Advertisement
JBC

HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

Originally published In Press as doi:10.1074/jbc.M413022200 on January 4, 2005

J. Biol. Chem., Vol. 280, Issue 10, 8901-8905, March 11, 2005
This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
280/10/8901    most recent
M413022200v1
Right arrow Submit a Letter to Editor
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Grishko, V. I.
Right arrow Articles by LeDoux, S. P.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Grishko, V. I.
Right arrow Articles by LeDoux, S. P.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?

Contribution of Mitochondrial DNA Repair to Cell Resistance from Oxidative Stress*

Valentina I. Grishko{ddagger}§, Lyudmila I. Rachek§, Douglas R. Spitz¶, Glenn L. Wilson§, and Susan P. LeDoux§||

From the Departments of {ddagger}Orthopedics and §Cell Biology and Neuroscience, College of Medicine, University of South Alabama, Mobile, Alabama 36688 and the Free Radical and Radiation Biology Program, Department of Radiation Oncology, Holden Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa 52242

Received for publication, November 17, 2004 , and in revised form, December 21, 2004.


   ABSTRACT
TOP
 ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
 EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 REFERENCES
 
Numerous studies have revealed that a part of the cellular response to chronic oxidative stress involves increased antioxidant capacity. However, another defense mechanism that has received less attention is DNA repair. Because of the important homeostatic role of mitochondria and the exquisite sensitivity of mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) to oxidative damage, we hypothesized that mtDNA repair plays an important role in the protection against oxidative stress. To test this hypothesis mtDNA damage and repair was evaluated in normal HA1 Chinese hamster fibroblasts and oxidative stress-resistant variants isolated following chronic exposure to H2O2 or 95% O2. Reactive oxygen species were generated enzymatically using xanthine oxidase and hypoxanthine. When treated with xanthine oxidase reduced levels of initial mtDNA damage and enhanced mtDNA repair were observed in the cells from the oxidative stress-resistant variants, relative to the parental cell line. This enhanced mtDNA repair correlated with an increase in mitochondrial apurinic/apyrimidinic endonuclease activity in both H2O2- and O2-resistant HA1 variants. This is the first report showing enhanced mtDNA repair in the cellular response to chronic oxidative stress. These results provide further evidence for the crucial role that mtDNA repair pathways play in protecting cells against the deleterious effects of reactive oxygen species.


   INTRODUCTION
TOP
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 REFERENCES
 
Oxidative stress occurs in cells when the equilibrium between prooxidant and species favors prooxidant stress. It is due to reactive oxygen species (ROS)1 generated by exogenous factors or by cellular metabolism. ROS can interact with multiple different macromolecules including lipids, nucleic acids, and proteins. As a result, cells have evolved numerous defense systems to counteract the deleterious effects of agents. A variety of cellular antioxidants have been identified that specifically eliminate ROS. These include superoxide dismutases, catalases, glutathione, {alpha}-tocopherol, vitamins A and C, and melanin. However, antioxidants are not able to fully protect DNA from oxidative stress, and various lesions in DNA such as base modifications, degradation products of deoxyribose, and strand breaks are known to occur. Therefore, the second line of defense against oxidative stress involves DNA repair.

Within mammalian cells, there are two distinct genomes; one is located in the nucleus, and the other in located in mitochondria. Although damage and repair of nuclear DNA has been a subject of intense study for many years, more recently interest in mtDNA damage and repair has come to the forefront with the discovery that defects in the mitochondrial genome are associated with many pathologies and that there are a number of chemotherapeutic agents that work through the initiation of mtDNA damage (1, 2). In addition, it is well established that mitochondria play a variety of essential roles in cellular metabolism, including the production of ATP through oxidative phosphorylation, regulation of calcium homeostasis in cell signaling pathways, and initiation of apoptotic signal cascades (3, 4).

