PARP-1 Is a Potential Marker of Retinal Photooxidation and a Key Signal Regulator in Retinal Light Injury

Li, Xun; Zhang, ZiYuan; Fan, Bin; Li, YuLin; Song, DeJuan; Li, Guang-Yu

doi:https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/6881322

Oxidative Medicine and Cellular Longevity

On this page

Abstract Introduction Methods Conclusions Conflicts of Interest Authors’ Contributions Acknowledgments References Copyright Related Articles

Special Issue

Targeting Molecular Mediators of Oxidative Stress for Neurolongevity and Neuroprotection

View this Special Issue

Review Article | Open Access

Volume 2022 | Article ID 6881322 | https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/6881322

PARP-1 Is a Potential Marker of Retinal Photooxidation and a Key Signal Regulator in Retinal Light Injury

Xun Li,¹ZiYuan Zhang,²Bin Fan,²YuLin Li,²DeJuan Song,²and Guang-Yu Li¹

Academic Editor: Hareram Birla

Received19 Jun 2022

Revised10 Aug 2022

Accepted24 Aug 2022

Published10 Sept 2022

Abstract

Advancements in technology have resulted in increasing concerns over the safety of eye exposure to light illumination, since prolonged exposure to intensive visible light, especially to short-wavelength light in the visible spectrum, can cause photochemical damage to the retina through a photooxidation-triggered cascade reaction. Poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase-1 (PARP-1) is the ribozyme responsible for repairing DNA damage. When damage to DNA occurs, including nicks and breaks, PARP-1 is rapidly activated, synthesizing a large amount of PAR and recruiting other nuclear factors to repair the damaged DNA. However, retinal photochemical damage may lead to the overactivation of PARP-1, triggering PARP-dependent cell death, including parthanatos, necroptosis, and autophagy. In this review, we retrieved targeted articles with the keywords such as “PARP-1,” “photoreceptor,” “retinal light damage,” and “photooxidation” from databases and summarized the molecular mechanisms involved in retinal photooxidation, PARP activation, and DNA repair to clarify the key regulatory role of PARP-1 in retinal light injury and to determine whether PARP-1 may be a potential marker in response to retinal photooxidation. The highly sensitive detection of PARP-1 activity may facilitate early evaluation of the effects of light on the retina, which will provide an evidentiary basis for the future assessment of the safety of light illumination from optoelectronic products and medical devices.

1. Introduction

The retina is responsible for sensing light signals from the outside world and converting these light signals into bioelectrical signals to form vision [1]. The frequency and duration of human eye exposure to excessive, strong, artificial lighting has gradually increased, including prolonged exposure to mobile phone screens, televisions, computers, excessive indoor illumination, and ophthalmic examinations with intensive lighting [2]. Although certain compensatory mechanisms exist in the retina to autorepair such damage, prolonged exposure to intensive light can cause acute or chronic retinal injury [3]. Therefore, how to effectively and accurately evaluate the safety of light illumination to the eye, especially to the retina, is still a necessary and urgent scientific issue.

Light-induced damage to the retina can be classified as photothermal damage and photochemical damage [4]. High-power light irradiation is able to cause a rapid increase in the temperature of local retinal tissue and can lead to irreversible retinal photothermal damage due to the protein denaturation and the inactivation of enzymes if the temperature rises more than 10°C above the basal level [5–8]. However, the light intensity that causes retinal photochemical damage is near the level of light illumination used in daily life; thus, retinal damage caused by photochemical reactions has become a growing concern [9]. Photooxidation is the initial molecular step that triggers the retinal photochemical damage via the oxidative cascade reactions and may even further activate the death signals in retinal cells [10]. In vivo studies have shown that retinal photochemical damage predominantly occurs in the outer layers of the retina, including the photoreceptor and retinal pigment epithelial (RPE) layers [11–13], as a large number of photosensitive substances, such as rhodopsin, melanin, and all-trans-retinal, are present in the cells located in these regions of the eye [14]. Energy from only an individual photon can be transferred to these photoactive groups, resulting in the modification of molecular structures and photooxidation [15].

Currently, the techniques most widely used to evaluate retinal light damage in vitro and in vivo assess three factors. First, retinal structural changes are determined using retinal slice hematoxylin and eosin (HE) staining, transparent electron microscope observation of ultrastructure, in vivo imaging optical coherence tomograms (SD-OCT), and autofluorescence (AF). Second, retinal functional changes are assessed via electroretinography, multifocal electroretinogram, visual field, or microvisual field. Third, the protein and mRNA levels of specific molecular markers retinal damage are measured. Light-induced changes in molecular levels may precede structural and functional changes, which may be an early indicator of the hazards of light illumination and retinal light damage and may be used a marker for early detection and assessment of these hazards [10]. Studies have shown that some markers, such as heme oxygenase 1 (HO-1) [16], 8-oxoG (related to oxidative stresse damage), caspase 3 [17], caspase 8 [18] (caspase-dependent apoptotic markers), as well as in situ terminal deoxynucleotidyl transferase dUTP nick-end labeling (TUNEL) [19], and rhodopsin levels, may indicate the severity of retinal light damage; however, whether these molecular markers are suitable for accurate and rapid assessment of retinal light damage requires further investigation.

Poly(ADP-ribose) (PAR) polymerase-1 (PARP-1) is a ribozyme that is involved in repairing DNA damage [20]. Studies have shown that PARP-1 is rapidly activated when DNA is damaged, and activated PARP-1 can synthesize a large amount of PAR to facilitate the recruitment of nuclear factors for DNA repair [21]. We and other teams have shown that excessive light radiation can lead to the significant upregulation of PARP-1 in vivo and in vitro, indicating that light radiation may cause nuclear DNA damage in retinal cells [22–24]. However, the overactivation of PARP-1 may lead to the exhaustion of cellular energy or trigger PARP-1-dependent death [25, 26]. Multiple lines of evidence support the notion that the inhibition of PARP-1 activity or knockdown of PARP-1 may play a key protective role against light damage in photoreceptor cells [27, 28]. Therefore, in this review, we summarize the molecular mechanisms of retinal photooxidation, PARP activation, and DNA repair and illustrate the connections among them. We determine the possibility of using PARP-1 as a standard marker for response to retinal light damage and elucidate the key regulatory role of PARP-1 in light-induced retinal injury. Highly sensitive and accurate detection of PARP-1 activity may facilitate the rapid assessment of the effects of light on the retina and evaluation of the safety of light illumination from various optoelectronic products and medical devices.

2. Methods

The MEDLINE, Scopus, and Wiley online databases were searched using multiple combinations of the keywords “PARP-1,” “photoreceptor,” “retinal light damage,” “photooxidation,” “parthanatos,” “necroptosis,” “autophagy,” and “mTOR.” Articles published between January 1, 1990 and January 1, 2022 were retrieved; articles without an available English translation were excluded.

