Swarts, S. G., Gilbert, D. C., Sharma, K. K., Razskazovskiy, Y., Purkayastha, S., Naumenko, K. A. and Bernhard, W. A. Mechanisms of Direct Radiation Damage in DNA, Based on a Study of the Yields of Base Damage, Deoxyribose Damage, and Trapped Radicals in d(GCACGCGTGC)2. Radiat. Res. 168, 367–381 (2007).
Dose–response curves were measured for the formation of direct-type DNA products in X-irradiated d(GCACGCGTGC)2prepared as dry films and as crystalline powders. Damage to deoxyribose (dRib) was assessed by HPLC measurements of strand break products containing 3′ or 5′ terminal phosphate and free base release. Base damage was measured using GC/ MS after acid hydrolysis and trimethylsilylation. The yield of trappable radicals was measured at 4 K by EPR of films X-irradiated at 4 K. With exception of those used for EPR, all samples were X-irradiated at room temperature. There was no measurable difference between working under oxygen or under nitrogen. The chemical yields (in units of nmol/J) for trapped radicals, free base release, 8-oxoGua, 8-oxoAde, diHUra and diHThy were Gtotal(fr) = 618 ± 60, G(fbr) = 93 ± 8, G(8-oxoGua) = 111 ± 62, G(8-oxoAde) = 4 ± 3, G(diHUra) = 127 ± 160, and G(diHThy) = 39 ± 60, respectively. The yields were determined and the dose–response curves explained by a mechanistic model consisting of three reaction pathways: (1) trappable-radical single-track, (2) trappable-radical multiple-track, and (3) molecular. If the base content is projected from the decamer's GC:AT ratio of 4:1 to a ratio of 1:1, the percentage of the total measured damage (349 nmol/J) would partition as follows: 20 ± 16% 8-oxoGua, 3 ± 3% 8-oxoAde, 28 ± 46% diHThy, 23 ± 32% diHUra, and 27 ± 17% dRib damage. With a cautionary note regarding large standard deviations, the projected yield of total damage is higher in CG-rich DNA because C combined with G is more prone to damage than A combined with T, the ratio of base damage to deoxyribose damage is ∼3:1, the yield of diHUra is comparable to the yield of diHThy, and the yield of 8-oxoAde is not negligible. While the quantity and quality of the data fall short of proving the hypothesized model, the model provides an explanation for the dose–response curves of the more prevalent end products and provides a means of measuring their chemical yields, i.e., their rate of formation at zero dose. Therefore, we believe that this comprehensive analytical approach, combined with the mechanistic model, will prove important in predicting risk due to exposure to low doses and low dose rates of ionizing radiation.
