Abstract
Metabolic activation of the human carcinogen 1,3-butadiene (BD) by cytochrome 450 monooxygenases gives rise to a genotoxic diepoxide, 1,2,3,4-diepoxybutane (DEB). This reactive electrophile alkylates guanine bases in DNA to produce N7-(2-hydroxy-3,4-epoxy-1-yl)-dG (N7-HEB-dG) adducts. Because of the positive charge at the N7 position of the purine heterocycle, N7-HEB-dG adducts are inherently unstable and can undergo spontaneous depurination or base-catalyzed imidazole ring opening to give N6-[2-deoxy-D-erythro-pentofuranosyl]-2,6-diamino-3,4-dihydro-4-oxo-5-N-1-(oxiran-2-yl)propan-1-ol-formamidopyrimidine (DEB-FAPy-dG) adducts. Here we report the first synthesis and structural characterization of DEB-FAPy-dG adducts. Authentic standards of DEB-FAPy-dG and its 15N3-labeled analogue were used for the development of a quantitative nanoLC-ESI+-HRMS/MS method, allowing for adduct detection in DEB-treated calf thymus DNA. DEB-FAPy-dG formation in DNA was dependent on DEB concentration and pH, with higher numbers observed under alkaline conditions.
Keywords: 1,3-Butadiene; 1,2,3,4-Diepoxybutane; DEB-FAPy-dG; Formamidopyrimidine; DNA
Graphical Abstract
Formamidopyrimidnes (FAPy) are highly mutagenic DNA lesions. Here we describe the first synthesis and complete structural characterization of a diepoxybutane (DEB) derived formamidopyrimidine of dG (DEB-FAPy-dG). An isotope dilution nanoLC-ESI+-HRMS/MS method was developed and DEB-FAPy-dG adducts were detected in DEB treated DNA.

1,3-Butadiene (BD) is a known human carcinogen commonly found in automobile exhaust[1] and wood burning smoke,[2] and is widely used in the rubber and plastic industries.[3] BD is one of the most abundant carcinogens present in cigarette smoke.[4] It induces leukemia and lymphoma, as well as tumors of the lung, ovary, liver, and mammary gland, in laboratory animals.[5] Furthermore, BD causes chromosomal abnormalities and increases the risk of lymphatic and hematopoietic cancer in occupationally exposed workers.[3, 6]
BD is metabolically activated by cytochrome 450 monooxygenases CYP2E1 and 2A6 to reactive electrophile 3,4-epoxy-1-butene (EB)[7]. EB can be further epoxidized to form 1,2,3,4-diepoxybutane (DEB) or hydrolyzed by epoxide hydrolase (EH) to form 1-butene-3,−4-diol (EB-diol)[7]. 1,2-dihydroxy-3,4-epoxybutane (EBD) is formed both through the epoxidation of EB-diol and the hydrolysis of DEB (Scheme 1).[7b, 8] EB, DEB, and EBD are genotoxic and can induce point mutations and deletions; among the three, DEB is by far the most mutagenic.[9] BD-derived epoxides can enter cell nuclei and react with genomic DNA to form covalent DNA adducts at guanine and adenine bases.[10] BD-DNA adducts can cause polymerase errors during DNA replication, potentially leading to mutations and cancer.[11]
Scheme 1.
Metabolism of 1,3-butadiene to reactive species.
The N7-position of guanine in DNA is the favored reactive site for simple alkylating agents such as BD-derived epoxides.[12] N7-guanine adducts retain the ability to pair with C,[12a, 12c, 12d] but are hydrolytically labile due to the presence of a positive charge on the alkylated base.[12a, 12b, 13] These adducts undergo two competing reactions: spontaneous depurination to release N7-alkylguanine bases (favored under acidic conditions) and imidazole ring opening to give the formamidopyrimidine (FAPy) lesions (preferred under basic conditions, Scheme 2).[12d] Imidazole ring scission and alkyl-FAPy formation alters the molecular shape and base pairing preferences of the parent nucleobase, leading to mispairing during DNA replication.[14] Alkyl-FAPy lesions are relatively stable and can accumulate in cells over time[12b, 12d, 15] and have been shown to play a major role in genotoxicity of the liver carcinogen aflatoxin B1[16]. Structurally related unsubstituted FAPy adducts can be formed by a free radical mechanism upon exposure to reactive oxygen species (ROS).[15, 17]
Scheme 2.