3. ADP Ribosylation and PARP-1

ADP ribosylation is a reversible posttranslational modification (PTM) that covalently links one or more ADP ribose unit(s) to a target protein using β-nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide (β-NAD⁺) as a donor [29]. This modification is mediated by PARP family proteins, and the target protein can be modified by a single ADP ribose unit or by a polymer chain composed of multiple ADP ribose units [30]. The modification is classified as mono ADP ribosylation or poly ADP ribosylation, according to the amount of ADP ribose added to the target protein [31]. In vitro studies have shown that the modification of poly ADP ribosylation can contain up to 200 ADP ribosomes, including linear chains and branched chains [32]. ADP ribosylation can cause functional changes in the modified protein or can serve as a scaffold molecule to recruit other proteins to perform their functions after the protein is modified [33, 34]. Poly ADP ribosylation can regulate a variety of cellular processes, including cell division, apoptosis, chromatin structure regulation, transcription, and protein degradation [35].

The PARP family of proteins is responsible for catalyzing the ADP ribosylation modification [36]. The family consists of 17 members, and the catalytic domains of all members contain a classical conservative sequence H-Y-E, in which histidine and tyrosine are necessary for binding NAD⁺, while glutamic acid is related to catalytic activity [37]. According to the catalytic activity, the members can be classified into mono (ADP ribosyl) transferases (MARTS), poly(ADP ribosyl) transferases (PARTS), and inactive enzymes. MARTS include PARP-3, PARP-4, PARP-6, PARP-10, PARP-14, PARP-15, and PARP-16; PARTS include PARP-1, PARP-2, PARP-5a, and PARP-5b; and PARP-9 and PARP-13 do not have catalytic activity [38].

PARP-1 was the first to be discovered, and it is also the most well-studied member of the PARP family. PARP-1 can uniquely catalyze ADPr residues to form long- branched chains of poly-ADPr polymers (PARylation) [20]. The human PARP-1 gene consists of 23 exons and is located on chromosome 1q42.12. The full-length PARP-1 protein is composed of 1,014 aa and has a molecular weight of approximately 116 kDa [39]. The structure of PARP-1 is composed of three functional domains: (1) an N-terminal DNA binding domain, containing three zinc finger motifs (Zn1-3) and a nuclear localization sequence (NLS), which can identify DNA double-stranded break and single-stranded breaks; (2) a central BRCA1 C-terminal (BRCT), which is an automodification domain that mediates protein-protein interactions; and (3) a C-terminal catalytic domain containing a tryptophan-glycine-arginine–rich domain (WGR) and PARP featured motifs, which is the NAD+ binding site required for PAR synthesis [40] (Figure 1). As a ribozyme, PARP-1 not only participates in DNA damage repair but is also involved in various biological functions, such as DNA replication, transcription regulation, cell cycle modulation, inflammation, differentiation, aging, and RNA processing [20].

Figure 1

Three main domains of PARP-1 protein: (1) an N-terminal DNA binding domain, containing three zinc finger motifs (Zn1-3) and a nuclear localization sequence (NLS) that can identify DNA double- and single-stranded breaks; (2) a central BRCA1 C-terminal (BRCT), which is mainly for auto-modification; and (3) a C-terminal catalytic domain containing a tryptophan-glycine-arginine–rich domain (WGR) and PARP featured motifs, which is the binding site of the nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide (NAD) required for PAR synthesis.

4. Photooxidation and PARP-1 Activation

Prolonged exposure to intense visible light, especially exposure to the short-wavelength visible light with high energy, such as blue, violet, and green light, is prone to induce retinal photochemical damage [9]. The occurrence and severity of retinal photochemical damage is positively correlated with light energy intensity and exposure duration in a dose-dependent manner. Photooxidation is the initial step that triggers retinal photochemical damage [10]. As a crucial part of the visual system, the retina contains a large number of photosensitive groups for receiving light signals [41]. Cones contain three types of opsins that are sensitive to blue light (absorption peak at 430 nm), green light (absorption peak at 540 nm), and red light (absorption peak at 570 nm). All-trans-retinal in the outer segment of photoreceptor cells participates in the visual cycle with an absorption peak at 382 nm. In addition, A2E in RPE cells is one of the components of lipofuscin and may function as a potent photosensitizer with absorption peaks at 336 and 430–439 nm. Melanin is also present in RPE cells with an absorption peak at 335 nm [42]. The high energy carried by the photons of short-wavelength light in the visible light spectrum can trigger the orbital transition of electrons or break chemical bonds, resulting in modifications of molecular structures, once absorbed by the photosensitive groups of the retina [43]. The photon energy transferred to these photosensitive molecules causes the electron orbital transition of oxygen to generate singlet oxygen (1O²), which can react with other molecules to break their chemical bonds and further generate superoxide radicals (O^2⋅−), hydrogen peroxide (H₂O₂), hydroxyl radicals (·OH), and other reactive oxygen species (ROS) [44]. This process is called photooxidation [45].

Excessive light irradiation can induce the production of a large amount of ROS in the retina. However, the imbalance between excessive accumulation of ROS and the ability of antioxidant defense systems to combat it may result in oxidative-stress damage, which can transduce the oxidative damage to cellular macromolecules, such as proteins, lipids, and DNA [46]. Notably, nitric oxide can penetrate the nuclear membrane and cause oxidative damage to DNA [47]. The bases, nucleotides, and single and double strands of nuclear DNA are all targets of ROS. Oxidative damage to DNA includes the modification of bases and the breaking of chemical bonds. Excessive ROS can even lead to structural modification of the four DNA bases (adenine, cytosine, guanine, and thymine). As these structures are modified, normal base pairing is disrupted. Oxidative damage to bases can cause base misincorporation, mismatches, and substitutions, ultimately leading to genetic mutations [48]. Guanine is the most easily oxidized DNA base because of its low oxidation potential, and the most common oxidized form is 8-oxo-2-deoxyguanosine (8-oxoG) [49]. The major oxidized forms of the other three DNA bases are 8-oxo-2-deoxyadenosine (8-oxoA, the oxidation product of adenine), thymidinediol (the oxidation product of thymine), and 5-hydroxy-2-deoxycytidine (the oxidation product of cytosine) [50]. Oxidative damage can also break the hydrogen bonds between nucleotides, resulting in DNA single- or double-strand breaks or DNA gaps [51]. Free radicals then bind a hydrogen atom from the pentose of DNA to form a free radical with an unpaired electron at the C4 position, which in turn causes a break in the DNA chain at the β-position [52]. O² can also decompose nucleotides, especially guanylate [53]. After oxidative damage, DNA may undergo fragmentation, mutation, and changes in thermal stability, which markedly affects gene transcription and translation [54].