Because we and others have found that mtDNA is a sensitive target for oxidative damage (5–7), the objective of the present study was to investigate the role that mtDNA damage and repair plays in the cellular response to chronic oxidative stress. For these studies, we used cell lines isolated from HA1 Chinese hamster fibroblasts that became resistant to oxidative stress following chronic exposure to progressively increasing concentrations of H2O2 (OC14 cells) or to high concentrations of molecular oxygen (O2R95 cells) (8–11). These lines are cross-resistant to other oxidative stresses, including oxygen toxicity (10, 11). Furthermore, H2O2- and O2-resistant variants of HA1 cells have an increased ability to metabolize toxic oxidants including hydrogen peroxide and lipid peroxidation-derived aldehydes (8–10). This increased resistance to toxic oxidants is accompanied by pronounced increases in several cellular antioxidant defenses, including copper-zinc superoxide dismutase, catalase, total glutathione, glutathione peroxidase activity, and glutathione transferase activity (8–11).

mtDNA damage and repair was evaluated following exposure to ROS. Both resistant variants displayed reduced levels of initial mtDNA damage and a greater capacity to repair oxidative lesions in this DNA. To elucidate some of the mechanisms involved in this enhanced mtDNA repair in the resistant cell lines, we investigated the activities of several major DNA repair enzymes involved in mitochondrial base excision repair enzymes (BER) using abasic site (AP)-, 8-oxoguanine (8-OxoG)-, and thymine glycol (Tg)-containing oligonucleotides as substrates. The results showed that mitochondrial APE activity was significantly augmented in both the H2O2- and O2-resistant HA1 variants. No significant changes were found in removal of either 8-OxoG or Tg between oxidative stress-resistant variants and parental HA1 cells. As expected, both oxidative stress-resistant variants showed more efficient survival following treatment with XO compared with the parental HA1 line. These results, to our knowledge, are the first to document enhanced mtDNA repair in the cellular response of cells to chronic oxidative stress.


   EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
TOP
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
 EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 REFERENCES
 
Cell Culture—Chinese hamster fibroblasts designated HA1 and their stable H2O2-resistant (OC14) and O2-resistant (O2R95) variants were maintained in Eagle's minimal essential medium supplemented with 10% fetal calf serum (Hyclone, Logan, UT) and 0.05 mg/ml gentamicin. Cultures were grown at 37 °C in a humidified incubator with a mixture of 5% CO2 and air. For the repair studies, ~1.5 x 107 cells were plated per 150-mm dish. The cultures were used for experiments ~3 days after plating.

Drug Preparation and Exposure—HA1 cells and their resistant variants were exposed to different concentrations of XO (Grade III from buttermilk; Sigma) ranging from 5 to 600 milliunits/ml. A constant concentration of 0.5 mM hypoxanthine (Sigma) was used. Initially, hypoxanthine was dissolved in Hanks' balanced salt solution (HBSS), and different amounts of XO were subsequently added to the medium. The cells were rinsed with HBSS and then exposed to XO for 15 min in a 5% CO2, 37 °C incubated environment. Control cultures were exposed to HBSS under the same conditions. After 15 min, the cells were lysed for dose-response experiments or rinsed and placed in culture medium to allow time for repair.

Mitochondrial DNA Damage and Repair Assay—Following drug exposure or after different times for repair, the cells were lysed in 10 mM Tris, 1 mM EDTA (pH 8.0), 0.5% SDS, and 0.3 mg/ml proteinase K and incubated overnight at 37 °C. High molecular weight DNA was extracted, precipitated with 2.5 M ammonium acetate and 2 volumes of cold ethanol, resuspended in water, treated with DNase-free RNase (~1 mg/ml) for 2 h at 37 °C, and precipitated again with cold ethanol. Purified DNA was digested overnight with KpnI (10 units/µg DNA), precipitated, resuspended in TE buffer (10 mM Tris, 1 mM EDTA, pH 8.0), and quantified using Hoechst 33258 dye and a Hoefer TKO 100 Mini-Fluorometer and TKO standards kit (Hoefer Scientific Instruments, San Francisco, CA). Samples containing 5 µg of DNA were heated at 70 °C for 15 min and then cooled at room temperature for 20 min. A sodium hydroxide solution then was added to a final concentration of 0.1 N, and samples were incubated for 15 min at 37 °C. This alkali treatment produced single strand breaks at all abasic or sugar-modified sites in the DNA. Gel electrophoresis and vacuum transfer were carried out as described previously (12). Following a prehybridization, the membranes were hybridized with a denatured PCR-generated mitochondrial probe (5), washed according to the manufacturer, placed under phosphorus imaging screens, and scanned for detection of hybridization bands. The resulting band images were scanned using a Bio-Rad GS-250 molecular imager. Break frequency was determined using the Poisson expression (s = –lnPo, where s is the number of breaks per fragment, and Po is the fraction of fragments free of breaks). The percentage of repair at time t was calculated by subtracting the breaks at time t from the breaks present at 0 h and dividing by the 0-h breaks. The resulting value then was converted to a percentage by multiplying by 100.

