|
|
|
| Effect of exposure to chrysotile on ribosomal DNA copy number variation and DNA damage response |
| LIU Jiaqi, FENG Lingfang, CHEN Junfei, XIA Hailing, JIANG Zhaoqiang, WU Fan, GONG Xiaoxue, LOU Jianlin
|
| School of Public Health, Hangzhou Medical College, Hangzhou, Zhejiang 310013, China |
|
|
|
|
Abstract Objective To investigate the effect of chrysotile exposure on ribosomal DNA (rDNA) copy number and DNA damage response, so as to provide insights into the mechanism of asbestos-induced carcinogenesis. Methods Human pleural mesothelial MeT-5A cells were treated with chrysotile suspensions at doses of 1.25, 2.5 and 5 μg/cm2 (low-, medium-, high-dose group), while PBS served as controls. MeT-5A cells were harvested 6, 24, 48 and 72 h post-treatment, and the rDNA copy numbers and the BIRC5, HRAS, GINS4 and RRM2 mRNA expression were determined using a quantitative real-time PCR (qPCR) assay. The apoptosis of MeT-5A cells and DNA damage were detected using Muse cell analyzer. The rDNA copy numbers, DNA damage responses and BIRC5, HRAS, GINS4 and RRM2 mRNA expression were compared in MeT-5A cells treated with different doses of chrysotile suspensions. Results There were significant differences in 45S rDNA copy numbers among low-, medium-, high-dose groups and the control groups 6, 48 and 72 h post-treatment with chrysotile suspensions, and significantly lower 45S rDNA copy numbers were measured in low-, medium- and high-dose groups than in the control group 6 h post-treatment, while significantly higher 45S rDNA copy numbers were found in the high-dose group than in low- and medium-dose groups 48 and 72 h post-treatment (all P<0.05). There were significant differences in 5S rDNA copy numbers among low-, medium-, high-dose groups and the control groups 24, 48 and 72 h post-treatment with chrysotile suspensions, and significantly lower 5S rDNA copy numbers were measured in medium- and high-dose groups than in the control group 24 and 48 h post-treatment, while significantly lower 5S rDNA copy numbers were found in medium- and high-dose groups than in the low-dose group 24, 72 h post-treatment (all P<0.05). There were significant differences in the overall apoptotic rate of MeT-5A cells among groups at different time points, and the overall apoptotic rate of MeT-5A cells were significantly higher in medium- and high-dose groups than in the control group (all P<0.05), with late-stage apoptosis predominantly detected. There were significant differences in the rates of ATM activation and DNA double-strand break in MeT-5A cells among groups 72 h post-treatment, and higher rates of ATM activation and DNA double-strand break were measured in medium- and high-dose groups than in the control group (all P<0.05). In addition, there were significant differences in the relative mRNA expression of BIRC5, HRAS, GINS4 and RRM2 genes among groups 24 and 48 h post-treatment, and significantly lower BIRC5, HRAS, GINS4 and RRM2 mRNA expression was quantified in medium- and high-dose groups than in the control group (all P<0.05). Conclusion Exposure to chrysotile may induce rDNA copy number variations and altered expression of nucleolar proteins in human pleural mesothelial cells, which may be involved in the regulation of DNA damage responses.
|
|
Received: 21 February 2022
Revised: 30 March 2022
Published: 15 June 2022
|
|
|
|
|
|
[1] World Health Organization,International Labour Organization. WHO/ILO joint estimates of the work-related burden of disease and injury,2000-2016[EB/OL]. [2022-03-30]. https://www.ilo.org/global/topics/safety-and-health-at-work/resources-library/publications/WCMS_819788/lang--zh/index.htm.
[2] VAN ZANDWIJK N,REID G,FRANK A L.Asbestos-related cancers:the ‘Hidden Killer’ remains a global threat[J].Expert Rev Anticancer Ther,2020,20(4):271-278.
[3] LOU J,YU S,FENG L,et al.Environmentally induced ribosomal DNA(rDNA)instability in human cells and populations exposed to hexavalent chromium [Cr(VI)][J/OL].Environ Int,2021,153[2022-03-30].https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2021.106525.