As a ribozyme, PARP-1 is responsible for repairing damaged DNA. The DNA damage such as DNA alkylation, strand gaps, and breaks can rapidly lead to the activation of PARP-1 [55, 56]. The catalytic activity of PARP-1 depends on its interaction with damaged DNA. As PARP-1 binds to DNA strand breaks, the PARP-1 activity increases and the resulting PAR synthesis is more than 500-fold higher than at basal levels [57]. The automodification of PARP-1 in response to DNA damage is crucial for rapid DNA repair and recruitment of nuclear factors to DNA injury sites [58–61]. In light-induced retinal damage, many studies have shown that PARP-1 responds rapidly and the expression level of PARP-1 increases significantly. Lara et al. found that exposure to white light (2200 lux, 24 hours) significantly increased the number of TUNEL-positive cells in the outer nuclear layer of the rat retina, accompanied by a significant increase in PARP-1 expression, while treatment with the antioxidant EGCG significantly mitigated this retinal light damage [62]. Moreover, our team showed that exposure to visible light markedly induced oxidative-stress damage in retinal ganglion cell 5 (RGC-5) cells in vitro, accompanied by a significant increase in the expression of PARP-1, and the PARP-1 inhibitor NU-1025 significantly protected RGC-5 cells from light damage [23]. Additionally, Liu et al. confirmed that visible light irradiation significantly induced excessive production of intracellular ROS, decreased the ratio of reduced/oxidized glutathione (GSH/GSSG), and overexpressed PARP-1 in cultured 661W cells in vitro [27]. Lv et al. demonstrated that exposure to light for 12 hours resulted in significant structural damage of the inner nuclear layer (INL) and ganglion cell layer (GCL) in mouse retinas and that this light exposure caused a significant upregulation of PARP-1 in a time-dependent manner [24]. Thus, these studies indicate that photooxidation may result in the damage of nuclear DNA in retinal cells, while the ribozyme PARP-1 may be rapidly activated by damaged DNA and participates in the repair of the DNA damage (Figure 2).

5. Role of PARP-1 in DNA Repair

Often, the damaged DNA sites are on only one strand, which are referred to as single-strand breaks (SSBs). There are many types of SSBs including breaks of the DNA backbone with intact base pairs, abasic sites caused by base (pyrimidine/purine) deletion, and nucleotide deletion. Since repair of SSBs can be guided by genetic information from the complementary strand, SSBs are usually easily mended [63]. However, a damaged site at the same position on both strands of DNA at the same time results in a double-strand break (DSB). DSBs are a more severe type of DNA damage and require the activation of special signaling pathways, such as the homologous recombination (HR) or nonhomologous end joining (NHEJ) [64].

PARP-1 can rapidly identify DNA damage through zinc finger structures [65, 66]. Two of the single zinc fingers (Zn1 and Zn2) of human PARP-1 can form complexes with nucleotide bases exposed from on DNA double-strand gaps through a loop structure connecting with two β-strands [66]. In addition, zinc fingers can also identify the continuity of nucleotide bases and phosphate backbones through a “backbone grasping” mechanism [67]. Thus, PARP-1 is highly sensitive to DNA damage. Once identified DNA free ends caused by single- or double-stranded DNA gaps are sensed, PARP-1 can rapidly bind SSBs and DSBs with its N-terminal DNA binding domain. The binding of DNA gaps triggers a conformational transformation exposing the enzymatic site of PARP-1, resulting in PARP-1 activation and PARylation [56] (Figure 3). This PARylation response is very rapid; upon activation of PARP-1, intranuclear PAR levels can rise as much as 500-fold above baseline, consuming up to 90% of intracellular NAD⁺ [57]. Long or branched PARs on PARP-1 and other protein substrates serve as scaffolds for the recruitment of DNA repairing enzymes, facilitating the localization of repairing factors to DNA damaged sites [68]. For instance, X-ray repair cross-complementary protein 1 (XRCC1) is recruited by PAR chains and is a key scaffolding protein for the assembly and activation of DNA base excision repair machinery [69]. In the case of DSBs, the chromatin surrounding a break is rapidly and transiently PARylated to recruit the nucleosome remodeling and deacetylase (NuRD) complex, which can further result in ATP-dependent chromatin remodeling, histone deacetylation, and the recruitment of DNA repairing factors [70]. PAR at DSB lesions can also rapidly recruit meiotic recombination 11 (MRE11) to detect DSBs via HR or NHEJ, causing the halting of the cell cycle and the activation of downstream repair factors [70]. PARylation of chromatin-associated PARP-1 with negative charges causes chromatin decondensation and changes chromatin into an open conformation that facilitates DNA repair [71]. Furthermore, in alternative NHEJ pathways, PARylation caused by PARP-1 interacting with DSB ends leads to the recruitment of repairing proteins, DNA ligase III/XRCC1, and polynucleotide kinase phosphatase (PNKP) [72, 73]. PARylation modification at DNA damage sites and protein targets is highly dynamic, since PARylation can be rapidly degraded with half-lives ranging from 40 seconds to 6 minutes [74]. The degrading enzymes of PAR include poly(ADP-ribose) glycohydrolase (PARG), Nudix hydrolase 9 (NUDT9) and NUDT16, terminal ADP-ribose protein glycohydrolase 1 (TARG1), MacroD1, and MacroD2, which all contain the domain recognizing PAR and ADP-ribose [75–77]. PARG, as the major de-PARylation enzyme that localizes to the nucleus, can hydrolyze ribose-ribose bonds between ADP-ribose units [75], while NUDT9 and NUDT16 may hydrolyze phosphodiester bonds between ADP-ribose moieties and proteins [76, 77]. Removal of a terminal ADP-ribose is regarded as a rate-limiting step in PAR degradation, and TARG1, MacroD1, and MacroD2 may hydrolyze PARylation by cleaving a glutamate-banded ADP-ribose [75]. Accumulating evidence supports the important role of de-PARylation in DNA repair, however, the detailed mechanism of PARylation needs to be further elucidated.

When the retina suffers from photochemical damage, photooxidation is triggered and causes excessive accumulation of ROS within the retina, resulting in DNA damage of the outer layers of retinal cells. PARP-1 is then activated rapidly and promotes the repair of damaged DNA, to a certain extent, through PARylation. However, if the DNA damage is severe, PARP-1 will be overactivated, leading to cellular energy depletion and ultimately triggering PARP-1-dependent death.

6. PARP-1 Involvement in Signaling Pathways and PARP-Dependent Cell Death

6.1. Parthanatos

Parthanatos is a caspase-independent cell death characterized by the activation of PARP-1 and the nuclear translocation of apoptosis-inducing factor (AIF) [78]. Increasing evidence suggests that the parthanatos plays a crucial role in the progression of various neurodegenerative diseases [79, 80]. When death stimuli result in extensive DNA damage in the nucleus, PARP-1 is overactivated and synthesizes a large amount of PAR, which consumes massive intracellular NAD⁺ and ATP, eventually leading to energy exhaustion and cell death [81]. In addition, the intracellular accumulation of PAR may increase mitochondrial outer membrane permeabilization (MOMP), triggering the release of AIF from mitochondria [82]. AIF is a flavoprotein synthesized in the cytosol with a full-length precursor of 67 kDa (pre-AIF) [78]. The 67 kDa AIF is guided by its mitochondrial localization sequence (MLS) and translocates into the mitochondrial intermembrane space, where it is cleaved into the mature form 62 kDa AIF and participates in mitochondrial energy synthesis. Under death stimuli, 62 kDa AIF is hydrolyzed into the 57 kDa soluble form, tAIF, and released from the mitochondria into the cytosol. In the cytosol, tAIF can further translocate into the nucleus and interact with histone H2AX and endonucleases/DNases, causing chromatin condensation, large-scale DNA fragmentation, and cell death [83, 84] (Figure 4). Our recent study showed that exposure to visible light significantly induced the upregulated expression of PARP-1 in photoreceptor cells (661 W) in vitro, accompanied by the nuclear translocation of AIF, and knock down of PARP-1 with lentivirus-mediated shRNA significantly blocked nuclear translocation of AIF, thus protecting photoreceptor cells from light damage [22]. Lv et al. found that exposure to light for 12 h resulted in significant structural damage of the inner nuclear layer (INL) and ganglion cell layer (GCL) of the mouse retina and that light irradiation significantly increased the level of PARP-1 in a time-dependent manner. In addition, they found that light exposure also caused the activation of the PARP-1/AIF signaling pathway in RGC-5 cells (retinal precursor neurons) cultured in vitro and that the PARP inhibitor NU1025 significantly attenuated the light-induced death of RGC-5 cells [24].