Preparation of Mitochondrial Fractions—Mitochondrial protein fractions were isolated from one 150-mm dish of each cell type (HA1 cells and their resistant variants). The cells were harvested and treated with ice-cold digitonin (325 mM digitonin, 2.5 mM EDTA, 250 mM mannitol, and 17 mM MOPS, pH 7.4) for 80 s. The lysed cells were then added to mannitol-sucrose buffer to a final strength of 1x (210 mM mannitol, 70 mM sucrose, 5 mM EDTA, 5 mM Tris, pH 7.5). The suspension was centrifuged for 10 min at 800 x g at 4 °C to pellet nuclei. The supernatant was centrifuged two more times for 10 min at 800 x g at 4 °C to remove nuclear debris. The mitochondrial fraction was pelleted by centrifugation at 20,000 x g at 4 °C for 20 min. Isolated mitochondria were suspended in a buffer of 10 mM HEPES, pH 6.5, 100 mM KCl, 10 mM MgCl2, 5 mM dithiothreitol, 5% glycerol, and 5 µl of protease inhibitors mixture/ml (Sigma). These suspensions were briefly sonicated on ice and centrifuged once more at 5,000 x g to pellet any remaining debris. Supernatant proteins from mitochondrial enriched fractions were used for APE activity assays. The purity of these fractions was routinely evaluated by Western blot analysis as has been documented in our previous publication (13). For the assays to detect 8-OxoG and Tg removal, mitochondria were suspended in a buffer of 20 mM HEPES, pH 7.4, 1 mM EDTA, 5 mM dithiothreitol, 100 mM KCl, 5% glycerol, and 5 µl of protease inhibitors mixture/ml. The protein concentration was determined using the Bio-Rad protein dye microassay according to the manufacturer's recommendation (Bio-Rad).

APE Activity Assays—A 21-mer oligonucleotide with a tetrahydrofuran residue (THF-AP) at the 10th position (Trevigen, Gaithersburg, MD) was end-labeled. The labeling reaction contained 20 pmol of single-stranded THF-AP oligonucleotide, 5 pmol of [33P]ATP, T4 polynucleotide kinase (Promega, Madison, WI), and appropriate kinase buffer in a total volume of 20 µl (incubation for 45 min at 37 °C followed by 10 min at 68 °C). Complementary oligonucleotide (20 pmol) then was added at room temperature to form duplex DNA. Equal amounts of mitochondrial extracts (50–100 ng) were used in assays with the labeled duplex oligonucleotide. Activity assays contained 1 pmol of labeled duplex oligonucleotide, 2 µl of 10x REC buffer (10 mM HEPES, pH 6.5, 100 mM KCl, 10 mM MgCl2) and organelle extracts or 2.5 units of control APE enzyme (Trevigen) in a total volume of 20 µl. The reaction mixes were incubated for various times at 37 °C. Formamide/bromphenol (80%: 0.2%) dye was added to the mix to stop the reaction, and the reaction products were analyzed by electrophoresis in 20% polyacrylamide, 8 M urea gels. Wet gels were autoradiographed at –70 °C. Autoradiographs were scanned using a Bio-Rad GS-250 molecular imager, and the densitometry values were analyzed by using Molecular Analyst (Bio-Rad) software.

Removal of 8-OxoG and Tg—8-OxoG- and Tg-containing DNA duplexes were prepared, and specific reaction assays were performed as described previously (12–14). Equal amounts of proteins (10–15 µg) from mitochondrial fractions isolated from resistant HA1 variants and the parental cell line were used. In the control reactions, 5 units of either pure formamidopyrimidine DNA glycosylase enzyme (Trevigen) or endonuclease III (Trevigen) was added instead of cell lysates. The reaction mixtures in a total volume of 20 µl were incubated for 3–20 h at 37 °C. Following polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis, the resultant images were analyzed by using Molecular Analyst (Bio-Rad) software.

