Yue Zou

The sensitivity of Xeroderma pigmentosa (XP) patients to sunlight has spurred the discovery and genetic and biochemical analysis of the eight XP gene products (XPA-XPG plus XPV) responsible for this disorder. These studies also have served to elucidate the nucleotide excision repair (NER) process, especially the critical role played by the XPA protein. More recent studies have shown that NER also involves numerous other proteins normally employed in DNA metabolism and cell cycle regulation. Central among these is ataxia telangiectasia and Rad3-related (ATR), a protein kinase involved in intracellular signaling in response to DNA damage, especially DNA damage-induced replicative stresses. This review summarizes recent findings on the interplay between ATR as a DNA damage signaling kinase and as a novel ligand for intrinsic cell death proteins to delay damage-induced apoptosis, and on ATR’s regulation of XPA and the NER process for repair of UV-induced DNA adducts. ATR’s regulatory role in the cytosolic-to-nuclear translocation of XPA will be discussed. In addition, recent findings elucidating a non-NER role for XPA in DNA metabolism and genome stabilization at ds-ssDNA junctions, as exemplified in prematurely aging progeroid cells, also will be reviewed.

Hutchinson‐Gilford progeria syndrome (HGPS) is a rare genetic disorder that is caused by a point mutation in the LMNA gene, resulting in production of a truncated farnesylated‐prelamin A protein (progerin). We previously reported that XPA mislocalized to the progerin‐induced DNA double‐strand break (DSB) sites, blocking DSB repair, which led to DSB accumulation, DNA damage responses, and early replication arrest in HGPS. In this study, the XPA mislocalization to DSBs occurred at stalled or collapsed replication forks, concurrent with a significant loss of PCNA at the forks, whereas PCNA efficiently bound to progerin. This PCNA sequestration likely exposed ds‐ssDNA junctions at replication forks for XPA binding. Depletion of XPA or progerin each significantly restored PCNA at replication forks. Our results suggest that although PCNA is much more competitive than XPA in binding replication forks, PCNA sequestration by progerin may shift the equilibrium to favor XPA binding. Furthermore, we demonstrated that progerin‐induced apoptosis could be rescued by XPA, suggesting that XPA‐replication fork binding may prevent apoptosis in HGPS cells. Our results propose a mechanism for progerin‐induced genome instability and accelerated replicative senescence in HGPS.—Hilton, B. A., Liu, J., Cartwright, B. M., Liu, Y., Breitman, M., Wang, Y., Jones, R., Tang, H., Rusinol, A., Musich, P. R., Zou, Y. Progerin sequestration of PCNA promotes replication fork collapse and mislocalization of XPA in laminopathy‐related progeroid syndromes. FASEB J. 31, 3882–3893 (2017). www.fasebj.org —Hilton, Benjamin A., Liu, Ji, Cartwright, Brian M., Liu, Yiyong, Breitman, Maya, Wang, Youjie, Jones, Rowdy, Tang, Hui, Rusinol, Antonio, Musich, Phillip R., Zou, Yue Progerin sequestration of PCNA promotes replication fork collapse and mislocalization of XPA in laminopathy‐related progeroid syndromes. FASEB J. 31, 3882–3893 (2017)

XPC-RAD23B (XPC) plays a critical role in human nucleotide excision repair (hNER) as this complex recognizes DNA adducts to initiate NER. To determine the mutagenic potential of structurally different bulky DNA damages, various studies have been conducted to define the correlation of XPC-DNA damage equilibrium binding affinity with NER efficiency. However, little is known about the effects of XPC-DNA damage recognition kinetics on hNER. Although association of XPC is important, our current work shows that the XPC-DNA dissociation rate also plays a pivotal role in achieving NER efficiency. We characterized for the first time the binding of XPC to mono- versus di-AAF-modified sequences by using the real time monitoring surface plasmon resonance technique. Strikingly, the half-life (t_1/2 or the retention time of XPC in association with damaged DNA) shares an inverse relationship with NER efficiency. This is particularly true when XPC remained bound to clustered adducts for a much longer period of time as compared to mono-adducts. Our results suggest that XPC dissociation from the damage site could become a rate-limiting step in NER of certain types of DNA adducts, leading to repression of NER.