6.2. Necroptosis

Necroptosis, a form of programmed cell death, is initiated by tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF-α) signaling and mediated by receptor-interacting protein kinase 1 (RIPK1) and RIPK3 [85], though it is caspase-independent [86] and can be blocked by necrostatin-1 (Nec-1) [87]. Studies have shown that PARP-1 is involved in TNF-α-induced necroptosis. PARP-1 can regulate necroptosis directly by interacting with RIP kinases or indirectly by generating PAR, which in turn can target necroptosic effectors [88]. The activity of PARP-1 is also influenced by upstream RIP kinases, and its activity is significantly increased during TNF-α-induced necroptosis, while inhibition of PARP-1 blocks necroptosis, suggesting that PARP-1 plays an active role in necroptosis [89]. Xu et al. showed that the activation of PARP-1 was involved in glutamate-induced necroptosis in HT-22 cells, and necrostatin-1, an inhibitor of necroptosis, could reduce the activity of PARP-1 [90]. Hitomi et al. demonstrated that PARP-2 played a key role in necroptosis in L929 cells induced by TNF-α and a caspase inhibitor (zVAD-fmk), while knockout of PARP-2 significantly inhibited necroptosis [91]. However, the in vitro evidence from Sosna et al. suggested that TNF-α-induced necroptosis and PARP-1 signaling represent two distinct and independent programmed necroptosis pathways [92]. Although studies have shown that PARP-1 is closely related to the necroptosis pathway, the exact molecular mechanism of this interaction remains to be elucidated. In addition, there is a lack of in vivo experimental evidence determining whether PARP-1 is directly or indirectly involved in necroptosis regulation, particularly clarifying the specific crosstalk between PARP-1 and TNF-α or RIP.

6.3. Autophagy

Autophagy is a programmed self-degradation process used to maintain cellular energy homeostasis. By degrading damaged or dysfunctional organelles, cells may recycle amino acids, lipids, and other molecules via autophagy [93]. The activation of autophagy is closely related to intracellular energy status and is regulated by the mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR)/AMP-activated protein kinase (AMPK) signaling pathway [94]. For example, mTOR may negatively regulate the activation of autophagy. Mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) remains active under conditions where there is sufficient nutrient supply to keep autophagy “off,” while mTOR is significantly inhibited as cells are starved, which in turn results in the activation of autophagy to promote energy production [95]. AMPK is able to sense the changes of cellular ATP/AMP and regulate autophagy activation through its downstream signal, mTOR [96]. The massive synthesis of PAR by the overactivation of PARP-1 leads to NAD⁺ and ATP depletion as well as significant increases in intracellular AMP, which remarkably influence the activation of autophagy through the interaction between the AMPK/mTOR signaling pathways [97] (Figure 5). Chen et al. showed that PARP-1 promotes autophagy in CNE-2 cells after ionizing radiation by activating AMPK and inhibiting mTOR [98]. Huang et al. showed that, in addition to causing ATP consumption, the overactivation of PARP-1 also promotes autophagy through the liver kinase B1 (LKB1)-AMPK-mTOR pathway, thereby enhancing cell survival in oxidative stress-induced DNA damage [99]. Excessive light exposure can not only cause an increase in the level of PARP-1 but also in the activation of mTOR in photoreceptors [22, 100]. Pan et al. demonstrated that PARP-1 knockdown reduced the phosphorylation level of mTOR in photoreceptors in vitro, while knockdown of mTOR also resulted in a significant decrease in the levels of PARP-1 and PAR and that sirtuin 1 (SIRT1) may be the signal hub between PARP-1 and the mTOR signaling pathway [22]. However, as the underlying modulator of the interaction between mTOR and PARP-1, the role of SIRT-1 in regulating photodamage-induced autophagy still needs to be further elucidated.

7. Conclusions and Perspectives

Prolonged exposure to intense visible light, especially short-wavelength light such as blue light, may cause retinal photochemical damage, which is predominantly caused by intracellular cascade reactions triggered by photooxidation [9]. Intracellular oxidative stress damage can cause DNA breaks in the nucleus, in turn triggering the activation of the ribozyme, PARP-1, for DNA repair [99]. Therefore, determination of PARP-1 levels may indirectly reflect retinal light damage. Since PARP-1 is highly sensitive to DNA damage, it can be rapidly activated and is significantly upregulated once DNA damage occurs [101], ultimately triggering PARP-1-dependent cell death (Figure 6). PARP-1 has better stability and sensitivity compared with other oxidative stress markers for evaluating retinal light damage, such as HO-1 or 8-oxoG. Experimental evidence for assessing the safety of light illumination on the retina may be provided by determining the level of PARP-1 after light irradiation, using in vitro and in vivo experimental models and may also be indicative of light illumination safety in daily work.

Figure 6

Schematic diagram illustrating that PARP-1 may be a key signal regulator in retinal light injury. Prolonged exposure to intense visible light may cause retinal photochemical damage that is triggered by photooxidation. Oxidative stress damage can cause nuclear DNA breaks and lead to rapid and significant activation of PARP-1 to repair damaged DNA. Additionally, inhibition or knockdown of PARP-1 can play a crucial protective role against light damage in the outer layers of retinal cells.

