Naruto Yamashita

Mechanism of oxidative DNA damage induced by quercetin in the presence of Cu(II)

Quercetin, one of flavonoids, has been reported to be carcinogenic. There have been no report concerning carcinogenicity of kaempferol and luteolin which have structure similar to quercetin. DNA damage was examined by using DNA fragments obtained from the human p53 tumor suppressor gene. Quercetin induced extensive DNA damage via reacting with Cu(II), but kaempferol and luteolin induced little DNA damage even in the presence of Cu(II). Excessive quercetin inhibited copper-dependent DNA damage induced by quercetin. Bathocuproine, a Cu(I)-specific chelator, catalase and methional inhibited the DNA damage by quercetin, whereas free hydroxyl radical scavengers did not. Site specificity of the DNA damage was thymine and cytosine residues. The site specificity and the inhibitory effects suggested that DNA-copper-oxygen complex rather than free hydroxyl radical induced the DNA damage. Formation of 8-oxodG by quercetin increased extensively in the presence of Cu(II), whereas 8-oxodG formation by kaempferol or luteolin increased only slightly. This study suggests a good relationship between carcinogenicity and oxidative DNA damage of three flavonoids. The mechanism of DNA damage by quercetin was discussed in relation to the safety in cancer chemoprevention by flavonoids.

Superoxide formation and DNA damage induced by a fragrant furanone in the presence of copper(II)

2,5-Dimethyl-4-hydroxy-3(2H)-furanone (2,5-DMHF), a caramel-like fragrant compound found in may processed foodstuff, has been reported to be mutagenic. 4,5-Dimethyl-3-hydroxy-2(5H)-furanone (4,5-DMHF), which is a similar characteristic fragrant compound, has no report concerning its mutagenicity. DNA damage by 2,5-DMHF and 4,5-DMHF was investigated by using DNA fragments obtained from the p53 tumor suppressor gene. 2,5-DMHF induced DNA damage extensively in the presence of Cu(II), but only slightly in the presence of Fe(III). 4,5-DMHF did not cause metal-dependent DNA damage. Bathocuproine, a Cu(I)-specific chelator, and catalase inhibited DNA damage induced by 2,5-DMHF plus Cu(II), whereas free hydroxyl radical scavengers did not. The order of DNA cleavage sites was thymine, cytosine > guanine residues. The site-specific DNA damage and effects of scavengers show that DNA-copper-oxygen complex rather than free .OH are involved in the DNA damage. Formation of 8-oxodeoxyguanosine (8-oxodG) by 2,5-DMHF increased with its concentration in the presence of Cu(II), whereas 8-oxodG formation increased only slightly in the presence of Fe(III). Degradation of 2,5-DMHF was efficiently accelerated by Cu(II), but only slightly accelerated by Fe(III). The degradation of 4,5-DMHF was little even in the presence of metal ions. Examination using cytochrome c suggest that superoxide was generated from 2,5-DMHF. Stoichiometric study of Cu(II) reduction revealed that autoxidation of 2,5-DMHF could offer 4-electron reduction. These results suggest that, at least in vitro and in an acellular system, 2,5-DMHF generates superoxide and subsequently hydrogen peroxide to induce metal-dependent DNA damage.

Distinct mechanisms of DNA damage in apoptosis induced by quercetin and luteolin

Quercetin has been reported to have carcinogenic effects. However, both quercetin and luteolin have anti-cancer activity. To clarify the mechanism underlying the carcinogenic effects of quercetin, we compared DNA damage occurring during apoptosis induced by quercetin with that occuring during apoptosis induced by luteolin. Both quercetin and luteolin similarly induced DNA cleavage with subsequent DNA ladder formation, characteristics of apoptosis, in HL-60 cells. In HP 100 cells, an H2O2-resistant clone of HL-60 cells, the extent of DNA cleavage and DNA ladder formation induced by quercetin was less than that in HL-60 cells, whereas differences between the two cell types were minimal after treatment with luteolin. In addition, quercetin increased the formation of 8-oxo-7,8-dihydro-2′-deoxyguanosine (8-oxodG), an indicator of oxidative DNA damage, in HL-60 cells but not in HP 100 cells. Luteolin did not increase 8-oxodG formation, but inhibited topoisomerase II (topo II) activity of nuclear extract more strongly than quercetin and cleaved DNA by forming a luteolin-topo II-DNA ternary complex. These results suggest that quercetin induces H2O2-mediated DNA damage, resulting in apoptosis or mutations, whereas luteolin induces apoptosis via topo II-mediated DNA cleavage. The H2O2-mediated DNA damage may be related to the carcinogenic effects of quercetin.

Catechol estrogens induce oxidative DNA damage and estradiol enhances cell proliferation.

Estrogen‐induced carcinogenesis involves enhanced cell proliferation (promotion) and genotoxic effects (initiation). To investigate the contribution of estrogens and their metabolites to tumor initiation, we examined DNA damage induced by estradiol and its metabolites, the catechol estrogens 2‐hydroxyestradiol (2‐OHE2) and 4‐hydroxyestradiol (4‐OHE2). In the presence of Cu(II), catechol estrogens formed piperidine‐labile sites at thymine and cytosine residues in 32P 5′‐end‐labeled DNA fragments and induced the formation of 8‐oxo‐7,8‐dihydro‐2′‐deoxyguanosine. NADH markedly enhanced Cu(II)‐dependent DNA damage mediated by nanomolar concentrations of catechol estrogens. Catalase and bathocuproine inhibited the DNA damage, suggesting the involvement of H2O2 and Cu(I). These results suggest that H2O2, generated during Cu(II)‐catalyzed autoxidation of catechol estrogens, reacts with Cu(I) to form the Cu(I)–peroxide complex, leading to oxidative DNA damage, and that NADH enhanced DNA damage through the formation of redox cycle. To investigate the role of estrogens and their metabolites in tumor promotion, we examined their effects on proliferation of estrogen‐dependent MCF‐7 cells. Estradiol enhanced the proliferation of MCF‐7 cells at much lower concentrations than catechol estrogens. These findings indicate that catechol estrogens play a role in tumor initiation through oxidative DNA damage, whereas estrogens themselves induce tumor promotion and/or progression by enhancing cell proliferation in estrogen‐induced carcinogenesis.