Cell Viability and Survival Experiments—For viability studies, HA1 cells and their resistant variants were plated into 24-well plates and exposed to the concentrations of xanthine oxidase that were used for subsequent repair studies (HA1, 50 milliunits; OC14, 600 milliunits; O2R95, 300 milliunits). Following a 15-min exposure to XO, the cells were rinsed with HBSS, and complete medium was replaced for 2 or 24 h. At the indicated time points, trypan blue was added to the wells, and viable cells were counted using light microscope. The percentage of viable cells was plotted as a function of time. For survival experiments, exponentially growing cultures with 2.5–2.8 x 106 cells/60-mm plate were rinsed once with HBSS, and 4 ml of fresh HBSS containing 0.5 mM hypoxanthine was added to each dish. The reaction was then initialized by the addition of the indicated amount of XO, and the treatment interval was 15 min. Control cultures were exposed to the drug diluent only. Following treatment, each cell culture was washed with sterile Pucks saline followed by removal using trypsin. The resulting single cell suspension was counted (Coulter counter), diluted, and plated for clonogenic cell survival. After 8–10 days of incubation at 37 °C, the colonies were fixed (70% ethanol), stained with Coomassie Blue, and counted using a dissecting microscope. The dilution replicates, which yielded 50–250 surviving colonies, were used for survival analysis. A colony had to contain 50 cells to be considered a survivor. Plating efficiencies were 60–90% for all untreated cell lines. Surviving fractions were normalized to the appropriate untreated control and plotted versus the dose of cytotoxic agent.

Statistical Analysis—The data are presented as the means ± S.E. of three independent experiments. The data were compared using a standard t test, and statistical significance was determined at the 0.01 level.


   RESULTS
TOP
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
 EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
 RESULTS
DISCUSSION
 REFERENCES
 
Cell Viability Studies—To ensure that the XO doses used for the repair experiments were not toxic to the analyzed cells, metabolic viability studies using the trypan blue excision method were performed. The cells were treated with different concentrations of XO, as described under "Experimental Procedures," and cell viability was determined immediately after treatment (0 h) and 2 and 24 h later. As can be seen in Table I, 80% or more of the cells in each cell line were viable after treatment with XO.


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		TABLE I
Cell viability (the percentage viable) following XO treatment analyzed by trypan blue dye exclusion

 
Clonogenic Survival—Following XO exposure, the cells were trypsinized and replated at equivalent densities (1000 cells/plate). After 8–10 days, the colonies were fixed and stained with Coomassie Blue, and colonies containing 50 or more cells were counted using a dissecting microscope. Dilution replicates that yielded 50–250 surviving colonies were used for analysis. The data were normalized to the cloning efficiencies of untreated controls in the respective cell line, which was 0.775 for HA1 cells, 0.847 for OC14 cells, and 0.827 for O2R95 cells. Both ROS-resistant variants showed enhanced survival, even at increased concentrations of XO (Fig. 1).



View larger version (19K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		FIG. 1.
ROS-resistant variants showed enhanced survival following XO exposure. Exponentially growing cultures with 2.5–2.8 x 106 cells/60-mm plate were treated with the indicated amount of XO as described under "Experimental Procedures." Following treatment, each cell culture was washed with sterile Pucks saline followed by removal using trypsin. The resulting single cell suspension was counted, diluted (1000 cells/60-mm plate), and plated for clonogenic cell survival. After 8–10 days, the colonies were fixed, stained with Coomassie Blue, and counted using a dissecting microscope. A, HA1 parental cell line; B, OC14 cells; C, O2R95 cells. An average of the results ± S.E. from three separate experiments is shown. mU, milliunits.

 
Analysis of mtDNA Damage in Response to ROS—Initial studies were designed to quantify the amount of mtDNA damage following exposure to various concentrations of XO. In initial experiments, doses of 150, 100, and 50 milliunits/ml were used for all three cell cultures (Fig. 2). After 15 min of exposure to XO and 0.5 mM hypoxanthine, the cells were lysed. DNA was extracted and digested to completion with KpnI. After heating, alkali treatment, and alkaline gel electrophoresis, a Southern blot procedure was performed, and data analyses were conducted as described above. Data obtained from these experiments show significant differences in the initial damage to mtDNA between parent cells and the resistant variants following exposure to the same dose of XO. mtDNA of resistant cells contained almost no damage, even at the highest dose of 150 milliunits/ml, whereas the parental cells showed break frequencies corresponding to three breaks/10-kb DNA fragment at the same dose. For the repair experiments, which require the same initial break frequency for all cell lines, the doses were increased for the resistant variants. Increased concentrations of XO were necessary to generate the same amount of mtDNA damage in the H2O2-resistant variant (12-fold, 600 milliunits/ml) and O2-resistant line (6-fold, 300 milliunits/ml) when compared with the parental HA1 cells (50 milliunits/ml) (Fig. 3).