The detection of PARP-1 activity is crucial as PARP-1 may serve as a potential biomarker. Frequently used techniques for detecting PARP-1 include enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA), biotin labeling, immunoblotting, fluorescence, and colorimetry [102–106]. Recently, novel methods have been developed for more efficient detection of PARP-1 activity. Liu et al. indicated a potential tool for PARP-1 activity detection based on the large impact of PARP-1 on the diffusion flux of ferricyanide in anodic aluminum oxide (AAO) nanochannels [107]. Zhou et al. proposed a method to linearly detect PARP-1 activity based on host–guest recognition using a renewable electrochemical (EC) sensor modified with mono-(6-mercapto-6-deoxy)-beta-cyclodextrin on the electrode surface to avoid unspecific adsorption and improve detection accuracy [108]. Liu et al. developed an ultrasensitive EC detection for PARP-1 activity on basis of the electrostatic interaction of PAR and polyaniline [109]. Wang et al. designed a label-free photoelectrochemical (PEC) biosensor, also based on the electrostatic interaction of PAR and another chemical compound, poly [9,9-bis(6-N, N, N-trimethylammonium) hexyl] fluorenylene phenylene for detection of PARP-1 activity [110]. In addition, Xu et al. further developed a dual-mode (both EC and PEC), label-free strategy for the detection of PARP-1 activity through gold nanocluster (AuNCs). The AuNCs adsorbed by PAR produced both strong fluorescence and chemiluminescence by catalyzing the luminol-H₂O₂ system, which provided higher sensitivity and stability, a wider linear range, and better biocompatibility [111]. In conclusion, these highly sensitive methods for detecting PARP-1 activity may facilitate rapid assessment of retinal light damage, providing an evidentiary basis for future evaluation of the safety of light illumination produced by optoelectronic products and medical devices.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Authors’ Contributions

Xun Li and Guang-Yu Li prepared the first draft of the manuscript. All authors edited the review article. Guang-Yu Li approved the submission of the manuscript. All authors contributed to the writing and editing and agreed to the submission of the manuscript.

Acknowledgments

The study was funded by the Joint Project Between Suzhou Xuanjia Photoelectric Technology Co., Ltd. and Ji Lin University, the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Nos. 82171053 and 81570864), and the Natural Science Foundation of Jilin Province (Nos. 20200801043GH, 20220101321JC, and 20190201083JC).

