Skip to content

Bioessays Impact Factor 2012 Toyota

Citation data is made available by participants in Crossref's Cited-by Linking service. For a more comprehensive list of citations to this article, users are encouraged to perform a search inSciFinder.

  • Flow Cytometric Analysis To Evaluate Morphological Changes in Giant Liposomes As Observed in Electrofusion Experiments

    TakeshiSunamiKunihiroShimadaGakushiTsujiSatoshiFujii

    Langmuir201834 (1), 88-96

    Abstract | Full Text HTML | PDF | PDF w/ Links

  • Engineering Compartmentalized Biomimetic Micro- and Nanocontainers

    TatianaTrantidouMarkFriddinYuvalElaniNicholas J.BrooksRobert V.LawJohn M.SeddonOscarCes

    ACS Nano201711 (7), 6549-6565

    Abstract | Full Text HTML | PDF | PDF w/ Links

  • Monodisperse Uni- and Multicompartment Liposomes

    Nan-NanDengMaaruthyYelleswarapuWilhelm T. S.Huck

    Journal of the American Chemical Society2016138 (24), 7584-7591

    Abstract | Full Text HTML | PDF | PDF w/ Links

  • Creating Biocompatible Oil–Water Interfaces without Synthesis: Direct Interactions between Primary Amines and Carboxylated Perfluorocarbon Surfactants

    Cheryl J.DeJournetteJoonyulKimHaleyMedlenXiangpengLiLuke J.VincentChristopher J.Easley

    Analytical Chemistry201385 (21), 10556-10564

    Abstract | Full Text HTML | PDF | PDF w/ Links

  • Microdevices for Nanomedicine

    MichinaoHashimotoRongTongDaniel S.Kohane

    Molecular Pharmaceutics201310 (6), 2127-2144

    Abstract | Full Text HTML | PDF | PDF w/ Links

  • The Potential Impact of Droplet Microfluidics in Biology

    ThomasSchneiderJasonKreutzDaniel T.Chiu

    Analytical Chemistry201385 (7), 3476-3482

    Abstract | Full Text HTML | PDF | PDF w/ Links

  • Micro Total Analysis Systems for Cell Biology and Biochemical Assays

    Michelle L.KovarikPhilip C.GachDouglas M.OrnoffYuliWangJosephBalowskiLilaFarragNancy L.Allbritton

    Analytical Chemistry201284 (2), 516-540

    Abstract | Full Text HTML | PDF | PDF w/ Links

  • Encapsulation of Active Cytoskeletal Protein Networks in Cell-Sized Liposomes

    Feng-ChingTsaiBjörnStuhrmannGijsje H.Koenderink

    Langmuir201127 (16), 10061-10071

    Abstract | Full Text HTML | PDF | PDF w/ Links

  • Constructing vesicle-based artificial cells with embedded living cells as organelle-like modules

    YuvalElaniTatianaTrantidouDouglasWylieLindaDekkerKarenPolizziRobert V.LawOscarCes

    Scientific Reports20188 (1),

  • A reverse-phase method revisited: Rapid high-yield preparation of giant unilamellar vesicles (GUVs) using emulsification followed by centrifugation

    KantaTsumotoYukiHayashiJinTabataMasahiroTomita

    Colloids and Surfaces A: Physicochemical and Engineering Aspects2018546, 74-82


  •   
    REVIEW ARTICLE
    Year : 2015  |  Volume : 128  |  Issue : 11  |  Page : 1543-1548

    Evidence for DNA Damage as a Biological Link Between Diabetes and Cancer

    Shao Chin Lee1, Juliana CN Chan2
    1 Department of Biological Sciences, School of Life Sciences, Shanxi University, Taiyuan, Shanxi 030006, China
    2 Department of Medicine and Therapeutics, Hong Kong Institute of Diabetes and Obesity, Li Ka Shing Institute of Health Science, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Prince of Wales Hospital, Shatin, Hong Kong, China

    Date of Submission09-Dec-2014
    Date of Web Publication26-May-2015

    Correspondence Address:
    Dr. Shao Chin Lee
    School of Life Sciences, Shanxi University, Taiyuan, Shanxi 030006
    China

    Source of Support: This work was supported by direct grants to Dr. Shao Chin Lee, from Shanxi University and the Chinese University of Hong Kong, respectively., Conflict of Interest: None