View larger version (26K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		FIG. 2.
Significant differences are found in initial damage to mtDNA between parental cells and the resistant variants following exposure to the same doses of XO. Initially, 150-, 100-, and 50-milliunits/ml doses of XO were used to evaluate mtDNA damage in parental and variant cell cultures. After a 15-min exposure to XO at the indicated doses and 0.5 mM hypoxanthine, the cells were lysed. Control cells were incubated in drug diluent only. High molecular weight DNA was isolated and digested with KpnI, and Southern blot analysis with mtDNA specific probe was performed. C, control.

 



View larger version (48K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		FIG. 3.
Higher concentrations of XO were necessary to generate equivalent mtDNA damage in H2O2- and O2-resistant variants when compared with the parental HA1 cells. To optimize levels of damage for the repair experiments, XO doses were increased for the resistant variants. The HA1 parental cell line was exposed to 50, 25, and 5 milliunits/ml of XO and 0.5 mM hypoxanthine. OC14 cell were treated with 600, 300, and 150 milliunits/ml of XO, whereas O2R95 cells were exposed to 300, 150, and 50 milliunits/ml of XO. A, a representative autoradiogram of a Southern blot analysis of mtDNA damage from each cell type. B displays the quantitation of strand brakes in mtDNA from these experiments. The data are expressed as the means of three separate experiments ± S.E. C, control.

 
Analysis of mtDNA Repair in Response to Oxidative Damage—To determinate whether there were differences in the mtDNA repair capacity between the parental line and resistant variants, HA1, OC14, and O2R95 cells were exposed to doses of XO and hypoxanthine required to generate approximately one break/10 kb. After a 15-min exposure, the cells were lysed or rinsed and placed in culture medium. Control cultures were incubated in drug diluent only. 2- and 8-h repair times were selected. The data from these studies revealed that both the O2- and H2O2-resistant variants repair oxidative damage more rapidly then the parental HA1 line (Fig. 4).



View larger version (57K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		FIG. 4.
Resistant cells revealed a greater capacity for mtDNA repair. A, representative autoradiographs of quantitative Southern blots for each cell type are displayed. B, the percentage of repair for all three cell lines are displayed. Note that higher concentrations of XO were used for both resistant variants. The data are the means ± S.E. of three separate experiments. An asterisk indicates a significant difference (p < 0.01). C, control.

 
Activation of Mitochondrial APE by ROS—Having determined that stable oxidative stress-resistant derivations from HA1 cells demonstrated a greater capacity for mtDNA repair, we evaluated whether the up-regulation of mitochondrial APE activity could contribute to the increase of mtDNA repair in these resistant variants. Mitochondrial protein extracts were isolated from HA1 cells and their resistant variants. The extracts then were incubated with labeled THF-AP substrate. As a positive control, human APE (Trevigen) was used. As illustrated in Fig. 5 APE activity was significantly increased in both resistant variants compared with the parental cell line.



View larger version (28K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		FIG. 5.
Increased APE activity in ROS-resistant variants. Mitochondrial extracts were isolated from HA1 cells and their resistant variants as described under "Experimental Procedures." Equal amounts of mitochondrial protein extracts were incubated with labeled THF-AP substrate for a various times. The data are the means ± S.E. of three separate experiments. An asterisk indicates a significant difference (p < 0.01).

 
Removal of 8-OxoG and Tg in Parental HA1 Cells and Oxidative Stress-resistant Variants—To determine the effect of chronic oxidative stress on removal of 8-OxoG and Tg, mitochondrial protein extracts were isolated from HA1 cells and their resistant variants. Reaction mixtures in a total volume of 20 µl were incubated for 3–20 h at 37 °C. The data in Fig. 6 show that there were no significant differences in the removal of either adduct between parental HA1 and oxidative stress-resistant variants.



View larger version (31K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		FIG. 6.
Specific activities for removal of 8-OxoG and Tg in parental and chronic oxidative stress-resistant cells are similar. A, 8-OxoG removal in HA1 cells and chronic oxidative stress-resistant cells. The values are the means ± S.E. of three separate experiments. B, Tg removal in HA1 parental cells and chronic oxidative stress-resistant variants. The values are the means ± S.E. of three separate experiments.

