Misc

Anti-programmed death-1 (PD-1)/programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) therapy, which is one of the most promising cancer therapies, is licensed for treating various tumors. Programmed death-ligand 1, which is expressed on the surface of cancer cells, leads to the inhibition of T lymphocyte activation and immune evasion if it binds to the receptor PD-1 on CTLs. Anti-PD-1/PD-L1 Abs inhibit interactions between PD-1 and PD-L1 to restore antitumor immunity. Although certain patients achieve effective responses to anti-PD-1/PD-L1 therapy, the efficacy of treatment is highly variable. Clinical trials of anti-PD-1/PD-L1 therapy combined with radiotherapy/chemotherapy are underway with suggestive evidence of favorable outcome; however, the molecular mechanism is largely unknown. Among several molecular targets that can influence the efficacy of anti-PD-1/PD-L1 therapy, PD-L1 expression in tumors is considered to be a critical biomarker because there is a positive correlation between the efficacy of combined treatment protocols and PD-L1 expression levels. Therefore, understanding the mechanisms underlying the regulation of PD-L1 expression in cancer cells, particularly the mechanism of PD-L1 expression following DNA damage, is important. In this review, we consider recent findings on the regulation of PD-L1 expression in response to DNA damage signaling in cancer cells.

Most molecular chaperones belonging to heat shock protein (HSP) families are known to protect cancer cells from pathologic, environmental and pharmacological stress factors and thereby can hamper anti-cancer therapies. In this review, we present data on inhibitors of the heat shock response (particularly mediated by the chaperones HSP90, HSP70, and HSP27) either as a single treatment or in combination with currently available anti-cancer therapeutic approaches. An overview of the current literature reveals that the co-administration of chaperone inhibitors and targeting drugs results in proteotoxic stress and violates the tumor cell physiology. An optimal drug combination should simultaneously target cytoprotective mechanisms and trigger the imbalance of the tumor cell physiology.

The significance of canonical DNA non-homologous end-joining (c-NHEJ) for DNA double strand break (DSB) repair has increased from lower organisms to higher eukaryotes, and plays the predominant role in human cells. Ku, the c-NHEJ end-binding component, binds DSBs with high efficiency enabling c-NHEJ to be the first choice DSB repair pathway, although alternative pathways can ensue after regulated steps to remove Ku. Indeed, radiation-induced DSBs are repaired rapidly in human cells. However, an important question is the fidelity with which radiation-induced DSBs are repaired, which is essential for assessing any harmful impacts caused by radiation exposure. Indeed, is compromised fidelity a price we pay for high capacity repair. Two subpathways of c-NHEJ have been revealed; a fast process that does not require nucleases or significant chromatin changes and a slower process that necessitates resection factors, and potentially more significant chromatin changes at the DSB. Recent studies have also shown that DSBs within transcriptionally active regions are repaired by specialised mechanisms, and the response at such DSBs encompasses a process of transcriptional arrest. Here, we consider the limitations of c-NHEJ that might result in DSB misrepair. We consider the common IR-induced misrepair events and discuss how they might arise via the distinct subpathways of c-NHEJ.

A DNA double-strand break (DSB) is considered the most critical DNA lesion because it causes cell death and severe mutations if it is not repaired or repaired incorrectly. Accumulating evidence has shown that the majority of DSBs are repaired by DNA non-homologous end joining (NHEJ), the first utilized repair pathway in human cells. In contrast, the repair pathway is sometimes diverted into using homologous recombination (HR), which has increased precision under specific circumstances: e.g., when DSBs are generated at transcriptionally active loci or are not readily repaired due to the complexity of damage at the DSB ends or due to highly compacted chromatin. DSB end resection (resection) is considered the most critical turning point for directing repair towards HR. After resection, the HR process is finalized by RAD51 loading and recombination. Thus, understanding the process of resection is critically important to understand the regulation of the choice of DSB repair pathway. In addition, resection is also an important factor influencing DNA damage signaling because unresected ends preferentially activate ATM, whereas longer resected ends activate ATR. Thus, DSB end resection is a key relay point that determines the repair pathway and the signal balance. In this review, we summarize the mechanism underlying DSB end resection and further discuss how it is involved in cancer therapy.

In mammalian cells, the mediator protein, 53BP1, exerts distinct impacts on the repair of DNA double strand breaks (DSBs) depending on the setting, for example whether the DSBs arise at telomeres or during replication or class switch recombination. Here, we focus on two roles of 53BP1 in response to ionising radiation (IR)-induced DSBs (IR-DSBs). Canonical DNA non-homologous end-joining (c-NHEJ) is the major DSB repair pathway with homologous recombination (HR) contributing to DSB repair in S/G2 phase. ATM signalling promotes histone modifications and protein assembly in the DSB vicinity, which can be visualised as irradiation induced foci (IRIF). 53BP1 assembles at DSBs in a complex manner involving the formation of nano-domains. In G1 and G2 phase, X- or gamma-ray induced DSBs are repaired with biphasic kinetics. 70–80 % of DSBs are repaired with fast kinetics in both cell cycle phases by c-NHEJ; the remaining DSBs are repaired with slower kinetics in G2 phase via HR and in G1 by a specialised form of c-NHEJ termed Artemis and resection-dependent c-NHEJ, due to a specific requirement for the nuclease, Artemis and resection factors. 53BP1 is essential for the repair of DSBs rejoined with slow kinetics in G1 and G2 phase. This 53BP1 function requires its tandem BRCT domain and interaction with NBS1. As a distinct function, 53BP1 suppresses resection during both HR and Artemis and resection-dependent c-NHEJ. This latter role requires RIF1 and is counteracted by BRCA1. 53BP1 appears to be dispensable for the rejoining of the fast c-NHEJ repair process.