    DOI: 10.4103/0366-6999.157693

      Abstract 

    Objective: This review examines the evidence that: Diabetes is a state of DNA damage; pathophysiological factors in diabetes can cause DNA damage; DNA damage can cause mutations; and DNA mutation is linked to carcinogenesis.
    DataSources: We retrieved information from the PubMed database up to January, 2014, using various search terms and their combinations including DNA damage, diabetes, cancer, high glucose, hyperglycemia, free fatty acids, palmitic acid, advanced glycation end products, mutation and carcinogenesis.
    StudySelection: We included data from peer-reviewed journals and a textbook printed in English on relationships between DNA damage and diabetes as well as pathophysiological factors in diabetes. Publications on relationships among DNA damage, mutagenesis, and carcinogenesis, were also reviewed. We organized this information into a conceptual framework to explain the possible causal relationship between DNA damage and carcinogenesis in diabetes.
    Results: There are a large amount of data supporting the view that DNA mutation is a typical feature in carcinogenesis. Patients with type 2 diabetes have increased production of reactive oxygen species, reduced levels of antioxidant capacity, and increased levels of DNA damage. The pathophysiological factors and metabolic milieu in diabetes can cause DNA damage such as DNA strand break and base modification (i.e., oxidation). Emerging experimental data suggest that signal pathways (i.e., Akt/tuberin) link diabetes to DNA damage. This collective evidence indicates that diabetes is a pathophysiological state of oxidative stress and DNA damage which can lead to various types of mutation to cause aberration in cells and thereby increased cancer risk.
    Conclusions: This review highlights the interrelationships amongst diabetes, DNA damage, DNA mutation and carcinogenesis, which suggests that DNA damage can be a biological link between diabetes and cancer.

    Keywords: Cancer; Diabetes; DNA Damage; Mutation, Pathophysiological Factors


    How to cite this article:
    Lee SC, Chan JC. Evidence for DNA Damage as a Biological Link Between Diabetes and Cancer. Chin Med J 2015;128:1543-8



      Introduction 


    Diabetes confers an increased risk for all-site cancer worldwide, except prostate cancer. [1] Among the Chinese population of Hong Kong, for example, the prevalence of diabetes was reported to be over 10% in mid 1990s with 30% higher risk for cancer in people with diabetes compared to the general population. [2],[3] With aging and declining mortality from cardiovascular-renal disease, 25% of Chinese people with type 2 diabetes now died from cancer, mainly due to liver, pancreatic, colorectal, and breast cancer. [4] Despite the health care and socio-economic burden of diabetes and cancer, the mechanisms whereby diabetes favors cancer development remain unknown. Since insulin has pro-proliferative activity and activation of insulin signaling axis has been implicated in carcinogenesis, [5] some researchers proposed that the use of insulin by diabetic patients might contribute to cancer development. [1] However, this view is controversial, as some epidemiological studies do not show a correlation between use of insulin and all-site cancer [6] while some others have even reported that use of insulin might decrease the risk for cancer. [7]

    One of the typical features in carcinogenesis is DNA mutation which can be caused by DNA damage often found in people with diabetes. In this review article, we searched the literature and summarized the evidence in support of a possible linking role of DNA damage between diabetes and cancer.


      Diabetes is a Pathophysiological State of DNA Damage 


    DNA damage occurs in different forms through different mechanisms. Strand break and base modification are the most studied forms of DNA damage. DNA strand break can be detected using single cell gel electrophoresis or otherwise named comet assay. Base oxidation, i.e., the formation of 8-hydroxy-2'- deoxyguanosine (8-OHdG), the most studied form of base modification, can be quantified using specific antibody by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. These techniques are well-established, and assay kits are easily available and user-friendly. This review focuses on the two forms of DNA damage with relevance to diabetes and cancer.