[4] GIBBONS J G,BRANCO A T,GODINHO S A,et al.Concerted copy number variation balances ribosomal DNA dosage in human and mouse genomes[J].Proc Natl Acad Sci USA,2015,112(8):2485-2490.
[5] WARMERDAM D O,RMF W.Keeping ribosomal DNA intact:a repeating challenge[J].Chromosome Res,2019,27(1/2):57-72.
[6] FANCELLO L,KAMPEN K R,HOFMAN I J,et al.The ribosomal protein gene RPL5 is a haploinsufficient tumor suppressor in multiple cancer types[J].Oncotarget,2017,8(9):14462-14478.
[7] WARMERDAM D O,VAN DEN BERG J,MEDEMA R H. Breaks in the 45S rDNA lead to recombination-mediated loss of repeats[J].Cell Rep,2016,14(11):2519-2527.
[8] ANDERSEN J S,LAM Y W,LEUNG A K,et al.Nucleolar proteome dynamics[J].Nature,2005,433(7021):77-83.
[9] VAN SLUIS M,MCSTAY B.Nucleolar reorganization in response to rDNA damage[J].Curr Opin Cell Biol,2017,46:81-86.
[10] WANG M,LEMOS B.Ribosomal DNA copy number amplification and loss in human cancers is linked to tumor genetic context,nucleolus activity,and proliferation[J].PLoS Genet,2017,13(9):1-24.
[11] 张文翠,朱钰玲,胡伟江,等.选矿企业石棉粉尘的职业健康风险评估[J].预防医学,2018,30(9):879-883.
ZHANG W C,ZHU Y L,HU W J,et al.Occupational health risk assessment on asbestos processing enterprises[J].Prev Med,2018,30(9):879-883.
[12] 夏海玲,蒋兆强,冯玲芳,等.石棉作业对人体氧化应激水平的影响[J].预防医学,2022,34(1):1-6.
XIA H L,JIANG Z Q,FENG L F,et al.Effect of asbestos exposure on oxidative stress[J]. Prev Med,2022,34(1):1-6.
[13] MIKOLASKOVA B,JURCIK M,CIPAKOVA I,et al.Maintenance of genome stability:the unifying role of interconnections between the DNA damage response and RNA-processing pathways[J].Curr Genet,2018,64(5):971-983.
[14] 贾君麟,楼建林. 核糖体DNA在DNA损伤反应中的作用机制研究进展[J].中华劳动卫生职业病杂志,2018,36(1):70-74.
JIA J L,LOU J L.Research progress on the mechanism of ribosomal DNA in DNA damage response[J].Chin J Ind Hyg Occup Dis,2018,36(1):70-74.
[15] LARSEN D H,STUCKI M.Nucleolar responses to DNA double-strand breaks[J].Nucleic Acids Res,2016,44(2):538-544.
[16] NARIMANI M,SHARIFI M,JALILI A.Knockout of BIRC5 gene by CRISPR/Cas9 induces apoptosis and inhibits cell proliferation in leukemic cell lines,HL60 and KG1[J].Blood Lymphat Cancer,2019,9:53-61.
[17] LI Q,LIANG J,CHEN B. Identification of CDCA8,DSN1 and BIRC5 in regulating cell cycle and apoptosis in osteosarcoma using bioinformatics and cell biology[J/OL].Technol Cancer Res Treat,2020,19[2022-03-30].https://doi.org/10.1177/1533033820965605.
[18] LÜ G,LI L,WANG B,et al.LINC00623/miR-101/HRAS axis modulates IL-1β-mediated ECM degradation,apoptosis and senescence of osteoarthritis chondrocytes[J].Aging,2020,12(4):3218-3237.
[19] ZHU Z,YU Z,RONG Z,et al.The novel GINS4 axis promotes gastric cancer growth and progression by activating Rac1 and CDC42[J].Theranostics,2019,9(26):8294-8311.
[20] JIN C Y,DU L,NUERLAN A H,et al.High expression of RRM2 as an independent predictive factor of poor prognosis in patients with lung adenocarcinoma[J].Aging,2020,13(3):3518-3535. |
|
|
|