Mechanism of apurinic site and FAPy lesion formation from dG
Previously, we reported the synthesis and structural characterization of N6-(2-deoxy-D-erythro-pentofuranosyl)-2,6-diamino-3,4-dihydro-4-oxo-5-N-(2-hydroxy-3-buten-1-yl)-formamidopyrimidine (EB-FAPy-dG) adducts in DNA exposed to butadiene monoepoxide (EB, Scheme 1).[12c] EB-FAPy-dG lesions were detected in EB-treated calf thymus DNA and in murine cells in culture (MEF), with higher adduct numbers observed in cells deficient in NEIL1, a DNA repair gene involved in base excision repair.[18] In the present work, we describe the synthesis and structural characterization of the corresponding adducts of butadiene derived diepoxide (DEB), N6-[2-deoxy-D-erythro-pentofuranosyl]-2,6-diamino-3,4-dihydro-4-oxo-5-N-1-(oxiran-2-yl)propan-1-ol-formamidopyrimidine (DEB-FAPy-dG). DEB-FAPy-dG adducts were detected in DEB-treated calf thymus DNA (CT DNA) using isotope dilution liquid chromatography-high resolution tandem mass spectrometry. To our knowledge, this is the first report of DEB-derived FAPy adducts, which are hypothesized to play a role in genotoxicity of DEB.
Chemical synthesis of DEB-FAPy-dG was achieved via direct alkylation of 2’-deoxyguanosine (dG, 1 in Scheme 3) with commercial 1,2,3,4-diepoxybutane (5 equiv.) in Tris-HCl buffer (10 mM, pH 7.2) overnight. The reaction mixture was separated by HPLC to obtain N7-(2-hydroxy-3,4-epoxy-1-yl)-dG (N7-HEB-dG) (compound 3, est. yield, 10%). HPLC separation was achieved via preparative HPLC using a Sunfire Prep C18 OBD column (Waters, 19 × 250 mm, 5 μm) and a gradient of acetonitrile/water (for details, see Supporting Information, Figure S1). Structural characterization data for compound 3 is given in Supporting Information (Figures S3-S8). Next, compound 3 was treated with 1 M NaOH at room temperature for 1 h and immediately neutralized with 20% AcOH, followed by HPLC purification to give compound 4 (est. yield, 70%) (Scheme 3). DEB-FAPy-dG was isolated by semipreparative HPLC on a Synergi Hydro RP column (Phenomenex, 4.6× 250 mm, 4 μm) using a gradient of acetonitrile in water (for details, see Supporting Information, Figure S2).
Scheme 3.
Synthesis of DEB-FAPy-dG nucleoside from 2’-deoxyguanosine.
It should be noted that under our reaction conditions, the 3,4- epoxy ring of DEB-FAPy-dG remained intact. The epoxide ring could be opened upon extended treatment of adduct 3 with 1 M NaOH to give trihydroxybutyl-FAPy-dG (compound 6) (Figure S3).
Complete structural characterization of DEB-FAPy-dG 4 was achieved via various spectroscopic techniques. DEB-FAPy-dG was initially characterized by UV spectrophotometry. Imidazole ring opening of N7-alkyl-dG to give alkyl-FAPy generates signatory UV-Vis spectra for these molecules.[12c, 12d, 19] At neutral pH, the λmax of DEB-FAPy-dG was determined to be at 272 nm (Figure 1). Under acidic conditions (pH 1.0), the λmax of the nucleoside shifted to 271 nm. Conversely, when solution pH was adjusted to higher pH (12.0) using 1 M NaOH, λmax moved to 265 nm (Figure 1). Overall, the UV absorption profile of this lesion matched the published spectra of closely related analogue EB-FAPy-dG and other alkyl-FAPy-dG adducts.[12c, 12d, 19]
Figure 1.
