Literature DB >> 28754468

Microhomology-mediated end joining: Good, bad and ugly.

Ja-Hwan Seol1, Eun Yong Shim2, Sang Eun Lee3.   

Abstract

DNA double-strand breaks (DSBs) are induced by a variety of genotoxic agents, including ionizing radiation and chemotherapy drugs for treating cancers. The elimination of DSBs proceeds via distinctive error-free and error-prone pathways. Repair by homologous recombination (HR) is largely error-free and mediated by RAD51/BRCA2 gene products. Classical non-homologous end joining (C-NHEJ) requires the Ku heterodimer and can efficiently rejoin breaks, with occasional loss or gain of DNA information. Recently, evidence has unveiled another DNA end-joining mechanism that is independent of recombination factors and Ku proteins, termed alternative non-homologous end joining (A-NHEJ). While A-NHEJ-mediated repair does not require homology, in a subtype of A-NHEJ, DSB breaks are sealed by microhomology (MH)-mediated base-pairing of DNA single strands, followed by nucleolytic trimming of DNA flaps, DNA gap filling, and DNA ligation, yielding products that are always associated with DNA deletion. This highly error-prone DSB repair pathway is termed microhomology-mediated end joining (MMEJ). Dissecting the mechanisms of MMEJ is of great interest because of its potential to destabilize the genome through gene deletions and chromosomal rearrangements in cells deficient in canonical repair pathways, including HR and C-NHEJ. In addition, evidence now suggests that MMEJ plays a physiological role in normal cells.
Copyright © 2017 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Chromosome rearrangement; DNA double strand break; End joining; Microhomology; Mutagenesis

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28754468      PMCID: PMC6477918          DOI: 10.1016/j.mrfmmm.2017.07.002

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Mutat Res        ISSN: 0027-5107            Impact factor:   2.433


  121 in total

1.  Frequent chromosomal translocations induced by DNA double-strand breaks.

Authors:  C Richardson; M Jasin
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2000-06-08       Impact factor: 49.962

Review 2.  Partners and pathwaysrepairing a double-strand break.

Authors:  J E Haber
Journal:  Trends Genet       Date:  2000-06       Impact factor: 11.639

3.  Physical and functional interaction between the XPF/ERCC1 endonuclease and hRad52.

Authors:  Teresa A Motycka; Tadayoshi Bessho; Sean M Post; Patrick Sung; Alan E Tomkinson
Journal:  J Biol Chem       Date:  2004-01-20       Impact factor: 5.157

Review 4.  Two direct repeats cause most human mtDNA deletions.

Authors:  David C Samuels; Eric A Schon; Patrick F Chinnery
Journal:  Trends Genet       Date:  2004-09       Impact factor: 11.639

5.  Werner syndrome protein is regulated and phosphorylated by DNA-dependent protein kinase.

Authors:  S M Yannone; S Roy; D W Chan; M B Murphy; S Huang; J Campisi; D J Chen
Journal:  J Biol Chem       Date:  2001-07-27       Impact factor: 5.157

Review 6.  Multiple pathways of recombination induced by double-strand breaks in Saccharomyces cerevisiae.

Authors:  F Pâques; J E Haber
Journal:  Microbiol Mol Biol Rev       Date:  1999-06       Impact factor: 11.056

7.  Efficient processing of DNA ends during yeast nonhomologous end joining. Evidence for a DNA polymerase beta (Pol4)-dependent pathway.

Authors:  T E Wilson; M R Lieber
Journal:  J Biol Chem       Date:  1999-08-13       Impact factor: 5.157

Review 8.  Role of RAD52 epistasis group genes in homologous recombination and double-strand break repair.

Authors:  Lorraine S Symington
Journal:  Microbiol Mol Biol Rev       Date:  2002-12       Impact factor: 11.056

9.  Hairpin opening and overhang processing by an Artemis/DNA-dependent protein kinase complex in nonhomologous end joining and V(D)J recombination.

Authors:  Yunmei Ma; Ulrich Pannicke; Klaus Schwarz; Michael R Lieber
Journal:  Cell       Date:  2002-03-22       Impact factor: 41.582

10.  Yeast Mre11 and Rad1 proteins define a Ku-independent mechanism to repair double-strand breaks lacking overlapping end sequences.

Authors:  Jia-Lin Ma; Eun Mi Kim; James E Haber; Sang Eun Lee
Journal:  Mol Cell Biol       Date:  2003-12       Impact factor: 4.272

View more
  68 in total

Review 1.  Repair of a Site-Specific DNA Cleavage: Old-School Lessons for Cas9-Mediated Gene Editing.

Authors:  Danielle N Gallagher; James E Haber
Journal:  ACS Chem Biol       Date:  2017-11-14       Impact factor: 5.100

2.  Defective heart chamber growth and myofibrillogenesis after knockout of adprhl1 gene function by targeted disruption of the ancestral catalytic active site.

Authors:  Stuart J Smith; Norma Towers; Kim Demetriou; Timothy J Mohun
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2020-07-29       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 3.  Ways of improving precise knock-in by genome-editing technologies.

Authors:  Svetlana A Smirnikhina; Arina A Anuchina; Alexander V Lavrov
Journal:  Hum Genet       Date:  2018-11-02       Impact factor: 4.132

Review 4.  DNA double-strand breaks: a potential therapeutic target for neurodegenerative diseases.

Authors:  Nidheesh Thadathil; Roderick Hori; Jianfeng Xiao; Mohammad Moshahid Khan
Journal:  Chromosome Res       Date:  2019-11-09       Impact factor: 5.239

Review 5.  Brain cell somatic gene recombination and its phylogenetic foundations.

Authors:  Gwendolyn Kaeser; Jerold Chun
Journal:  J Biol Chem       Date:  2020-07-22       Impact factor: 5.157

Review 6.  Main steps in DNA double-strand break repair: an introduction to homologous recombination and related processes.

Authors:  Lepakshi Ranjha; Sean M Howard; Petr Cejka
Journal:  Chromosoma       Date:  2018-01-11       Impact factor: 4.316

Review 7.  Repair of DNA double-strand breaks by mammalian alternative end-joining pathways.

Authors:  Annahita Sallmyr; Alan E Tomkinson
Journal:  J Biol Chem       Date:  2018-03-12       Impact factor: 5.157

8.  DNA polymerase θ (POLQ) is important for repair of DNA double-strand breaks caused by fork collapse.

Authors:  Zi Wang; Yadong Song; Shibo Li; Sunil Kurian; Rong Xiang; Takuya Chiba; Xiaohua Wu
Journal:  J Biol Chem       Date:  2019-01-17       Impact factor: 5.157

9.  The canonical non-homologous end joining factor XLF promotes chromosomal deletion rearrangements in human cells.

Authors:  Ragini Bhargava; Felicia Wednesday Lopezcolorado; L Jillianne Tsai; Jeremy M Stark
Journal:  J Biol Chem       Date:  2019-11-21       Impact factor: 5.157

Review 10.  An Emerging Regulatory Role for the Tumor Microenvironment in the DNA Damage Response to Double-Strand Breaks.

Authors:  Tshering D Lama-Sherpa; Lalita A Shevde
Journal:  Mol Cancer Res       Date:  2019-11-01       Impact factor: 5.852

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.