References

M. Hoon, H. Okawa, L. Della Santina, and R. O. L. Wong, “Functional architecture of the retina: development and disease,” Progress in Retinal and Eye Research, vol. 42, pp. 44–84, 2014.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
J. Shen and J. Tower, “Effects of light on aging and longevity,” Ageing Research Reviews, vol. 53, p. 100913, 2019.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
P. N. Youssef, N. Sheibani, and D. M. Albert, “Retinal light toxicity,” Eye, vol. 25, no. 1, pp. 1–14, 2011.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
R. D. Glickman, “Phototoxicity to the retina: mechanisms of damage,” International Journal of Toxicology, vol. 21, no. 6, pp. 473–490, 2002.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. L. Denton, G. D. Noojin, B. G. Gamboa, E. M. Ahmed, and B. A. Rockwell, “Photothermal damage is correlated to the delivery rate of time-integrated temperature,” in Conference on Optical Interactions with Tissue and Cells XXVII, San Francisco, CA, 2016.
View at: Google Scholar
R. Birngruber, F. Hillenkamp, and V. P. Gabel, “Theoretical investigations of laser thermal retinal injury,” Health Physics, vol. 48, no. 6, pp. 781–796, 1985.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
F. C. Henriques, “Studies of thermal injury; the predictability and the significance of thermally induced rate processes leading to irreversible epidermal injury,” Archives of Pathology, vol. 43, no. 5, pp. 489–502, 1947.
View at: Google Scholar
R. Birngruber, V. P. Gabel, and F. Hillenkamp, “Experimental studies of laser thermal retinal injury,” Health Physics, vol. 44, no. 5, pp. 519–531, 1983.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
J. Wu, S. Seregard, and P. V. Algvere, “Photochemical damage of the retina,” Survey of Ophthalmology, vol. 51, no. 5, pp. 461–481, 2006.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
D. T. Organisciak and D. K. Vaughan, “Retinal light damage: mechanisms and protection,” Progress in Retinal and Eye Research, vol. 29, no. 2, pp. 113–134, 2010.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
W. T. Ham Jr., J. J. Ruffolo, H. A. Mueller, A. M. Clarke, and M. E. Moon, “Histologic analysis of photochemical lesions produced in rhesus retina by short-wave-length light,” Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science, vol. 17, no. 10, pp. 1029–1035, 1978.
View at: Google Scholar
T. Lawwill, “Effects of prolonged exposure of rabbit retina to low-intensity light,” Investigative Ophthalmology, vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 45–51, 1973.
View at: Google Scholar
S. M. Sykes, Robison WG Jr, M. Waxler, and T. Kuwabara, “Damage to the monkey retina by broad-spectrum fluorescent light,” Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science, vol. 20, no. 4, pp. 425–434, 1981.
View at: Google Scholar
J. R. Sparrow, Y. Wu, C. Y. Kim, and J. Zhou, “Phospholipid meets all- trans -retinal: the making of RPE bisretinoids,” Journal of Lipid Research, vol. 51, no. 2, pp. 247–261, 2010.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
J. Marshall, “Thermal and mechanical mechanisms in laser damage to the retina,” Investigative Ophthalmology, vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 97–115, 1970.
View at: Google Scholar
R. K. Kutty, G. Kutty, B. Wiggert, G. J. Chader, R. M. Darrow, and D. T. Organisciak, “Induction of heme oxygenase 1 in the retina by intense visible light: suppression by the antioxidant dimethylthiourea,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, vol. 92, no. 4, pp. 1177–1181, 1995.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
H. Tomita, Y. Kotake, and R. E. Anderson, “Mechanism of protection from light-induced retinal degeneration by the synthetic antioxidant phenyl-N-tert-butylnitrone,” Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science, vol. 46, no. 2, pp. 427–434, 2005.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
T. R. Dunkern, G. Fritz, and B. Kaina, “Ultraviolet light-induced DNA damage triggers apoptosis in nucleotide excision repair-deficient cells via Bcl-2 decline and caspase-3/-8 activation,” Oncogene, vol. 20, no. 42, pp. 6026–6038, 2001.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
J. Vicente-Tejedor, M. Marchena, L. Ramírez et al., “Removal of the blue component of light significantly decreases retinal damage after high intensity exposure,” PLoS One, vol. 13, no. 3, article e0194218, 2018.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
T. Jubin, A. Kadam, M. Jariwala et al., “The PARP family: insights into functional aspects of poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase-1 in cell growth and survival,” Cell Proliferation, vol. 49, no. 4, pp. 421–437, 2016.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
E. E. Alemasova and O. I. Lavrik, “Poly(ADP-ribosyl)ation by PARP1: reaction mechanism and regulatory proteins,” Nucleic Acids Research, vol. 47, no. 8, pp. 3811–3827, 2019.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
Y. R. Pan, J. Y. Song, B. Fan et al., “mTOR may interact with PARP-1 to regulate visible light-induced parthanatos in photoreceptors,” Cell Communication and Signaling: CCS, vol. 18, no. 1, p. 27, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
G. Y. Li, B. Fan, and T. H. Ma, “Visible light may directly induce nuclear DNA damage triggering the death pathway in RGC-5 cells,” Molecular Vision, vol. 17, pp. 3279–3289, 2011.
View at: Google Scholar
J. Lv and Y. Xing, “Down-regulation of Fra-2 alleviates light-induced retina damage by inhibiting the PARP-1/AIF pathway,” International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Pathology, vol. 11, no. 8, pp. 4221–4229, 2018.
View at: Google Scholar
S. W. Yu, H. Wang, M. F. Poitras et al., “Mediation of poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase-1-dependent cell death by apoptosis-inducing factor,” Science, vol. 297, no. 5579, pp. 259–263, 2002.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
J. C. Ame, C. Spenlehauer, and G. de Murcia, “The PARP superfamily,” BioEssays, vol. 26, no. 8, pp. 882–893, 2004.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
S. Y. Liu, J. Y. Song, B. Fan et al., “Resveratrol protects photoreceptors by blocking caspase- and PARP-dependent cell death pathways,” Free Radical Biology & Medicine, vol. 129, pp. 569–581, 2018.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
A. Sahaboglu, N. Tanimoto, J. Kaur et al., “PARP1 gene knock-out increases resistance to retinal degeneration without affecting retinal function,” PLoS One, vol. 5, no. 11, p. e15495, 2010.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
P. Poltronieri, M. Miwa, and M. Masutani, “ADP-ribosylation as post-translational modification of proteins: use of inhibitors in cancer control,” International Journal of Molecular Sciences, vol. 22, no. 19, p. 10829, 2021.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
B. Lüscher, M. Bütepage, L. Eckei, S. Krieg, P. Verheugd, and B. H. Shilton, “ADP-ribosylation, a multifaceted posttranslational modification involved in the control of cell physiology in health and disease,” Chemical Reviews, vol. 118, no. 3, pp. 1092–1136, 2018.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
B. Lüscher, I. Ahel, M. Altmeyer et al., “ADP-ribosyltransferases, an update on function and nomenclature,” The FEBS Journal, 2021.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
J. G. M. Rack, Q. Liu, V. Zorzini et al., “Mechanistic insights into the three steps of poly(ADP-ribosylation) reversal,” Nature Communications, vol. 12, no. 1, p. 4581, 2021.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
L. Palazzo, A. Mikoč, and I. Ahel, “ADP-ribosylation: new facets of an ancient modification,” The FEBS Journal, vol. 284, no. 18, pp. 2932–2946, 2017.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. Lehner, S. Rieth, E. Höllmüller et al., “Profiling of the ADP-ribosylome in living cells,” Angewandte Chemie, vol. 61, no. 18, 2022.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
T. Karlberg, M. F. Langelier, J. M. Pascal, and H. Schüler, “Structural biology of the writers, readers, and erasers in mono- and poly(ADP- ribose) mediated signaling,” Molecular Aspects of Medicine, vol. 34, no. 6, pp. 1088–1108, 2013.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
A. Z. Lu, R. Abo, Y. Ren et al., “Enabling drug discovery for the PARP protein family through the detection of mono-ADP-ribosylation,” Biochemical Pharmacology, vol. 167, pp. 97–106, 2019.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
S. Vyas, I. Matic, L. Uchima et al., “Family-wide analysis of poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase activity,” Nature Communications, vol. 5, no. 1, p. 4426, 2014.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
G. Grimaldi and D. Corda, “ADP-ribosylation and intracellular traffic: an emerging role for PARP enzymes,” Biochemical Society Transactions, vol. 47, no. 1, pp. 357–370, 2019.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
V. Schreiber, F. Dantzer, J. C. Ame, and G. de Murcia, “Poly(ADP-ribose): novel functions for an old molecule,” Nature Reviews. Molecular Cell Biology, vol. 7, no. 7, pp. 517–528, 2006.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
