Photomutagenicity of chlorpromazine and its N-demethylated metabolites assessed by NGS.
Journal
Scientific reports
ISSN: 2045-2322
Titre abrégé: Sci Rep
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101563288
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
23 04 2020
23 04 2020
Historique:
received:
14
01
2020
accepted:
02
04
2020
entrez:
25
4
2020
pubmed:
25
4
2020
medline:
1
12
2020
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The human genome is constantly attacked by endogenous and exogenous agents (ultraviolet light, xenobiotics, reactive oxygen species), which can induce chemical transformations leading to DNA lesions. To combat DNA damage, cells have developed several repair mechanisms; however, if the repair is defective, DNA lesions lead to permanent mutations. Single-cell gel electrophoresis (COMET assay) is a sensitive and well-established technique for quantifying DNA damage in individual cells. Nevertheless, this tool lacks relationship with mutagenesis. Therefore, to identify errors that give rise to mutations it would be convenient to test an alternative known procedure, such as next generation sequencing (NGS). Thus, the present work aims to evaluate the photomutagenicity of neuroleptic drug chlorpromazine (CPZ), and its N-demethylated metabolites using COMET assay and to test NGS as an alternative method to assess photomutagenesis. In this context, upon exposure to UVA radiation, COMET assay reveals CPZ-photosensitized DNA damage partially repaired by cells. Conversely with this result, metabolites demethylchlorpromazine (DMCPZ) and didemethylchlorpromazine (DDMCPZ) promote extensive DNA-photodamage, hardly repaired under the same conditions. Parallel assessment of mutagenesis by NGS is consistent with these results with minor discrepancies for DDMCPZ. To our knowledge, this is the first example demonstrating the utility of NGS for evaluating drug-induced photomutagenicity.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32327675
doi: 10.1038/s41598-020-63651-y
pii: 10.1038/s41598-020-63651-y
pmc: PMC7181754
doi:
Substances chimiques
Chlorpromazine
U42B7VYA4P
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
6879Références
Bjelland, S. & Seeberg, E. Mutagenicity, toxicity and repair of DNA base damage induced by oxidation. Mutat. Res. 531, 37–80 (2003).
doi: 10.1016/j.mrfmmm.2003.07.002
Friedberg, E. C. A brief history of the DNA repair field. Cell Res. 18, 3–7 (2008).
doi: 10.1038/cr.2007.113
Cadet, J. & Wagner, J. R. DNA base damage by reactive oxygen species, oxidizing agents, and UV radiation. Cold Spring Harb. Perspect. Biol. 5, (2013).
Bauer, N. C., Corbett, A. H. & Doetsch, P. W. The current state of eukaryotic DNA base damage and repair. Nucleic Acids Res. 43, 10083–10101 (2015).
pubmed: 26519467
pmcid: 4666366
Cadet, J. & Davies, K. J. A. Oxidative DNA damage & repair: An introduction. Free Radic. Biol. Med. 107, 2–12 (2017).
doi: 10.1016/j.freeradbiomed.2017.03.030
Sancar, A., Lindsey-Boltz, L. A., Unsal-Kaçmaz, K. & Linn, S. Molecular mechanisms of mammalian DNA repair and the DNA damage checkpoints. Annu. Rev. Biochem. 73, 39–85 (2004).
doi: 10.1146/annurev.biochem.73.011303.073723
Roos, W. P., Thomas, A. D. & Kaina, B. DNA damage and the balance between survival and death in cancer biology. Nat. Rev. Cancer 16, 20–33 (2016).
doi: 10.1038/nrc.2015.2
Møller, P. Assessment of reference values for DNA damage detected by the comet assay in human blood cell DNA. Mutat. Res. 612, 84–104 (2006).
doi: 10.1016/j.mrrev.2005.10.001
Azqueta, A. & Collins, A. R. The essential comet assay: a comprehensive guide to measuring DNA damage and repair. Arch. Toxicol. 87, 949–968 (2013).
doi: 10.1007/s00204-013-1070-0
Collins, A. R. et al. Controlling variation in the comet assay. Front. Genet. 5, 359 (2014).
doi: 10.3389/fgene.2014.00359
Møller, P. The comet assay: ready for 30 more years. Mutagenesis 33, 1–7 (2018).
doi: 10.1093/mutage/gex046
Shendure, J. & Ji, H. Next-generation DNA sequencing. Nat. Biotechnol. 26, 1135–1145 (2008).
doi: 10.1038/nbt1486
Metzker, M. L. Sequencing technologies—the next generation. Nat. Rev. Genet. 11, 31 (2010).
doi: 10.1038/nrg2626
Gawad, C., Koh, W. & Quake, S. R. Single-cell genome sequencing: current state of the science. Nat. Rev. Genet. 17, 175–188 (2016).
doi: 10.1038/nrg.2015.16
Schwarz, U. I., Gulilat, M. & Kim, R. B. The Role of Next-Generation Sequencing in Pharmacogenetics and Pharmacogenomics. Cold Spring Harb. Perspect. Med. 9, (2019).
Epstein, J. H., Brunsting, L. A., Petersen, M. C. & Schwarz, B. E. A study of photosensitivity occurring with chlorpromazine therapy. J. Invest. Dermatol. 28, 329–338 (1957).
doi: 10.1038/jid.1957.44
Kochevar, I. E., Chung, F. L. & Jeffrey, A. M. Photoaddition of chlorpromazine to DNA. Chem. Biol. Interact. 51, 273–284 (1984).
doi: 10.1016/0009-2797(84)90153-4
Palumbo, F. et al. Enhanced photo(geno)toxicity of demethylated chlorpromazine metabolites. Toxicol. Appl. Pharmacol. 313, 131–137 (2016).
doi: 10.1016/j.taap.2016.10.024
Miki, Y. et al. A strong candidate for the breast and ovarian cancer susceptibility gene BRCA1. Science 266, 66–71 (1994).
doi: 10.1126/science.7545954
Wooster, R. et al. Identification of the breast cancer susceptibility gene BRCA2. Nature 378, 789–792 (1995).
doi: 10.1038/378789a0