UV absorption spectra of DEB-FAPy-dG in 0.1N HCl (pH: 1.0), λmax 271 nm; water (pH: 7.0), λmax 272 nm; and 0.1N NaOH (pH: 12.0). λmax 265 nm.
Mass spectrometric characterization of synthetic DEB-FAPy-dG was performed on a Q Exactive Orbitrap mass spectrophotometer (Figure 2). The observed molecular ion signal of DEB-FAPy-dG at m/z 372.1509 ([M+H]+) is in agreement with the theoretical value for protonated DEB-FAPy-dG (372.1514). MS/MS fragmentation of DEB-FAPy-dG (m/z 372.1509) was characterized by the neutral loss of deoxyribose (m/z 372.1509 [M+H]+ → 256.1037 [M−dR+H]+) and a loss of 2’-deoxyribose and water (m/z 372.1509 [M+H]+ → 238.0932 [M+H−dR−H2O]+) (Figure 2A).
Figure 2.
ESI+-MS/MS of DEB-FAPy-dG nucleoside (A) and its 15N3-labeled analogue (B).
15N1, 15N2, 15N3- N7-DEB-FAPy-dG was synthesized according to the above procedure starting with 25 mg of 15N1, 15N2, 15N3-dG. 15N1, 15N2, 15N3, N7-(2-hydroxy-3,4-epoxy-1-yl)-dG intermediate exhibited a molecular ion at m/z 375.2349, which is consistent with the theoretical value (375.1425, [M+H]+). 15N3-N7-DEB-FAPy-dG was treated with base to obtain the corresponding DEB-FAPy adduct. MS/MS fragmentation of 15N3-DEB-FAPy-dG (m/z 375.2349, [M+H]+) was characterized by two major fragments at 241.0845 [M+H−dR−H2O]+ and 259.0952 [M+H − dR]+ (Figure 2B). This isotopically labelled analogue was subsequently used as an internal standard for quantitative mass spectrometry analyses (see below).
DEB-FAPy-dG was further characterized by 1H-NMR,13C-NMR, 135-DEPT, and 1H−13C HSQC (Figure 3 and S10-S12). 1H−NMR signals at 8.20–8.10 and 7.95–7.85 ppm confirmed the presence of the formamido group (Figure 3). The complexity of the spectra is indicative of the presence of at least six different isomers of DEB-FAPy-dG. For the synthesis of DEB-FAPy-dG nucleoside, commercially available racemic DEB was used. As a result, the DEB-FAPy-dG adducts were formed as a mixture of stereoisomers. Additionally, the formyl N5-C7’ (N-CO bond) bond is characterized by restricted rotation, giving rise to stable rotamers.[12d, 20] Finally, several E/Z formamide isomers of alkyl FAPy are possible as a result of hindered rotation around C5-N5 bond (Scheme 4).[12d] Other N5-substituted-FAPy-adducts such as aflatoxin B1 FAPy adducts (AFB1-FAPy-dG) and Me-FAPy-dG adducts exist as a mixture of rotamers due to the hindered rotation around the C5-N5 as well as formamide (N5-C7’) bond. Similar isomers are possible for DEB-FAPy-dG (Scheme 4).
Figure 3.
1H-NMR spectrum of DEB-FAPy-dG nucleoside (4) in D2O.
Scheme 4.
Proposed structures of E/Z formamide isomers of DEB-FAPy-dG.