    Dandona et al. compared the levels of 8-OHdG in mononuclear cells amongst type 1 diabetic patients (n = 12), type 2 diabetic patients (n = 15) and healthy control subjects (n = 10). They found that both type 1 and type 2 diabetic patients had higher levels of 8-OHdG than the nondiabetic subjects. Production of reactive oxygen species by mononuclear cells was also significantly greater in diabetic patients than the control subjects. [8] Increased serum or urinary levels of 8-OHdG which correlated with poor glycemic control have been confirmed in both type 1 and type 2 diabetes. [9],[10],[11] In addition to DNA base oxidation, Collins, and co-workers used comet assays on white blood cells and reported higher levels of DNA strand break in people with type 1 diabetes (n = 10) compared to healthy controls (n = 10). [12] Subsequent studies have also confirmed elevated levels of DNA strand break in type 2 diabetes, which, similar to 8-OHdG levels, were correlated with poor glycemic control. [13],[14],[15]

    Peripheral blood cells are often used for comet assay to detect DNA strand break while urine and serum samples are commonly used for 8-OHdG quantification. A key question is whether the results from the peripheral samples reflect the levels of DNA damage in other body tissues. To address this issue, Kushwaha et al. compared the levels of DNA strand break in lymphocytes, lung, liver, heart, aorta, kidney, and pancreas from diabetic and control rats. They found that DNA strand break was increased in all the tested tissues from diabetic rats, and the level of DNA strand break in lymphocytes was positively correlated with that in other tissues, suggesting that lymphocyte DNA strand break might be a suitable marker indicating DNA damage in internal organs. [16]


      Pathophysiological Factors in Diabetes that Can Cause DNA Damage 


    Patients with type 1 or type 2 diabetes have increased plasma levels of glucose and advanced glycation endproducts (AGEs), which are diagnostic markers for diabetes and glycemic control. Type 2 diabetic patients often have increased plasma levels of free fatty acids and insulin, due to obesity-associated insulin resistance, especially during the early stage of the disease. These pathophysiological factors in diabetes have been found to cause DNA damage invitro, which may explain why diabetic patients have increased level of DNA damage invivo.

    High glucose/hyperglycemia

    Early in 1980s, researchers have reported that a high concentration of glucose (30 mmol/L) could cause DNA strand break in cultured human endothelial cells. [17] This observation has been confirmed in a subsequent study using the mouse and human renal cells as experimental models. [18] In addition to DNA strand break, high glucose could increase the level of 8-OHdG in endothelial and tubular cells. [19],[20]

    Since DNA damage is known to produce various mutations, [21] and that high glucose can promote DNA damage, the next question to ask is whether high glucose can cause or promote mutagenesis. Indeed, Zhang et al. examined the effect of high glucose on the genomic stability of phosphoribosyltransferase and thymidine kinase loci in human lymphoblastoid cell lines and reported a significant increase in mutations in both loci under high glucose. [22] Using mouse embryo as an experimental model, Lee et al. found that high glucose increased Lac I mutation in vitro and invivo. [23] Furthermore, since high glucose can cause mutation and DNA mutation are believed to play an important role in carcinogenesis, [24] it is logical to speculate that high glucose can promote cancer development. To address this point, Berstein and Alexandrov injected carcinogen into pregnant rats via an intraperitoneal route and divided them into experimental and control groups. The rats in the experimental group drank 10% glucose in water till delivery, after which the rats and their progeny drank 5% glucose in water for 45 days. Rats in the control group and their progeny drank water alone. The authors found that the progeny of the rats in the experimental group had significantly higher incidence of tumors than those from the control group. [25] In a follow-up study, the authors investigated whether glucose could have an effect on carcinogen-induced mutation in fetal cells, as measured using invivo/invitro assay. They found that high glucose not only increased the frequency of mutation but also promoted the proliferation and survival of the fetal cells from the rats in the experimental group. [26] These data suggest that high glucose can promote carcinogenesis, which might be due to its DNA damaging and then mutagenic effect.

    Advanced glycation endproducts

    Hyperglycemia in diabetes promotes the formation of AGEs due to nonenzymatic reactions between reducing sugars and free amino groups of proteins. Subsequent reactions such as dehydration, oxidation, and condensation result in the irreversible formation of this heterogeneous group of products. Stopper et al. investigated whether AGEs were genotoxic using pig kidney cells as an experimental model, and found that AGEs could cause DNA strand break. [27] These findings were subsequently confirmed in human liver and colon cells [28] as well as mouse podocytes. [29] In addition to DNA strand break, AGEs can also trigger DNA base oxidation and promote the production of 8-OHdG in different types of cells. [30],[31]