J. M. Pascal, “The comings and goings of PARP-1 in response to DNA damage,” DNA Repair, vol. 71, pp. 177–182, 2018.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
Y. Shichida and T. Matsuyama, “Evolution of opsins and phototransduction,” Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological Sciences, vol. 364, no. 1531, pp. 2881–2895, 2009.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
J. X. Tao, W. C. Zhou, and X. G. Zhu, “Mitochondria as potential targets and initiators of the blue light hazard to the retina,” Oxidative Medicine and Cellular Longevity, vol. 2019, Article ID 6435364, 20 pages, 2019.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
B. Fan, C. X. Zhang, J. Chi et al., “The molecular mechanism of retina light injury focusing on damage from short wavelength light,” Oxidative Medicine and Cellular Longevity, vol. 2022, Article ID 8482149, 14 pages, 2022.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. Hayyan, M. A. Hashim, and I. M. AlNashef, “Superoxide ion: generation and chemical implications,” Chemical Reviews, vol. 116, no. 5, pp. 3029–3085, 2016.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
J. J. Hunter, J. I. W. Morgan, W. H. Merigan, D. H. Sliney, J. R. Sparrow, and D. R. Williams, “The susceptibility of the retina to photochemical damage from visible light,” Progress in Retinal and Eye Research, vol. 31, no. 1, pp. 28–42, 2012.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. Boulton, M. Rozanowska, and B. Rozanowski, “Retinal photodamage,” Journal of Photochemistry and Photobiology. B, vol. 64, no. 2-3, pp. 144–161, 2001.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
S. Burney, J. L. Caulfield, J. C. Niles, J. S. Wishnok, and S. R. Tannenbaum, “The chemistry of DNA damage from nitric oxide and peroxynitrite,” Mutation Research, vol. 424, no. 1-2, pp. 37–49, 1999.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
H. Cui, Y. Kong, and H. Zhang, “Oxidative stress, mitochondrial dysfunction, and aging,” Journal of Signal Transduction, vol. 2012, Article ID 646354, 13 pages, 2012.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. Dizdaroglu, P. Jaruga, M. Birincioglu, and H. Rodriguez, “Free radical-induced damage to DNA: mechanisms and measurement1, 2,” Free Radical Biology & Medicine, vol. 32, no. 11, pp. 1102–1115, 2002.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
F. Bergeron, F. Auvré, J. P. Radicella, and J. L. Ravanat, “HO radicals induce an unexpected high proportion of tandem base lesions refractory to repair by DNA glycosylases,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, vol. 107, no. 12, pp. 5528–5533, 2010.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. Dizdaroglu and P. Jaruga, “Mechanisms of free radical-induced damage to DNA,” Free Radical Research, vol. 46, no. 4, pp. 382–419, 2012.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. S. Cooke, M. D. Evans, M. Dizdaroglu, and J. Lunec, “Oxidative DNA damage: mechanisms, mutation, and disease,” FASEB Journal, vol. 17, no. 10, pp. 1195–1214, 2003.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
J. Cadet, E. Sage, and T. Douki, “Ultraviolet radiation-mediated damage to cellular DNA,” Mutation Research-Fundamental and Molecular Mechanisms of Mutagenesis, vol. 571, no. 1-2, pp. 3–17, 2005.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
N. Chatterjee and G. C. Walker, “Mechanisms of DNA damage, repair, and mutagenesis,” Environmental and Molecular Mutagenesis, vol. 58, no. 5, pp. 235–263, 2017.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
D. Lautier, J. Lagueux, J. Thibodeau, L. Ménard, and G. G. Poirier, “Molecular and biochemical features of poly (ADP-ribose) metabolism,” Molecular and Cellular Biochemistry, vol. 122, no. 2, pp. 171–193, 1993.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
Y. Wang, W. Luo, and Y. Wang, “PARP-1 and its associated nucleases in DNA damage response,” DNA Repair, vol. 81, p. 102651, 2019.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. Y. Kim, T. Zhang, and W. L. Kraus, “Poly(ADP-ribosyl)ation by PARP-1: 'PAR-laying' NAD(+) into a nuclear signal,” Genes & Development, vol. 19, no. 17, pp. 1951–1967, 2005.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
F. Berger, C. Lau, and M. Ziegler, “Regulation of poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase 1 activity by the phosphorylation state of the nuclear NAD biosynthetic enzyme NMN adenylyl transferase 1,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, vol. 104, no. 10, pp. 3765–3770, 2007.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
H. Gao, D. L. Coyle, M. L. Meyer-Ficca et al., “Altered poly(ADP-ribose) metabolism impairs cellular responses to genotoxic stress in a hypomorphic mutant of poly(ADP-ribose) glycohydrolase,” Experimental Cell Research, vol. 313, no. 5, pp. 984–996, 2007.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
S. J. Hong, T. M. Dawson, and V. L. Dawson, “Nuclear and mitochondrial conversations in cell death: PARP-1 and AIF signaling,” Trends in Pharmacological Sciences, vol. 25, no. 5, pp. 259–264, 2004.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
A. Rancourt and M. S. Satoh, “Delocalization of nucleolar poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase-1 to the nucleoplasm and its novel link to cellular sensitivity to DNA damage,” DNA Repair, vol. 8, no. 3, pp. 286–297, 2009.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
B. L. da Silveira Andrade da Costa, R. Fawcett, G.-Y. Li, R. Safa, and N. N. Osborne, “Orally administered epigallocatechin gallate attenuates light-induced photoreceptor damage,” Brain Research Bulletin, vol. 76, no. 4, pp. 412–423, 2008.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
K. W. Caldecott, “DNA single-strand break repair,” Experimental Cell Research, vol. 329, no. 1, pp. 2–8, 2014.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
J. Her and S. F. Bunting, “How cells ensure correct repair of DNA double-strand breaks,” Journal of Biological Chemistry, vol. 293, no. 27, pp. 10502–10511, 2018.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
F. Dantzer, J. C. Amé, V. Schreiber, J. Nakamura, J. Ménissier‐de Murcia, and G. de Murcia, “Poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase-1 activation during DNA damage and repair,” DNA Repair, Pt B, p. 493, 2006.
View at: Google Scholar
O. Huambachano, F. Herrera, A. Rancourt, and M. S. Satoh, “Double-stranded DNA binding domain of poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase-1 and molecular insight into the regulation of its activity,” Journal of Biological Chemistry, vol. 286, no. 9, pp. 7149–7160, 2011.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M.-F. Langelier and J. M. Pascal, “PARP-1 mechanism for coupling DNA damage detection to poly(ADP-ribose) synthesis,” Current Opinion in Structural Biology, vol. 23, no. 1, pp. 134–143, 2013.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
A. S. Singatulina, L. Hamon, M. V. Sukhanova et al., “PARP-1 activation directs FUS to DNA damage sites to form PARG-reversible compartments enriched in damaged DNA,” Cell Reports, vol. 27, no. 6, pp. 1809–1821.e5, 2019.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
J. K. Horton, D. F. Stefanick, N. R. Gassman et al., “Preventing oxidation of cellular XRCC1 affects PARP-mediated DNA damage responses,” DNA Repair, vol. 12, no. 9, pp. 774–785, 2013.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
K. Hu, Y. Li, W. Wu et al., “ATM-dependent recruitment of BRD7 is required for transcriptional repression and DNA repair at DNA breaks flanking transcriptional active regions,” Advanced Science, vol. 7, no. 20, p. 2000157, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
T. Lebeaupin, R. Smith, S. Huet, and G. Timinszky, “Poly(ADP-Ribose)-Dependent Chromatin Remodeling in DNA Repair,” Poly(ADP-Ribose) Polymerase: Methods and Protocols, Humana Press, New York, NY, pp. 165–183, 2nd edition, 2017.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
M. Audebert, B. Salles, and P. Calsou, “Involvement of poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase-1 and XRCC1/DNA ligase III in an alternative route for DNA double-strand breaks rejoining,” Journal of Biological Chemistry, vol. 279, no. 53, pp. 55117–55126, 2004.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
N. A. Lebedeva, N. I. Rechkunova, and O. I. Lavrik, “AP-site cleavage activity of tyrosyl-DNA phosphodiesterase 1,” FEBS Letters, vol. 585, no. 4, pp. 683–686, 2011.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
W.-H. Hou, S.-H. Chen, and X. Yu, “Poly-ADP ribosylation in DNA damage response and cancer therapy,” Mutation Research-Reviews in Mutation Research, vol. 780, pp. 82–91, 2019.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
H. Schuhwerk, R. Atteya, K. Siniuk, and Z. Q. Wang, “PARPing for balance in the homeostasis of poly(ADP-ribosyl)ation,” Seminars in Cell & Developmental Biology, vol. 63, pp. 81–91, 2017.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