p53-binding protein 1 (53BP1) exerts distinct impacts in different situations involving DNA double-strand break (DSB) rejoining. Here we focus on how 53BP1 impacts upon the repair of ionising radiation-induced DSBs (IR-DSBs) and how it interfaces with Ku, the DNA end-binding component of canonical non-homologous end-joining (c-NHEJ), the major DSB repair pathway in mammalian cells. We delineate three forms of IR-DSB repair: resection-independent c-NHEJ, which rejoins most IR-DSBs with fast kinetics in G1 and G2, and Artemis and resection-dependent c-NHEJ and homologous recombination (HR), which repair IR-DSBs with slow kinetics in G1 and G2 phase, respectively. The fast component of DSB repair after X-ray exposure occurs via c-NHEJ with normal kinetics in the absence of 53BP1. Ku is highly abundant and has avid DNA end-binding capacity which restricts DNA end-resection and promotes resection-independent c-NHEJ at most IR-DSBs. Thus, 53BP1 is largely dispensable for resection-independent c-NHEJ. In contrast, 53BP1 is essential for the process of rejoining IR-DSBs with slow kinetics. This role requires 53BP1’s breast cancer susceptibility gene I (BRCA1) C-terminal (BRCT) 2 domain, persistent ataxia telangiectasia mutated (ATM) activation and potentially relaxation of compacted chromatin at heterochromatic-DSBs. In distinction, 53BP1 inhibits resection-dependent IR-DSB repair in G1 and G2, and this resection-inhibitory function can be counteracted by BRCA1. We discuss a model whereby most IR-DSBs are rapidly repaired by 53BP1-independent and resection-independent c-NHEJ due to the ability of Ku to inhibit resection, but, if delayed, then resection in the presence of Ku is triggered, the 53BP1 barrier comes into force and BRCA1 counteraction is required for resection.

An accumulation of evidence indicates the importance of DNA damage signaling in modulating immune responses. Indeed, understanding the mechanism that underlies signal transduction originating from DNA damage is vital to overcoming refractory cancer, particularly when cancer immune therapy is applied in combination with DNA damage-dependent radio/chemotherapy. In addition, immune-associated responses to such signals can aggravate the symptoms of infections, allergies, autoimmune disease, and aging. In this review, we discuss how cells transduce signals, triggered by DNA damage, from their origins to neighboring cells and how this affects immune and inflammatory responses.

Genome integrity is constantly threatened by internal and external stressors, in both animals and plants. As plants are sessile, a variety of environment stressors can damage their DNA. In the nucleus, DNA twines around histone proteins to form the higher-order structure “chromatin”. Unraveling how chromatin transforms on sensing genotoxic stress is, thus, key to understanding plant strategies to cope with fluctuating environments. In recent years, accumulating evidence in plant research has suggested that chromatin plays a crucial role in protecting DNA from genotoxic stress in three ways: (1) changes in chromatin modifications around damaged sites enhance DNA repair by providing a scaffold and/or easy access to DNA repair machinery; (2) DNA damage triggers genome-wide alterations in chromatin modifications, globally modulating gene expression required for DNA damage response, such as stem cell death, cell-cycle arrest, and an early onset of endoreplication; and (3) condensed chromatin functions as a physical barrier against genotoxic stressors to protect DNA. In this review, we highlight the chromatin-level control of genome stability and compare the regulatory systems in plants and animals to find out unique mechanisms maintaining genome integrity under genotoxic stress.

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) are cancer therapies that restore anti-tumor immunity; however, only a small percentage of patients have been completely cured by ICI alone. Multiple approaches in combination with other modalities have been used to improve the efficacy of ICI therapy. Among conventional cancer treatments, radiotherapy or DNA damage-based chemotherapy is a promising candidate as a partner of ICI because DNA damage signaling potentially stimulates immune activities turning the tumor’s immune environment into hot tumors. Programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) and human leukocyte antigen class I (HLA-I), which are immune ligands, regulate the balance of anti-tumor immunity in the tumor microenvironment. PD-L1 functions as a brake to suppress cytotoxic T cell activity, whereas HLA-I is an immune accelerator that promotes the downstream of the T cell signaling. Accumulating evidence has demonstrated that DNA damage enhances the presentation of HLA-I on the surface of damaged cells. However, it is unclear how signal transduction in DNA-damaged cells upregulates the presentation of HLA-I with antigens. Our recent study uncovered the mechanism underlying DNA damage-induced HLA-I presentation, which requires polypeptide synthesis through a pioneer round of translation. In this review, we summarize the latest overview of how DNA damage stimulates antigen production presented by HLA-I.