    Free fatty acids and insulin

    Palmitic acid is the most common saturated free fatty acid, which is often used to represent free fatty acids in experimental studies. Beeharry et al. found that palmitic acid caused DNA strand break and apoptosis in insulin-secreting cell line and primary human fibroblasts. [32] Under these experimental conditions, the DNA damage is the main significant event, and the clinical relevance of the small incremental trend in apoptosis remains uncertain. In a proof of concept study, we quantified 8-OHdG in the culture of HCT116 colon cancer cells treated with palmitic acid at concentrations lower than 75 μmol/L. These concentrations were not toxic to the cells but increased the production of 8-OHdG in a dose-dependent manner (Lee, unpublished date). In support of these data, obese subjects who had increased risk for cancer also had increased plasma levels of free fatty acids and 8-OHdG, supporting possible causal relationships among free fatty acid, DNA damage, and cancer. [33]

    In subjects with obesity and prediabetes which are associated with insulin resistance, hyperinsulinemia is a frequent phenomenon. [34] Whether insulin can cause strand break remains to be examined. However, in colon cells and human lymphocytes, insulin was found to cause base oxidation by triggering the production of reactive oxygen species. In particular, for colon cancer cells, the lowest tested and lowest active concentration of insulin in vitro was 1 nmol/L for short time treatment (i.e., 2 h) and 0.5-1 nmol/L for longer exposure. [35] In healthy human subjects, plasma insulin concentrations are in the order of 0.04 nmol/L after fasting, which can increase to 0.2 nmol/L after a meal. Pathophysiological levels of insulin can reach 1 nmol/L. Thus, the experimental results showed that insulin in pathophysiological concentrations had DNA damaging effect. [35]

    As summarized in [Table 1], these common pathophysiological features in diabetes, that is, high glucose, high insulin, AGEs and free fatty acids, can individually cause DNA damage, strand break, and base oxidation, although the effect of insulin on base oxidation remains unknown. Since these pathophysiological factors frequently co-exist in type 2 diabetes during the clinical course, their potential synergistic effects on causing DNA damage is an interesting topic for exploration.
    Table 1: DNA damaging effects due to the pathophysiological factors in diabetes

    Click here to view



      Diabetes Can Promote DNA Damage by Different Pathway 
    [Figure 1][36],[37]

    Direct (oxidative stress) pathway

    Damage of DNA by reactive oxygen species can be considered as a direct pathway in diabetes-associated mutation. High serum levels of glucose, AGEs, free fatty acids, and insulin can all promote the production of reactive oxygen species found to be increased in type 2 diabetes compared to nondiabetic subjects. [38] Besides, people with diabetes had low anti-oxidative capacity such as reduced glutathione synthesis which might contribute to their proneness to oxidative damage. [39]
    Figure 1: Pathways linking diabetes to DNA damage which is involved in carcinogenesis. AGEs: Advanced glycation end products; FFAs: Free fatty acids.

    Click here to view


    Despite the high heritability of diabetes, most of the genetic factors discovered by genome-wide association studies only explained small variance of the risk in the majority of people with type 2 diabetes. [40] Interestingly, Lai et al. found that genetic variants of peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor-γ coactivator-1α (PPARGC1A) were associated with increased risk of DNA damage (urine 8-OHdG) and diabetes. [41] In this light, PPARGC1A is known to regulate mitochondrial electron transport, which generates reactive oxygen species while at the same time, activates defending enzymes against reactive oxygen species. Imbalance between these two roles of PPARGC1A can lead to oxidative stress and possibly DNA damage. In Hong Kong Chinese, type 2 diabetes-related genetic variants of HHEX, TCF7L2, and CDKAL1 have also been reported to be associated with increased all-site cancer although the underlying mechanism remains to be explored. [42]

    Signaling pathway

    Indirectly, DNA damage in diabetes can occur through cell signal pathways. Simone et al. [36] reported the following observations in high glucose experimental models: (1) There were associations amongst Akt phosphorylation, tuberin phosphorylation, and 8-oxodG accumulation; (2) inhibition of Akt using PI3 kinase inhibitor reduced high glucose-induced tuberin phosphorylation, and (3) anti-oxidant inhibited reactive oxygen species generation, phosphorylation of Akt and tuberin, and 8-oxodG accumulation. These results indicated that the PI3 kinase-Akt-tuberin pathway might be important for DNA oxidation damage under hyperglycemic condition. In a recent study, Habib and Liang reported over-activation of Akt with decreased protein levels of tuberin and increased 8-OHdG concentration in kidney cancer tissues from diabetic patients, compared with cancer tissues from patients without diabetes. [43] Taken together, these data support a possible role of Akt/tuberin signaling in the occurrence of DNA damage in diabetes.