The multiple signals at 5.60–5.15 ppm (due to all the above discussed isomers) in the 1H NMR spectrum of DEB-FAPy-dG (Figure 3) were assigned to C1’-H of the deoxyribose, while the signals in the range of 2.15–1.80 ppm correspond to the 2’ proton of the deoxyribose moiety. These signals were attributed to CH2’-α and CH2’-β protons. The 1H-NMR signals in the range 4.30–3.20 ppm correspond to the sidechain hydrogens of C7 to C10-H (Figure 3). These 1H-NMR assignments are consistent with the 13C-HSQC spectra (Figure S12). Signals at 168 ppm, 87 ppm, 84 ppm, and 39 ppm in 1H-NMR-13C-HSQC correspond to formamide, C1’, side chain, and CH2’-α and β carbons, respectively (Supporting Information, Figures S10-S12). The presence of multiple signals in 1H-NMR and 13C-HSQC spectra reflects the presence of multiple stereoisomers and rotamers of DEB-FAPy-dG.
Collectively, the mass spectroscopy, NMR, and UV, and spectroscopy results for synthetic DEB-FAPy-dG are consistent with the structure of N6-[2-deoxy-D-erythro-pentofuranosyl]-2,6-diamino-3,4-dihydro-4-oxo-5-N-1-(oxiran-2-yl)propan-1-ol-formamidopyrimidine (DEB-FAPy-dG) shown in Scheme 2. Although the molecule was isolated as a mixture of isomers which were difficult or impossible to separate, this represents the structural complexity of DEB-FAPy-dG adducts formed in cells. All three stereoisomers of DEB (S,S, R,R and meso) are produced metabolically upon oxidation of 1,3-butadiene by liver enzymes such as P450 2E1.[8, 21]
To allow for DEB-FAPy-dG adduct detection and quantification in DNA, a quantitative isotope dilution nanoLC-ESI+-MS/MS method was developed. 15N3-DEB-FAPy-dG was used as an internal standard. We chose nanoLC for chromatographic separation since it allows for optimal sensitivity in mass spectrometry-based approaches for DNA adduct detection.[12c, 22] nanoLC-ESI+-HR MS/MS analyses were conducted on an Orbitrap QExactive mass spectrometer interfaced with a Dionex Ultimate 3000 nano LC system (Thermo Fisher). Instrument resolution was set for 70,000 to allow for excellent selectivity. Quantitative analysis of DEB-FAPy-dG was conducted in the parallel reaction monitoring mode using mass transitions corresponding to the loss of deoxyribose sugar (m/z 372.1509 [M+H]+ → 256.1037 [M−dR+H]+) and a loss of 2’-deoxyribose and water (m/z 372.1509 [M+H]+ → 238.0923 [M+H−dR−H2O]+) (Figure 4). The 15N3-labeled internal standard was monitored using the corresponding signals at m/z 375.2349 [M+H]+ → 241.0845 [M+H−dR−H2O]+ and m/z 375.2349 [M+H]+ → 259.0952 [M+H− dR]+ (Figure 4). MS/MS transition corresponding to the neutral loss of both deoxyribose and water provided greater sensitivity and was thus chosen for quantitative analyses, while the second transition was used for confirmation purposes.
Figure 4.
Representative nanoLC-ESI+-HRMS/MS traces of DEB-FAPy-dG in CT DNA treated with 50 μM DEB.
To determine whether DEB-FAPy-dG adducts can form in DNA, calf thymus DNA was treated with increasing amounts of DEB (10 μM to 10 mM). High concentrations were chosen in order to facilitate adduct detection. DEB-treated DNA was subjected to enzymatic hydrolysis to 2’-nucleosides, followed by enrichment by solid phase extraction on Hypercarb Hypersep cartridges (Thermo Scientific). We investigated DEB-FAPy-dG retention on multiple SPE cartridges (Isolute ENV+ (40 mg/1 mL, Biotage, Charlotte, NC), Strata X polymeric C18 (30 mg/1 mL, Phenomenex, Torrance, CA) and Hypercarb Hypersep (100 mg/1 mL, Thermo Scientific, Waltham, MA) and found that Hypercarb Hypersep was the only stationary phase that retained DEB-FAPy-dG (SPE recovery 58%). SPE eluates containing DEB-FAPy-dG and 15N3-DEB-FAPy-dG were concentrated under vacuum and reconstituted in water for nanoLC-ESI+-HRMS/MS analysis.