 

   DISCUSSION
TOP
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
 EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
 
There are three novel observations in this study. First, it has been shown that cells resistant to oxidative stress have a reduced level of initial mtDNA damage. Second, mtDNA repair is involved in the cellular response to chronic oxidative stress. Third, increased mtDNA repair correlates with enhanced mitochondrial APE activity. In the present study we used HA1 hamster fibroblasts and their stable oxidative stress-resistant variants, which were derived following chronic exposure to H2O2 or 95% O2. In the first set of experiments, we investigated the formation of mtDNA damage in response to ROS generation. Our data reveal that OC14 and O2R95 cells are quite resistant to ROS generated by XO. This finding can partially be explained by the high levels of antioxidants induced following chronic oxidative stress (8–11). To overcome this resistance and induce the same level of mtDNA damage in all three types of cultures analyzed, increased doses of XO for the resistant variants were required (12-fold for OC14 cells and 6-fold for O2R95 cells). The results of these studies revealed that the removal of oxidative lesions was dramatically more efficient in the oxidative stress-resistant variants compared with the parental line. To our knowledge this is the first study to quantitatively evaluate the effects of exposure to chronic oxidative stress on mtDNA repair.

Most, if not all, ROS-induced oxidative lesions in DNA are repaired via a BER pathway (15, 16). Previously it has been shown that expression of BER enzymes could be activated in cells by both alkylating (17) and oxidizing agents (18–21). APE is a major enzyme involved in BER both in the nucleus and mitochondria, and so far, it is one of the best characterized of the enzymes involved in BER in the mammalian response to genotoxic stress. Many reports (reviewed in Ref. 22) have provided convincing evidence that the expression of the APE1 gene is inducible by oxidative stress and that overexpression of the APE1 protein in the nucleus helps protect cells against the genotoxic and cell killing effects of ROS, whereas down-regulation of this repair enzyme sensitizes cells to these effects. Little is known about the mechanisms of induction of BER in mitochondria. It has been reported that APE translocates into mitochondria in response to oxidative stress, and therefore, it was speculated that it could participate in the protection of mtDNA against oxidative damage (23). Our data show that mitochondrial APE activity is increased in the stable resistant variants derived from HA1 cells, and this increased activity correlates well with their better ability to repair mtDNA damage following oxidative stress. We believe that increased APE activity in mitochondria could be the result of either increased expression of APE in the mitochondria of resistant variants or increased turnover of this enzyme in mitochondria of ROS-resistant variants. To make a distinction between these two possibilities, further studies need to be performed. A recent study using {rho}0 cells, which are deficient in mitochondrial respiration and have reduced levels of endogenous ROS, has shown that these cells also have lower cellular, nuclear, and mitochondrial levels of APE1 (24). When oxidative stress was introduced to {rho}0 cells, APE1 levels and APE1 activity increased rapidly to wild type levels. This finding indicates that {rho}0 cells retain the ability to modulate APE1 in response to oxidative stress. These data suggest that ROS-induced regulation of mitochondrial APE1 is a general feature of mitochondrial BER in human cells (24), and our data showing increased APE1 activity in the oxidative stress-resistant variants support this notion. Because our results showed that mitochondrial APE1 activity was increased in both H2O2- and O2-resistant variants, and this resistance correlates with their enhanced ability to repair mtDNA damage following oxidative stress, it is tempting to speculate that mitochondrial APE1 is an important part of the cellular response mechanism activated by genotoxic oxidative stress. However, to fully elucidate the role of APE1 in the resistance to chronic oxidative stress, future studies utilizing expression inhibitors are required.

Although we tested mitochondrial extracts from HA1 and its resistant variants for activity to remove 8-OxoG or TG, we were unable to find any differences in the induction of these repair enzymes between the three cells lines. There are mixed reports concerning the role of oxidative stress in influencing other BER enzymes, such as 8-oxoguanine DNA glycosylase/apurinic lyase expression. Some reports have suggested that the induction of human 8-oxoguanine DNA glycosylase/apurinic lyase expression is associated with oxidative stress (25–27), whereas other studies have failed to observe such an effect (28, 29). In agreement with our findings, a recent report showed that human 8-oxoguanine DNA glycosylase/apurinic lyase expression is induced by a DNA-alkylating agent but not by the ROS producing agent H2O2 in human colorectal carcinoma cells (30).

Improved mtDNA repair in chronic oxidative stress adopted cell lines correlated with increased cell viability following XO exposure, as evaluated by a clonogenic assay. Although the involvement of mtDNA repair in enhanced survival of cells after exposure to chronic oxidative stress needs to be investigated more thoroughly, recent data from our laboratory greatly support this idea. In a number of studies, we have demonstrated that overexpression of DNA repair enzymes in mitochondria leads to increased mtDNA repair following oxidative damage and increased cellular survival (12–14, 31, 32).