    DNA repair pathway

    Blasiak et al. compared the efficacy of removal of damaged DNA in peripheral blood lymphocytes between type 2 diabetic patients and healthy individuals, and reported reduced efficacy of repairing DNA damage in those with diabetes. [44] DNA is sensitive to damage caused by endogenous and exogenous factors, and as such, DNA damage occurs frequently in the absence of specific disease. Thus, an effective mechanism of DNA damage repair is crucial to maintain genomic integrity. Since defective DNA repair may determine the susceptibility to carcinogenesis, [44] decreased efficiency in DNA repair is another potential factor for cancer in diabetes. [45]

    Activation of Akt/tuberin pathway might down-regulate DNA repair

    The Akt pathway is an important pathway implicated in cell growth which can be activated by high levels of insulin, glucose, [36] AGEs [46] and free fatty acids (palmitic acid). [47] Here, insulin [48] and high glucose [36] activate Akt to phosphorylate tuberin which allows tuberin to interact with binding protein to perform its biological function. [48] Although there are reports on associations between DNA damage and changes in Akt activity, the mechanisms underlying Akt activation and DNA damage and repair is less clear. As reviewed by Xu and coworkers, Akt activation led to suppression of ATR/Chk1 signaling by direct phosphorylation of Chk1 or TopBP1. It could also inhibit recruitment of double-strand break resection factors (i.e., RPA, Brca1, and Rad51) to DNA damage sites, leading to compromised homologous recombination repair. Thus, Akt activation may be a potential cause of DNA repair inhibition and genomic instability. [49] In a study that used in vitro and in vivo experimental models, Akt activation was shown to phosphorylate Bim1, which led to increased genomic instability and increased oncogenic potential of Bim1. [50] In the case of tuberin, its phosphorylation or inactivation through activation of Akt could decrease the gene expression of OGG1, which was also downstream of Akt activation by reactive oxygen species, resulting in accumulation of DNA damage. [36],[51],[52] While these data support a regulatory role of Akt in DNA repair, the signal mediators downstream of Akt and their interactions remain to be defined.


      DNA Damage Can Cause Mutations 


    Genome stability is important for normal cell physiology. However, DNA bases are highly vulnerable to being damaged. Intrinsically, DNA is chemically unstable in an aqueous environment. Spontaneous reactions such as hydrolysis and de-amination can occur, resulting in DNA damage. Other endogenous factors such as metabolic products and exogenous factors such as environmental chemicals can also cause DNA damage. DNA strand breaks, in particular, double strand breaks, are potentially lethal. In surviving cells, double strand break triggers break-induced replication which is known to produce DNA mutations at high frequencies. The break-induced replication and related mechanisms can cause various DNA abnormalities which include loss of heterozygosity, telomere maintenance without telomerase, nonreciprocal translocation, copy number variation, and chromosomal rearrangements. [53]

    Similarly, DNA base oxidation can be harmful. [54] Take 8-OHdG as an example, it can pair with A to form situ G to T substitution, and if incorporated into DNA, it can lead to mis-pairing with dA to form A to C substitution [Figure 2]. Moreover, 8-OHdG can change DNA conformation, leading to substitution mutations by mis-pairing with dA or dT. The presence of 8-OHdG in DNA can also have epigenetic consequences such as altering the gene transcription. Unfortunately, once mis-pairing occurs in DNA, it will not be repaired effectively in cells. Although 8-OHdG is the most frequently reported DNA damage in diabetes and other diseases, it should be kept in mind that all four DNA bases are susceptible to oxidative damage. Among these changes, modifications to GC base pairs tend to be more mutagenic while modifications on AT base pairs have weaker mutagenic potential. [55] In addition to base oxidation, lipid peroxidation is also harmful, which can cause the formation of reactive aldehydes such as malondialdehyde and 4-hydroxy-2-nonenal. These products are highly reactive to protein and DNA and have been shown to be mutagenic. [56]
    Figure 2: Mechanism of mutation caused by 8-hydroxy-2'-deoxyguanosine. *: Oxidized base; A: Mispaired base.