A. L. Perraud, B. Shen, C. A. Dunn et al., “NUDT9, a member of the nudix hydrolase family, is an evolutionarily conserved mitochondrial ADP-ribose pyrophosphatase,” Journal of Biological Chemistry, vol. 278, no. 3, pp. 1794–1801, 2003.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
C. M. Daniels, P. Thirawatananond, S. E. Ong, S. B. Gabelli, and A. K. Leung, “Nudix hydrolases degrade protein-conjugated ADP-ribose,” Scientific Reports, vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 1–12, 2016.
View at: Google Scholar
A. A. Fatokun, V. L. Dawson, and T. M. Dawson, “Parthanatos: mitochondrial-linked mechanisms and therapeutic opportunities,” British Journal of Pharmacology, vol. 171, no. 8, pp. 2000–2016, 2014.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
D. W. Summers, A. DiAntonio, and J. Milbrandt, “Mitochondrial dysfunction induces Sarm1-dependent cell death in sensory neurons,” Journal of Neuroscience, vol. 34, no. 28, pp. 9338–9350, 2014.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
H. Park, T.-I. Kam, T. M. Dawson, and V. L. Dawson, “Poly (ADP-ribose) (PAR)-dependent cell death in neurodegenerative diseases,” Cell Death Regulation in Health and Disease - Part C, Elsevier, pp. 1–29, 2020.
View at: Google Scholar
X. Luo and W. L. Kraus, “On PAR with PARP: cellular stress signaling through poly(ADP-ribose) and PARP-1,” Genes & Development, vol. 26, no. 5, pp. 417–432, 2012.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
Y. F. Wang, V. L. Dawson, and T. M. Dawson, “Poly(ADP-ribose) signals to mitochondrial AIF: a key event in parthanatos,” Experimental Neurology, vol. 218, no. 2, pp. 193–202, 2009.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
S. A. Susin, H. K. Lorenzo, N. Zamzami et al., “Molecular characterization of mitochondrial apoptosis-inducing factor,” Nature, vol. 397, no. 6718, pp. 441–446, 1999.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
H. Otera, S. Ohsakaya, Z. I. Nagaura, N. Ishihara, and K. Mihara, “Export of mitochondrial AIF in response to proapoptotic stimuli depends on processing at the intermembrane space,” EMBO Journal, vol. 24, no. 7, pp. 1375–1386, 2005.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
E. Varfolomeev and D. Vucic, “Intracellular regulation of TNF activity in health and disease,” Cytokine, vol. 101, pp. 26–32, 2018.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
W. Declercq, T. Vanden Berghe, and P. Vandenabeele, “RIP kinases at the crossroads of cell death and survival,” Cell, vol. 138, no. 2, pp. 229–232, 2009.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
A. Degterev, J. Hitomi, M. Germscheid et al., “Identification of RIP1 kinase as a specific cellular target of necrostatins,” Nature Chemical Biology, vol. 4, no. 5, pp. 313–321, 2008.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
L. Olivares-Gonzalez, S. Velasco, J. M. Millán, and R. Rodrigo, “Intravitreal administration of adalimumab delays retinal degeneration in rd10 mice,” FASEB Journal, vol. 34, no. 10, pp. 13839–13861, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
S. Jouan-Lanhouet, M. I. Arshad, C. Piquet-Pellorce et al., “TRAIL induces necroptosis involving RIPK1/RIPK3-dependent PARP-1 activation,” Cell Death and Differentiation, vol. 19, no. 12, pp. 2003–2014, 2012.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
X. S. Xu, C. C. Chua, M. Zhang et al., “The role of PARP activation in glutamate-induced necroptosis in HT-22 cells,” Brain Research, vol. 1343, pp. 206–212, 2010.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
J. I. Hitomi, D. E. Christofferson, A. Ng et al., “Identification of a molecular signaling network that regulates a cellular necrotic cell death pathway,” Cell, vol. 135, no. 7, pp. 1311–1323, 2008.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
J. Sosna, S. Voigt, S. Mathieu et al., “TNF-induced necroptosis and PARP-1-mediated necrosis represent distinct routes to programmed necrotic cell death,” Cellular and Molecular Life Sciences, vol. 71, no. 2, pp. 331–348, 2014.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
A. L. Anding and E. H. Baehrecke, “Cleaning house: selective autophagy of organelles,” Developmental Cell, vol. 41, no. 1, pp. 10–22, 2017.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
S. Alers, A. S. Löffler, S. Wesselborg, and B. Stork, “Role of AMPK-mTOR-Ulk1/2 in the regulation of autophagy: cross talk, shortcuts, and feedbacks,” Molecular and Cellular Biology, vol. 32, no. 1, pp. 2–11, 2012.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
R. C. Russell, H. X. Yuan, and K. L. Guan, “Autophagy regulation by nutrient signaling,” Cell Research, vol. 24, no. 1, pp. 42–57, 2014.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
K. Inoki, J. Kim, and K. L. Guan, “AMPK and mTOR in cellular energy homeostasis and drug targets,” Annual Review of Pharmacology and Toxicology, Annual Reviews, vol. 52, pp. 381–400, 2012.
View at: Google Scholar
J. M. Rodriguez-Vargas, M. J. Ruiz-Magaña, C. Ruiz-Ruiz et al., “ROS-induced DNA damage and PARP-1 are required for optimal induction of starvation-induced autophagy,” Cell Research, vol. 22, no. 7, pp. 1181–1198, 2012.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
Z.-T. Chen, W. Zhao, S. Qu et al., “PARP-1 promotes autophagy via the AMPK/mTOR pathway in CNE-2 human nasopharyngeal carcinoma cells following ionizing radiation, while inhibition of autophagy contributes to the radiation sensitization of CNE-2 cells,” Molecular Medicine Reports, vol. 12, no. 2, pp. 1868–1876, 2015.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
Q. Huang and H. M. Shen, “To die or to live the dual role of poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase-1 in autophagy and necrosis under oxidative stress and DNA damage,” Autophagy, vol. 5, no. 2, pp. 273–276, 2009.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
G.-Y. Li, B. Fan, and Y.-Y. Jiao, “Rapamycin attenuates visible light-induced injury in retinal photoreceptor cells via inhibiting endoplasmic reticulum stress,” Brain Research, vol. 1563, pp. 1–12, 2014.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
N. Pandey and B. E. Black, “Rapid detection and signaling of DNA damage by PARP-1,” Trends in Biochemical Sciences, vol. 46, no. 9, pp. 744–757, 2021.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
P. Decker, E. A. Miranda, G. de Murcia, and S. Muller, “An improved nonisotopic test to screen a large series of new inhibitor molecules of poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase activity for therapeutic applications,” Clinical Cancer Research: An Official Journal of the American Association for Cancer Research, vol. 5, no. 5, pp. 1169–1172, 1999.
View at: Google Scholar
E. Bakondi, P. Bai, É. Szabó et al., “Detection of poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase activation in oxidatively stressed cells and tissues using biotinylated NAD substrate,” The Journal of Histochemistry and Cytochemistry: Official Journal of the Histochemistry Society, vol. 50, no. 1, pp. 91–98, 2002.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
Y. Zhang, J. Wang, M. Ding, and Y. Yu, “Site-specific characterization of the asp- and Glu-ADP-ribosylated proteome,” Nature Methods, vol. 10, no. 10, pp. 981–984, 2013.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
S. Tang, Z. Nie, W. Li, D. Li, Y. Huang, and S. Yao, “A poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase-1 activity assay based on the FRET between a cationic conjugated polymer and supercharged green fluorescent protein,” Chemical Communications (Cambridge, England), vol. 51, no. 76, pp. 14389–14392, 2015.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
Y. Xu, J. Wang, Y. Cao, and G. Li, “Gold nanoparticles based colorimetric assay of protein poly(ADP-ribosyl)ation,” The Analyst, vol. 136, no. 10, pp. 2044–2046, 2011.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
Y. Liu, J. Fan, H. Yang et al., “Detection of PARP-1 activity based on hyperbranched-poly (ADP-ribose) polymers responsive current in artificial nanochannels,” Biosensors & Bioelectronics, vol. 113, pp. 136–141, 2018.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
X. Zhou, C. Wang, Z. Wang et al., “Renewable electrochemical sensor for PARP-1 activity detection based on host- guest recognition,” Biosensors & Bioelectronics, vol. 148, article 111810, 2020.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
Y. Liu, J. Fan, L. Shangguan et al., “Ultrasensitive electrochemical detection of poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase-1 via polyaniline deposition,” Talanta, vol. 180, pp. 127–132, 2018.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
C. Wang, Y. Li, E. Xu et al., “A label-free PFP-based photoelectrochemical biosensor for highly sensitive detection of PARP-1 activity,” Biosensors & Bioelectronics, vol. 138, article 111308, 2019.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar
E. S. Xu, H. Yang, P. Li et al., “Dual-mode detection of PARP-1 by fluorescence and chemiluminescence,” Sensors and Actuators B-Chemical, vol. 330, p. 129288, 2021.
View at: Publisher Site | Google Scholar

Copyright

Copyright © 2022 Xun Li et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

PDF Download Citation

Download other formats

Order printed copies

Views

323

Downloads

424

Citations