During nanoLC-ESI+-HRMS/MS method development for DEB-FAPy-dG, several HPLC stationary phases including Hypercarb (Thermo Scientific, Waltham, MA), Synergi Polar RP (Phenomenex, Torrance, CA) and Synergi Hydro RP (Phenomenex, Torrance, CA) were tested with a variety of solvent systems (5 mM ammonium formate, 0.1% formic acid, and 0.05% formic acid with acetonitrile) and various solvent gradients. The best HPLC peak shape and retention were achieved on a Synergi Hydro RP column with a gradient of 0.05% formic acid and acetonitrile. With this method, DEB-FAPy-dG eluted as a complex peak at 14.87 min (Figure 4). The quantitative nanoLC-ESI+-HRMS/MS method for DEB-FAPy-dG was validated by spiking known amounts of analyte (12.5–500 fmol) and internal standard (350 fmol) into calf thymus DNA. A linear correlation was observed between the spiked and calculated amounts of analyte, with an R2 value of 0.999 (Supporting Information, Figure S13).
DEB-FAPy-dG formation was investigated at varying pH. Aliquots of treated CT DNA were taken and either analyzed directly (physiological pH) or treated with NaOH (pH = 12) to induce imidazole ring opening. Samples treated at high pH to induce ring opening exhibited a concentration dependent formation of DEB-FAPy-dG, with adduct numbers ranging from 0.7 to 428.0 DEB-FAPy-dG adducts per 106 nucleotides (Figure 5A). However, DEB-FAPy-dG lesions were also observed at physiological pH, with amounts approximately 1300-lower than at pH 12 (Figure 5B).
Figure 5.
Dose dependent formation of DEB-FAPy-dG at pH 12. (A) and pH 7.4 (B).
In order to establish pH dependence for DEB-FAPy-dG adduct formation, CT DNA was treated with 5 mM DEB at 37 °C for 24 h and subsequently incubated at pH 7.5, 10, 11, and 12 at room temperature for 1 h. DEB-FAPy-dG adducts were observed in all samples, although the amounts were much greater in samples incubated at higher pH (pH 12) (Figure 6). This indicates that while DEB-FAPy-dG adducts can form at lower pH, the higher abundance only at pH 12 is consistent with their preferred formation under basic conditions.
Figure 6.
pH-dependent formation of DEB-FAPy-dG in CT DNA treated with 5 mM DEB.
In terms of their biological effects, ring open N5-alkyl-FAPy adducts are expected to hinder DNA synthesis and/or to mispair with purines during DNA replication.[14a, 23] For instance, Me-FAPy-dG adducts block DNA polymerases α, β, and hPol δ/PCNA.[14d] However, Me-FAPy-dG adducts were bypassed by TLS polymerases η, κ, hRev1/Pol ζ and polymerases η, κ, leading to misinsertion and −1 deletion products.[14d] AFB1-FAPy adducts have been shown to be a potent block to DNA synthesis, even when DNA polymerase of lowered replication fidelity was used (MucAB).[16] AFB1-FAPy-G adducts caused G → T transversions along with G → T mutations in the ras oncogene, making them the ultimate lesions responsible for mutagenesis and genotoxicity of aflatoxin.[24] In light of these findings, we expect the newly discovered DEB-FAPy-dG lesions will exhibit mutagenetic and cytotoxic properties. Future research in our laboratory is directed towards investigating these lesions for their biological significance.
In summary, we have successfully synthesized and structurally characterized novel DEB-FAPy-dG and 15N3-DEB-FAPy-dG adducts. A sensitive isotope dilution nanoLC-ESI+-MS/MS methodology was developed for the detection and quantitation of DEB-FAPy-dG lesions in DNA. We investigated the formation of DEB-FAPy-dG lesions in CT-DNA treated with DEB, the most genotoxic and carcinogenic metabolite of 1,3-butadiene, and observed concentration dependent adduct formation, which was enhanced at high pH conditions. We therefore conclude that DEB-FAPy-dG adducts can form under physiological conditions upon exposure to DEB or its metabolic precursor 1,3-butadiene and are likely to contribute to genotoxicity and mutagenicity of BD. Further studies are underway to detect these lesions in cells treated with DEB and to establish their effect on DNA replication, transcription, and repair.