    Click here to view



      DNA Mutation is a Typical Feature in Carcinogenesis 


    About a century ago, Boveri speculated that cancer was a problem of cell proliferation due to chromosomal aberrations and/or mutations. [57] Indeed, with biotechnological advancement, large number of chromosomal abnormalities and DNA mutations had been demonstrated in various types of cancers. This leads to the proposal of "somatic mutation theory" to explain the mechanisms of cancer development, which considers the accumulation of somatic mutations as the origin of carcinogenesis and cancer progression. In animal models, carcinogenesis is found to involve multiple steps which include at least initiation, promotion, and progression stages. [58] DNA mutation is the main molecular feature of the initiation step which is irreversible characterized by micro-lesions such as base pair substitution and frame shift. Clinical cancer appears when cancerous cells enter the progression step where the karyotypic alteration of genomic instability and pathological features can be found. This step involves DNA macro-lesions such as DNA amplification and rearrangement.


      Can Glycemic Control Agents Reduce Cancer Risk in Diabetes? 


    If the pathophysiological factors of diabetes, notably, high blood glucose and AGEs, can contribute to the increased risk for all-site cancer in diabetes, then, we can expect that use of anti-diabetic drugs that reduce blood glucose and AGEs can also reduce cancer risk in diabetic patients. Indeed, this has been supported by epidemiological studies showing reduced cancer risk with metformin which is probably the most commonly used anti-diabetic drug. [1] In addition to its glucose-lowering effect, metformin itself can inhibit oxidative stress [59] and DNA damage. [60] Using the Hong Kong Diabetes Registry, we have also reported the association of reduced cancer risk with all anti-diabetic drugs as well as drugs such as renin-angiotensin system inhibitors and statins which have been shown to have anti-oxidant properties. [61],[62] These epidemiological observations support a relationship among diabetes, DNA damage, and carcinogenesis.


      Conclusion 


    The available data from the literature support the notion that pathophysiological metabolic factors in diabetes can cause DNA damage, making diabetes a state of DNA damage. Oxidative stress is likely the main mediator for DNA damage in diabetes. Inhibition of antioxidant capacity worsens the oxidative stress state while inhibition of DNA damage repair machinery contributes to DNA damage accumulation. DNA damage can cause mutation which plays key roles in carcinogenesis. Thus, DNA damage is possibly a biological link between diabetes and cancer. Apart from optimizing glycemic control, future cancer prevention in diabetic patients may target at inhibiting DNA damage using alternative drugs like antioxidants.

     
      References 

    1.
    Giovannucci E, Harlan DM, Archer MC, Bergenstal RM, Gapstur SM, Habel LA, et al. Diabetes and cancer: A consensus report. Diabetes Care 2010;33:1674-85.  
    [PUBMED]    
    2.
    Chan JC, Malik V, Jia W, Kadowaki T, Yajnik CS, Yoon KH, et al. Diabetes in Asia: Epidemiology, risk factors, and pathophysiology. JAMA 2009;301:2129-40.  
    [PUBMED]    
    3.
    Yang X, So WY, Ma RC, Ko GT, Kong AP, Wang Q, et al. Predicting values of lipids and white blood cell count for all-site cancer in type 2 diabetes. Endocr Relat Cancer 2008;15:597-607.  
    [PUBMED]    
    4.
    Hong Kong Diabetes Registry, Yang X, So WY, Tong PC, Ma RC, Kong AP, et al. Development and validation of an all-cause mortality risk score in type 2 diabetes. Arch Intern Med 2008;168:451-7.  
    [PUBMED]    
    5.
    Gupta K, Krishnaswamy G, Karnad A, Peiris AN. Insulin: A novel factor in carcinogenesis. Am J Med Sci 2002;323:140-5.  
        
    6.
    Gu Y, Wang C, Zheng Y, Hou X, Mo Y, Yu W, et al. Cancer incidence and mortality in patients with type 2 diabetes treated with human insulin: A cohort study in Shanghai. PLoS One 2013;8:e53411.  
        