In summary, our results show that in addition to the ability to detoxify ROS through the expression of the antioxidant enzymes, enhanced mtDNA repair capacity, because of the increased activity of specific mitochondrial BER enzymes, may contribute to cellular resistance to oxidative stress and thus initiate drug resistance. Altering of the mtDNA repair capacity perhaps through the inhibition of mitochondrial APE1 expression represents a potentially novel strategy to overcome the acquired drug resistance in neoplastic cells to genotoxic agents that presently plaques the use of cancer chemotherapeutic agents.


   FOOTNOTES
 
* This work was supported by National Institutes of Health Grants ES03456, ES05865, CA100045, and AG19602. The costs of publication of this article were defrayed in part by the payment of page charges. This article must therefore be hereby marked "advertisement" in accordance with 18 U.S.C. Section 1734 solely to indicate this fact. Back

|| To whom correspondence should be addressed. Tel.: 251-460-6762; Fax: 251-414-8241; E-mail: sledoux{at}usouthal.edu.

1 The abbreviations used are: ROS, reactive oxygen species; mtDNA, mitochondrial DNA; XO, xanthine oxidase; AP, apurinic/apyrimidinic; APE, AP endonuclease; BER, base excision repair; 8-OxoG, 8-oxoguanine; Tg, thymine glycol; THF, tetrahydrofuran; HBSS, Hanks' balanced salt solution; MOPS, 4-morpholinepropanesulfonic acid. Back



   REFERENCES
TOP
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
 EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 REFERENCES
 

  1. Singh, K. K., Russell, J., Sigala, B., Zhang, Y., Williams, J., and Keslav, K. F. (1999) Oncogene 18, 6641–6646[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  2. Pritsos, C. A., Briggs, L. A., and Gustafson, D. L. (1997) Oncol. Res. 9, 333–337[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  3. Wallace, D. C. (1999) Science 283, 1482–1488[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  4. Scheffler, I. E. (2001) Mitochondrion 1, 3–31[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  5. Driggers, W. J., LeDoux, S. P., and Wilson, G. L. (1993) J. Biol. Chem. 268, 22042–22045[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  6. LeDoux, S. P., Driggers, W. J., Hollensworth, B. S., and Wilson, G. L. (1999) Mutat. Res. 434, 149–159[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  7. Mandavilli, B. S., Santos, J. H., and Van Houten B. (2002) Mutat. Res. 509, 127–151[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  8. Spitz, D. R., Li, G. C., McCormik, M. L., Sun, Y., and Oberley, L. W. (1988) Radiat. Res. 114, 114–118[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  9. Sullivan, S. J., Oberley, T. D., Roberts, R. J., and Spitz, D. R. (1992) Am. J. Physiol. 262, L748–L756
  10. Spitz, D. R., Adams, D. T., Sherman, C. M., and Roberts, R. J. (1992) Arch. Biochem. Biophys. 292, 221–227[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  11. Hunt, C. R., Sim, J. E., Sullivan, S. J., Featherstone, T., Golden, W., Von Kapp-Herr, C., Hock, R. A., Gomez, R. A., Parsian, A. J., and Spitz, D. R. (1998) Cancer Res. 58, 3986–3992[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  12. Rachek, L. I., Grishko, V. I., Musiyenko, S. I., Kelly, M. R., LeDoux, S. P., and Wilson, G. L. (2002) J. Biol. Chem. 277, 44932–44937[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  13. Dobson, A. W., Xu, Y., Kelley, M. R., LeDoux, S. P., and Wilson, G. L. (2000) J. Biol. Chem. 275, 37518–37523[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  14. Rachek, L. I., Grishko, V. I., Alexeyev, M. F., Pastukh, V. V., LeDoux, S. P., and Wilson, G. L. (2004) Nucleic Acids Res. 32, 3240–3247[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  15. Friedberg, E. C., Walker, G. C., and Seide, W. (1994) DNA Repair, pp. 135–190, Freeman, San Francisco, CA
  16. Demple, B., and Harrison, L. (1994) Annu. Rev. Biochem. 63, 915–948[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  17. Grombacher, T., Mitra, S., and Kaina, B. (1996) Carcinogenesis 17, 23–29-2336
  18. Ramana, C. V., Boldogh, I., Izumi, T., and Mitra, S. (1998) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 95, 5061–5066[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  19. Chen, K., Yakes, F. M., Srivastava, D. K., Singhal, R. K., Sobol, R. W., Horton, J. K., Van Houten, B., and Wilson, S. (1998) Nucleic Acids Res. 26, 2001–2007[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  20. Lin, L. H., Cao, S., Yu, L., Cui, J., Hamilton, W. J., and Liu, P. K. (2000) J. Neurochem. 7, 1098–1105
  21. Rusyn, I., Asakura, S., Pachkowski, B., Bradford, B. U., Denissenko, M. F., Peters, J. M., Holland, S. M., Reddy, J. K., Cunningham, M. L., and Swenberg, J. A. (2004) Cancer Res. 64, 1050–1057[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  22. Fritz, G., Grosch, S., Tomicic, M., Kaina, B. (2003) Toxicology 193, 67–78[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  23. Frossi, B., Tell, G., Spessotto, P., Colombatti, A., Vitale, G., and Pucillo, C. (2002) J. Cell. Physiol. 193, 180–186[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  24. Stuart, J. A., Hashiguchi, K., Wilson, D. M., III, Copeland, W. C., Souza-Pinto, N. C., and Bohr, V. A. (2004) Nucleic Acids Res. 32, 2181–2192[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  25. Tsurudome, Y., Hirano, T., Yamato, H., Tanaka, I., Sagai, M., Hirano, H., Nagata, N., Itoh, H., and Kasai, H. (1999) Carcinogenesis 20, 1573–1576[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  26. Kim, H. N., Morimoto, Y., Tsuda, T., Ootsuyama, Y., Hirohashi, M., Hirano, T., Tanaka, I., Lim, Y., Yun, I. G., and Kasai, H. (2001) Carcinogenesis 22, 265–269[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  27. Tsuruya, K., Furuichi, M., Tominaga, Y., Shinozaki, M., Tokumoto, M., Yoshimitsu, T., Fukuda, K., Kanai, H., Hirakata, H., Iida, M., and Nakabeppu, Y. (2003) DNA Repair (Amst.) 2, 211–229
  28. Dhenaut, A., Boitex, S., Radicella, J. P. (2000) Mutat. Res. 461, 109–118[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  29. Hodges, N. J., and Chipman, J. K. (2002) Carcinogenesis 23, 55–60[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  30. Lee, M. R., Kim, S. H., Cho, H. J., Lee, K. Y., Moon, A. R., Jeong, H. G., Lee, J. S., Hyun, J. W., Chung, M. H., and You, H. J. (2004) J. Biol. Chem. 279, 9857–9866[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  31. Dobson, A. W., Grishko, V., LeDoux, S. P., Kelley, M. R., Wilson, G. L., and Gillespie, M. N. (2002) Am. J. Physiol. 283, L205–L210
  32. Druzhyna, N. M., Hollensworth, S. B., Kelley, M. R., Wilson, G. L., and Ledoux, S. P. (2003) Glia 42, 370–378[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]

Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Toxicol PatholHome page
T. Murai, S. Mori, J. S. Kang, K. Morimura, H. Wanibuchi, Y. Totsuka, and S. Fukushima
Evidence of a Threshold-Effect for 2-Amino-3,8-dimethylimidazo-[4,5-f]quinoxaline Liver Carcinogenicity in F344/DuCrj Rats
Toxicol Pathol, April 1, 2008; 36(3): 472 - 477.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 EndocrinologyHome page
L. I. Rachek, S. I. Musiyenko, S. P. LeDoux, and G. L. Wilson
Palmitate Induced Mitochondrial Deoxyribonucleic Acid Damage and Apoptosis in L6 Rat Skeletal Muscle Cells
Endocrinology, January 1, 2007; 148(1): 293 - 299.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 DiabetesHome page
L. I. Rachek, N. P. Thornley, V. I. Grishko, S. P. LeDoux, and G. L. Wilson
Protection of INS-1 Cells From Free Fatty Acid-Induced Apoptosis by Targeting hOGG1 to Mitochondria.
Diabetes, April 1, 2006; 55(4): 1022 - 1028.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
280/10/8901    most recent
M413022200v1
Right arrow Submit a Letter to Editor
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Grishko, V. I.
Right arrow Articles by LeDoux, S. P.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Grishko, V. I.
Right arrow Articles by LeDoux, S. P.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?

HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 All ASBMB Journals   Molecular and Cellular Proteomics 
 Journal of Lipid Research   ASBMB Today 
Copyright © 2005 by the American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology.
Advertisement
spacer
Advertisement
Advertisement