Supplementary Material
Acknowledgements
We thank Yingchun Zhao for his help with MS analysis and Luke Erber for accurate mass measurements. We also thank Robert Carlson (University of Minnesota) for preparing the graphics for this manuscript. This research is supported by a grant from the National Cancer Institute (R01 CA-100670).
Footnotes
DEB-FAPy-dG = N6-[2-deoxy-D-erythro-pentofuranosyl]-2,6-diamino-3,4-dihydro-4-oxo-5-N-1-(oxiran-2-yl)propan-1-ol-formamidopyrimidine
References
- [1].Pelz N, Dempster NM, Shore PR, J. Chromatog. Sci 1990, 28, 230–235. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- [2].Gustafson P, Barregard L, Strandberg B, Sällsten G, J. Environ. Monit 2007, 9, 23–32. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- [3].Cheng H, Sathiakumar N, Graff J, Matthews R, Delzell E, Chem. Biol. Interact 2007, 166, 15–24. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- [4].Hecht SS, Nat. Rev. Cancer 2003, 3, 733–744. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- [5].Himmelstein MW, Acquavella JF, Recio L, Medinsky MA, Bond JA, Crit. Rev. Toxicol 1997, 27, 1–108. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- [6].a) Delzell E, Sathiakumar N, Hovinga M, Macaluso M, Julian J, Larson R, Cole P, Muir DC, Toxicology 1996, 113, 182–189; [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]; b) Delzell E, Sathiakumar N, Graff J, Macaluso M, Maldonado G, Matthews R, Res. Rep. Health Eff. Inst 2006, 1–63; discussion 65–74. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- [7].a) Duescher RJ, Elfarra AA, Arch Biochem Biophys 1994, 311, 342–349; [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]; b) Elfarra AA, Krause RJ, Selzer RR, Toxicology 1996, 113, 23–30. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- [8].Duescher RJ, Elfarra AA, Arch. Biochem. Biophys 1994, 311, 342–349. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- [9].a) Cochrane JE, Skopek TR, Carcinogenesis 1994, 15, 719–723; [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]; b) Cochrane JE, Skopek TR, Carcinogenesis 1994, 15, 713–717. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- [10].Blair IA, Oe T, Kambouris S, Chaudhary AK, Res. Rep. Health Eff. Inst 2000, 151–190; discussion 211–159. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- [11].a) Kotapati S, Wickramaratne S, Esades A, Boldry EJ, Quirk Dorr D, Pence MG, Guengerich FP, Tretyakova NY, Chem. Res. Toxicol 2015, 28, 1496–1507; [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]; b) Carmical JR, Nechev LV, Harris CM, Harris TM, Lloyd RS, Environ. Mol. Mutagen 2000, 35, 48–56; [PubMed] [Google Scholar]; c) Steen AM, Meyer KG, Recio L, Mutagenesis 1997, 12, 61–67; [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]; d) Seo KY, Jelinsky SA, Loechler EL, Mutat. Res 2000, 463, 215–246. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- [12].a) Gates KS, Nooner T, Dutta S, Chem. Res. Toxicol 2004, 17, 839–856; [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]; b) Gates KS, Chem. Res. Toxicol 2009, 22, 1747–1760; [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]; c) Groehler AS, Najjar D, Pujari SS, Sangaraju D, Tretyakova NY, Chem. Res. Toxicol 2018, 31, 885–897; [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]; d) Pujari SS, Tretyakova N, Chem. Res. Toxicol 2017, 30, 434–452. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- [13].a) Watson JD, Crick FHC, Nature 1953, 171, 737–738; [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]; b) Boysen G, Pachkowski BF, Nakamura J, Swenberg JA, Mutat. Res 2009, 678, 76–94. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- [14].a) Tudek B, Boiteux S, Laval J, Nucleic Acids Res. 1992, 20, 3079–3084; [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]; b) Boiteux S, Laval J, Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun 1983, 110, 552–558; [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]; c) Asagoshi K, Terato H, Ohyama Y, Ide H, J. Biol. Chem 2002, 277, 14589–14597; [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]; d) Christov PP, Yamanaka K, Choi JY, Takata K, Wood RD, Guengerich FP, Lloyd RS, Rizzo CJ, Chem. Res. Toxicol 2012, 25, 1652–1661. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- [15].Evans MD, Dizdaroglu M, Cooke MS, Mutat. Res 2004, 567, 1–61. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- [16].Smela ME, Hamm ML, Henderson PT, Harris CM, Harris TM, Essigmann JM, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2002, 99, 6655–6660. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- [17].a) Greenberg MM, Acc. Chem. Res 2012, 45, 588–597; [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]; ) Dizdaroglu M, Kirkali G, Jaruga P, Free. Radic. Biol. Med 2008, 45, 1610–1621. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- [18].a) Vartanian V, Minko IG, Chawanthayatham S, Egner PA, Lin YC, Earley LF, Makar R, Eng JR, Camp MT, Li L, Stone MP, Lasarev MR, Groopman JD, Croy RG, Essigmann JM, McCullough AK, Lloyd RS, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2017, 114, 4207–4212; [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]; b) Hazra TK, Izumi T, Boldogh I, Imhoff B, Kow YW, Jaruga P, Dizdaroglu M, Mitra S, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2002, 99, 3523–3528; [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]; c) Hazra TK, Kow YW, Hatahet Z, Imhoff B, Boldogh I, Mokkapati SK, Mitra S, Izumi T, J. Biol. Chem 2002, 277, 30417–30420. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- [19].Singer B, Biochemistry 1972, 11, 3939–3947. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- [20].a) Brown KL, Deng JZ, Iyer RS, Iyer LG, Voehler MW, Stone MP, Harris CM, Harris TM, J. Am. Chem. Soc 2006, 128, 15188–15199; [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]; b) Christov PP, Son K-J, Rizzo CJ, Chem. Res. Toxicol 2014, 27, 1610–1618; [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]; c) Christov PP, Brown KL, Kozekov ID, Stone MP, Harris TM, Rizzo CJ, Chem. Res. Toxicol 2008, 21, 2324–2333. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- [21].Elfarra AA, Krause RJ, Selzer RR, Toxicology 1996, 113, 23–30. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- [22].Gruppi F, Hejazi L, Christov PP, Krishnamachari S, Turesky RJ, Rizzo CJ, Chem. Res. Toxicol 2015, 28, 1850–1860. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- [23].a) Graziewicz MA, Zastawny TH, Oliński R, Speina E, Siedlecki J, Tudek B, Free. Radic. Biol. Med 2000, 28, 75–83; [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]; b) Grąziewicz M-A, Zastawny TH, Oliński R, Tudek B, Mutat. Res 1999, 434, 41–52; [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]; c) Tudek B, Graziewicz M, Kazanova O, Zastawny TH, Obtułowicz T, Laval J, Acta. Biochim. Pol 1999, 46, 785–799; [PubMed] [Google Scholar]; d) Tudek B, J. Biochem. Mol. Biol 2003, 36, 12–19. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- [24].a) McMahon G, Davis EF, Huber LJ, Kim Y, Wogan GN, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 1990, 87, 1104–1108; [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]; b) Chang YJ, Mathews C, Mangold K, Marien K, Hendricks J, Bailey G, Mol. Carcinog 1991, 4, 112–119; [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]; c) Hsu IC, Metcalf RA, Sun T, Welsh JA, Wang NJ, Harris CC, Nature 1991, 350, 427–248; [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]; d) Bressac B, Kew M, Wands J, Ozturk M, Nature 1991, 350, 429–431. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Associated Data
This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.










