Skip Navigation


Mutagenesis Advance Access originally published online on September 17, 2009
Mutagenesis 2009 24(6):465-469; doi:10.1093/mutage/gep035
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
24/6/465    most recent
gep035v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
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 Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Heisig, P.
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Heisig, P.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?


© The Author 2009. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the UK Environmental Mutagen Society. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org.

Type II topoisomerases—inhibitors, repair mechanisms and mutations

Peter Heisig*

Pharmaceutical Biology and Microbiology, Department of Chemistry, University of Hamburg, Bundesstrasse 45, 20146 Hamburg, Germany

Type II topoisomerases are ubiquitous enzymes that play an essential role in the control of replicative DNA synthesis and share structural and functional homology among different prokaryotic and eukaryotic organisms. Antibacterial fluoroquinolones target prokaryotic topoisomerases at concentrations 100- to 1000-fold lower than mammalian enzymes, the preferred targets of anticancer drugs such as etoposide. The mechanisms of action of both of these types of inhibitors involve the fixation of an intermediate reaction step, where the enzyme is covalently bound to an enzyme-mediated DNA double-strand break (DSB). The resulting ternary drug–enzyme–DNA complexes can then be converted to cleavage complexes that block further movement of the DNA replication fork, subsequently inducing stress responses. In haploid prokaryotic cells, stress responses include error-free and error-prone DNA damage repair pathways, such as homologous recombination and translesion synthesis, respectively. The latter can result in the acquisition of point mutations. Diploid mammalian cells are assumed to preferentially use recombination mechanisms for the repair of DSBs, an example of which, non-homologous end joining, is a major error-prone repair mechanism associated with an increased frequency of detectable small deletions, insertions and translocations. However, results obtained from safety testing of novel fluoroquinolones at high concentrations indicate that point mutations may also occur in mammalian cells. Recent data provide evidence for translesion synthesis catalysed by error-prone repair polymerases as a damage-tolerance repair mechanism of DSBs in eukaryotic cells. This paper discusses possible roles of different mechanisms for the repair of DSBs operating in both eukaryotic and prokaryotic cells that result in recombinational rearrangements, deletions/insertions as well as point mutations.

* To whom correspondence should be addressed. Tel: +49 40 42838 3899; Fax: +49 40 42838 3895; Email: heisig{at}chemie.uni-hamburg.de

Received on April 23, 2009; revised on July 21, 2009; accepted on July 22, 2009.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.