    7.
    Yang X, Ko GT, So WY, Ma RC, Yu LW, Kong AP, et al. Associations of hyperglycemia and insulin usage with the risk of cancer in type 2 diabetes: The Hong Kong diabetes registry. Diabetes 2010;59:1254-60.  
    [PUBMED]    
    8.
    Dandona P, Thusu K, Cook S, Snyder B, Makowski J, Armstrong D, et al. Oxidative damage to DNA in diabetes mellitus. Lancet 1996;347:444-5.  
    [PUBMED]    
    9.
    Hinokio Y, Suzuki S, Hirai M, Chiba M, Hirai A, Toyota T. Oxidative DNA damage in diabetes mellitus: Its association with diabetic complications. Diabetologia 1999;42:995-8.  
    [PUBMED]    
    10.
    Goodarzi MT, Navidi AA, Rezaei M, Babahmadi-Rezaei H. Oxidative damage to DNA and lipids: Correlation with protein glycation in patients with type 1 diabetes. J Clin Lab Anal 2010;24:72-6.  
    [PUBMED]    
    11.
    Al-Aubaidy HA, Jelinek HF. Oxidative DNA damage and obesity in type 2 diabetes mellitus. Eur J Endocrinol 2011;164:899-904.  
    [PUBMED]    
    12.
    Collins AR, Raslová K, Somorovská M, Petrovská H, Ondrusová A, Vohnout B, et al. DNA damage in diabetes: Correlation with a clinical marker. Free Radic Biol Med 1998;25:373-7.  
        
    13.
    Tatsch E, Bochi GV, Piva SJ, De Carvalho JA, Kober H, Torbitz VD, et al. Association between DNA strand breakage and oxidative, inflammatory and endothelial biomarkers in type 2 diabetes. Mutat Res 2012;732:16-20.  
    [PUBMED]    
    14.
    Dinçer Y, Akçay T, Ilkova H, Alademir Z, Ozbay G. DNA damage and antioxidant defense in peripheral leukocytes of patients with Type I diabetes mellitus. Mutat Res 2003;527:49-55.  
        
    15.
    Sliwinska A, Blasiak J, Kasznicki J, Drzewoski J. In vitro effect of gliclazide on DNA damage and repair in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). Chem Biol Interact 2008;173:159-65.  
    [PUBMED]    
    16.
    Kushwaha S, Vikram A, Trivedi PP, Jena GB. Alkaline, Endo III and FPG modified comet assay as biomarkers for the detection of oxidative DNA damage in rats with experimentally induced diabetes. Mutat Res 2011;726:242-50.  
    [PUBMED]    
    17.
    Lorenzi M, Montisano DF, Toledo S, Barrieux A. High glucose induces DNA damage in cultured human endothelial cells. J Clin Invest 1986;77:322-5.  
    [PUBMED]    
    18.
    Yang S, Chintapalli J, Sodagum L, Baskin S, Malhotra A, Reiss K, et al. Activated IGF-1R inhibits hyperglycemia-induced DNA damage and promotes DNA repair by homologous recombination. Am J Physiol Renal Physiol 2005;289:F1144-52.  
    [PUBMED]    
    19.
    Quagliaro L, Piconi L, Assaloni R, Martinelli L, Motz E, Ceriello A. Intermittent high glucose enhances apoptosis related to oxidative stress in human umbilical vein endothelial cells: The role of protein kinase C and NAD (P) H-oxidase activation. Diabetes 2003;52:2795-804.  
    [PUBMED]    
    20.
    Takao T, Horino T, Kagawa T, Matsumoto R, Shimamura Y, Ogata K, et al. Possible involvement of intracellular angiotensin II receptor in high-glucose-induced damage in renal proximal tubular cells. J Nephrol 2011;24:218-24.  
    [PUBMED]    
    21.
    Jena NR. DNA damage by reactive species: Mechanisms, mutation and repair. J Biosci 2012;37:503-17.  
    [PUBMED]    
    22.
    Zhang Y, Zhou J, Wang T, Cai L. High level glucose increases mutagenesis in human lymphoblastoid cells. Int J Biol Sci 2007;3:375-9.  
    [PUBMED]    
    23.
    Lee AT, Reis D, Eriksson UJ. Hyperglycemia-induced embryonic dysmorphogenesis correlates with genomic DNA mutation frequency in vitro and in vivo. Diabetes 1999;48:371-6.  
    [PUBMED]    
    24.
    Frede J, Adams DJ, Jones PH. Mutation, clonal fitness and field change in epithelial carcinogenesis. J Pathol 2014;234:296-301.  
    [PUBMED]    
    25.
    Berstein LM, Alexandrov VA. Glucose consumption, newborn weight and nitrosomethylurea transplacental carcinogenesis in rats. Cancer Lett 1984;25:171-6.  
    [PUBMED]    
    26.
    Donovan PJ, Smith GT, Riggs CW, Alexandrov VA. Effects of glucose on cloning efficiency and mutagenesis of fetal rat cells. Teratog Carcinog Mutagen 2002;22:329-34.  
    [PUBMED]    
    27.
    Stopper H, Schinzel R, Sebekova K, Heidland A. Genotoxicity of advanced glycation end products in mammalian cells. Cancer Lett 2003;190:151-6.  
    [PUBMED]    
    28.
    Schupp N, Schinzel R, Heidland A, Stopper H. Genotoxicity of advanced glycation end products: Involvement of oxidative stress and of angiotensin II type 1 receptors. Ann N Y Acad Sci 2005;1043:685-95.  
    [PUBMED]    
    29.
    Fukami K, Yamagishi S, Kaifu K, Matsui T, Kaida Y, Ueda S, et al. Telmisartan inhibits AGE-induced podocyte damage and detachment. Microvasc Res 2013;88:79-83.  
    [PUBMED]    
    30.
    Mizutani K, Ikeda K, Nishikata T, Yamori Y. Phytoestrogens attenuate oxidative DNA damage in vascular smooth muscle cells from stroke-prone spontaneously hypertensive rats. J Hypertens 2000;18:1833-40.  
    [PUBMED]    
    31.
    Pazdro R, Burgess JR. Differential effects of a-tocopherol and N-acetyl-cysteine on advanced glycation end product-induced oxidative damage and neurite degeneration in SH-SY5Y cells. Biochim Biophys Acta 2012;1822:550-6.  
    [PUBMED]    
    32.
    Beeharry N, Lowe JE, Hernandez AR, Chambers JA, Fucassi F, Cragg PJ, et al. Linoleic acid and antioxidants protect against DNA damage and apoptosis induced by palmitic acid. Mutat Res 2003;530:27-33.  
    [PUBMED]    
    33.
    Donmez-Altuntas H, Sahin F, Bayram F, Bitgen N, Mert M, Guclu K, et al. Evaluation of chromosomal damage, cytostasis, cytotoxicity, oxidative DNA damage and their association with body-mass index in obese subjects. Mutat Res Genet Toxicol Environ Mutagen 2014;771:30-6.  
        
