Rev Clin Oncol 2011;8:25-37.
196. Bykov VJ, Issaeva N, Shilov A, et al. Restoration of the tumor suppressor function to mutant p53 by a low-molecular-weight compound. Nat Med 2002;8:282-8.
197. Baylin SB, Jones PA. A decade of exploring the cancer epigenome - biological and translational implications. Nat Rev Cancer 2011;11:726-34.
198. Panda H, Jaiswal AS, Corsino PE, et al. Amino acid Asp181 of 5'-flap endonuclease 1 is a useful target for chemotherapeutic development. Biochemistry 2009;48:9952-8.
199. Gao Z, Maloney DJ, Dedkova LM, et al. Inhibitors of DNA polymerase beta: activity and mechanism. Bioorg Med Chem 2008;16:4331-40.
200. Chen X, Zhong S, Zhu X, et al. Rational design of human DNA ligase inhibitors that target cellular DNA replication and repair. Cancer Res 2008;68:3169-77.
201. Samol J, Ranson M, Scott E, et al. Safety and tolerability of the poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitor, olaparib (AZD2281) in combination with topotecan for the treatment of patients with advanced solid tumors: a phase I study. Invest New Drugs 2012;30:1493-500.
202. Madhusudan S, Smart F, Shrimpton P, et al. Isolation of a small molecule inhibitor of DNA base excision repair. Nucleic Acids Res 2005;33:4711-24.
203. Mohammed MZ, Vyjayanti VN, Laughton CA, et al. Development and evaluation of human AP endonuclease inhibitors in melanoma and glioma cell lines. Br J Cancer 2011;104:653-63.
204. Bhaskara S, Chyla BJ, Amann JM, et al. Deletion of histone deacetylase 3 reveals critical roles in S phase progression and DNA damage control. Mol Cell 2008;30:61-72.
205. Bhaskara S, Knutson SK, Jiang G, et al. Hdac3 is essential for the maintenance of chromatin structure and genome stability. Cancer Cell 2010;18:436-47.
206. Evers B, Drost R, Schut E, et al. Selective inhibition of BRCA2-deficient mammary tumor cell growth by AZD2281 and cisplatin. Clin Cancer Res 2008;14:3916-25.
207. Rottenberg S, Jaspers JE, Kersbergen A, et al. High sensitivity of BRCA1-deficient mammary tumors to the PARP inhibitor AZD2281 alone and in combination with platinum drugs. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2008;105:17079-84.
208. Fong PC, Yap TA, Boss DS, et al. Poly(ADP)-ribose polymerase inhibition: frequent durable responses in BRCA carrier ovarian cancer correlating with platinum-free interval. J Clin Oncol 2010;28:2512-9.
209. Gelmon KA, Tischkowitz M, Mackay H, et al. Olaparib in patients with recurrent high-grade serous or poorly differentiated ovarian carcinoma or triple-negative breast cancer: a phase 2, multicentre, open-label, non-randomised study. Lancet Oncol 2011;12:852-61.
210. McCabe N, Turner NC, Lord CJ, et al. Deficiency in the repair of DNA damage by homologous recombination and sensitivity to poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibition. Cancer Res 2006;66:8109-15.
211. Sultana R, McNeill DR, Abbotts R, et al. Synthetic lethal targeting of DNA double-strand break repair deficient cells by human apurinic/apyrimidinic endonuclease inhibitors. Int J Cancer 2012;131:2433-44.
212. Weston VJ, Oldreive CE, Skowronska A, et al. The PARP inhibitor olaparib induces significant killing of ATM-deficient lymphoid tumor cells in vitro and in vivo. Blood 2010;116:4578-87.
213. Williamson CT, Muzik H, Turhan AG, et al. ATM deficiency sensitizes mantle cell lymphoma cells to poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase-1 inhibitors. Mol Cancer Ther 2010;9:347-57.
214. Vilar E, Bartnik CM, Stenzel SL, et al. MRE11 deficiency increases sensitivity to poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibition in microsatellite unstable colorectal cancers. Cancer Res 2011;71:2632-42.
215. Kennedy RD, Chen CC, Stuckert P, et al. Fanconi anemia pathway-deficient tumor cells are hypersensitive to inhibition of ataxia telangiectasia mutated. J Clin Invest 2007;117:1440-9.
216. Chen CC, Kennedy RD, Sidi S, et al. CHK1 inhibition as a strategy for targeting Fanconi Anemia (FA) DNA repair pathway deficient tumors. Mol Cancer 2009;8:24.
217. Kuriyama I, Mizuno T, Fukudome K, et al. Effect of dehydroaltenusin-C12 derivative, a selective DNA polymerase alpha inhibitor, on DNA replication in cultured cells. Molecules 2008;13:2948-61.
218. Maeda N, Kokai Y, Ohtani S, et al. Anti-tumor effects of dehydroaltenusin, a specific inhibitor of mammalian DNA polymerase alpha. Biochem Biophys Res Commun 2007;352:390-6.
219. Kumamoto-Yonezawa Y, Sasaki R, Suzuki Y, et al. Enhancement of human cancer cell radiosensitivity by conjugated eicosapentaenoic acid - a mammalian DNA polymerase inhibitor. Int J Oncol 2010;36:577-84.
220. Mizushina Y, Manita D, Takeuchi T, et al. The inhibitory action of kohamaic acid A derivatives on mammalian DNA polymerase beta. Molecules 2009;14:102-21.
221. Stachelek GC, Dalal S, Donigan KA, et al. Potentiation of temozolomide cytotoxicity by inhibition of DNA polymerase beta is accentuated by BRCA2 mutation. Cancer Res 2010;70:409-17.
222. Yang J, Parsons J, Nicolay NH, et al. Cells deficient in the base excision repair protein, DNA polymerase beta, are hypersensitive to oxaliplatin chemotherapy. Oncogene 2010;29:463-8.
223. Mizushina Y, Motoshima H, Yamaguchi Y, et al. 3-O-methylfunicone, a selective inhibitor of mammalian Y-family DNA polymerases from an Australian sea salt fungal strain. Mar Drugs 2009;7:624-39.
224. Xie K, Doles J, Hemann MT, et al. Error-prone translesion synthesis mediates acquired chemoresistance. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2010;107:20792-7.
225. Doles J, Oliver TG, Cameron ER, et al. Suppression of Rev3, the catalytic subunit of Polζ, sensitizes drug-resistant lung tumors to chemotherapy. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2010;107:20786-91.