Aim: Neoplastic meningitis (NM) from solid tumors is an advanced malignancy with poor prognosis. Intrathecal chemotherapy is a reliable treatment, and we have obtained some experiences in the treatment of NM with intrathecal dexamethasone and methotrexate (IT DXM and MTX). Methods: Retrospective study of 23 patients with NM from lung cancer (n = 11), breast cancer (n = 3), gastric cancer (n = 1), malignant melanoma (n = 1), unknown cancer (n = 7) was conducted. Among these patients, eight received IT DXM and MTX treatment, and 15 patients were placed into a palliative care group. Overall survival (OS) was compared, and the patients′ characteristics, symptoms, and some laboratory examinations were analyzed to find the risk factors affecting OS. Results: OS of IT DXM and MTX group was significantly longer than that of the palliative care group (P = 0.01). The median survival (MS) of palliative care group was 7.53 weeks (5.50-9.57; n = 15), and of the IT DXM and MTX group, 28.63 weeks (12.50-44.75; n = 8); IT DXM and MTX prolonged the OS of NM patients (regression coefficient = −2.923), with odds ratio (OR) being 0.054 (0.09-0.323). Spinal nerves damage decreased the OS (regression coefficient = 1.595), with OR being 4.928 (1.382-17.579). Conclusion: IT DXM and MTX have prolonged the patients′ MS, which could be used as a fundamental treatment of NM. Time of induction treatment should be flexible and individualized, and induction treatment could restart when central nervous system relapse. Patients with spinal nerves damage are apt to live shorter

XPA (xeroderma pigmentosum group A) protein is an essential factor for NER (nucleotide excision repair) which is believed to be involved in DNA damage recognition/verification, NER factor recruiting and stabilization of repair intermediates. Past studies on the structure of XPA have focused primarily on XPA interaction with damaged DNA. However, how XPA interacts with other DNA structures remains unknown though recent evidence suggest that these structures could be important for its roles in both NER and non-NER activities. Previously, we reported that XPA recognizes undamaged DNA ds/ssDNA (double-strand/single-strandDNA) junctions with a binding affinity much higher than its ability to bind bulky DNA damage. To understand how this interaction occurs biochemically we implemented a structural determination of the interaction using a MS-based protein footprinting method and limited proteolysis. By monitoring surface accessibility of XPA lysines to NHS-biotin modification in the free protein and the DNA junction-bound complex we show that XPA physically interacts with the DNA junctions via two lysines, K168 and K179, located in the previously known XPA(98–219) DBD (DNA-binding domain). Importantly, we also uncovered new lysine residues, outside of the known DBD, involved in the binding. We found that residues K221, K222, K224 and K236 in the C-terminal domain are involved in DNA binding. Limited proteolysis analysis of XPA–DNA interactions further confirmed this observation. Structural modelling with these data suggests a clamp-like DBD for the XPA binding to ds/ssDNA junctions. Our results provide a novel structure-function view of XPA–DNA junction interactions.

Xeroderma pigmentosum Group A (XPA) is a crucial factor in mammalian nucleotide excision repair (NER) and nuclear import of XPA from the cytoplasm for NER is regulated in cellular DNA damage responses in S-phase. In this study, experiments were carried out to determine the transport mechanisms that are responsible for the UV (ultraviolet)-induced nuclear import of XPA. We found that, in addition to the nuclear localization signal (NLS) of XPA, importin-α4 or/and importin-α7 are required for the XPA nuclear import. Further investigation indicated that, importin-α4 and importin-α7 directly interacted with XPA in cells. Interestingly, the binding of importin-α4 to XPA was dependent on UV-irradiation, while the binding of importin-α7 was not, suggesting a role for importin-α7 in nuclear translocation of XPA in the absence of DNA damage, perhaps with specificity to certain non-S-phases of the cell-cycle. Consistent with the previous report of a dependence of UV-induced XPA nuclear import on ataxia telangiectasia and Rad3-related protein (ATR) in S-phase, knockdown of ATR reduced the amount of XPA interacting with importin-α4. In contrast, the GTPase XPA binding protein 1 (XAB1), previously proposed to be required for XPA nuclear import, showed no effect on the nuclear import of XPA in our siRNA knockdown analysis. In conclusion, our results suggest that upon DNA damage transport adaptor importin-α4 imports XPA into the nucleus in an ATR-dependent manner, while XAB1 has no role in this process. In addition, these findings reveal a potential new therapeutic target for the sensitization of cancer cells to chemotherapy.

Homologous recombination (HR) and nonhomologous end joining (NHEJ) are two distinct DNA double-stranded break (DSB) repair pathways. Here, we report that DNA-dependent protein kinase (DNA-PK), the core component of NHEJ, partnering with DNA-damage checkpoint kinases ataxia telangiectasia mutated (ATM) and ATM- and Rad3-related (ATR), regulates HR repair of DSBs. The regulation was accomplished through modulation of the p53 and replication protein A (RPA) interaction. We show that upon DNA damage, p53 and RPA were freed from a p53–RPA complex by simultaneous phosphorylations of RPA at the N-terminus of RPA32 subunit by DNA-PK and of p53 at Ser37 and Ser46 in a Chk1/Chk2-independent manner by ATR and ATM, respectively. Neither the phosphorylation of RPA nor of p53 alone could dissociate p53 and RPA. Furthermore, disruption of the release significantly compromised HR repair of DSBs. Our results reveal a mechanism for the crosstalk between HR repair and NHEJ through the co-regulation of p53–RPA interaction by DNA-PK, ATM and ATR.