    34.
    Defronzo RA. Banting lecture. From the triumvirate to the ominous octet: A new paradigm for the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus. Diabetes 2009;58:773-95.  
    [PUBMED]    
    35.
    Othman EM, Leyh A, Stopper H. Insulin mediated DNA damage in mammalian colon cells and human lymphocytes in vitro. Mutat Res 2013;745-746:34-9.  
    [PUBMED]    
    36.
    Simone S, Gorin Y, Velagapudi C, Abboud HE, Habib SL. Mechanism of oxidative DNA damage in diabetes: Tuberin inactivation and downregulation of DNA repair enzyme 8-oxo-7,8-dihydro-2'- deoxyguanosine-DNA glycosylase. Diabetes 2008;57:2626-36.  
    [PUBMED]    
    37.
    Ye C, Li X, Wang Y, Zhang Y, Cai M, Zhu B, et al. Diabetes causes multiple genetic alterations and downregulates expression of DNA repair genes in the prostate. Lab Invest 2011;91:1363-74.  
    [PUBMED]    
    38.
    Orie NN, Zidek W, Tepel M. Reactive oxygen species in essential hypertension and non-insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus. Am J Hypertens 1999;12:1169-74.  
    [PUBMED]    
    39.
    Seghrouchni I, Drai J, Bannier E, Rivière J, Calmard P, Garcia I, et al. Oxidative stress parameters in type I, type II and insulin-treated type 2 diabetes mellitus; insulin treatment efficiency. Clin Chim Acta 2002;321:89-96.  
        
    40.
    McCarthy MI. Genomics, type 2 diabetes, and obesity. N Engl J Med 2010;363:2339-50.  
    [PUBMED]    
    41.
    Lai CQ, Tucker KL, Parnell LD, Adiconis X, García-Bailo B, Griffith J, et al. PPARGC1A variation associated with DNA damage, diabetes, and cardiovascular diseases: The Boston Puerto Rican Health Study. Diabetes 2008;57:809-16.  
        
    42.
    Ma RC, So WY, Tam CH, Luk AO, Ho JS, Wang Y, et al. Genetic variants for type 2 diabetes and new-onset cancer in Chinese with type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Res Clin Pract 2014;103:328-37.  
    [PUBMED]    
    43.
    Habib SL, Liang S. Hyperactivation of Akt/mTOR and deficiency in tuberin increased the oxidative DNA damage in kidney cancer patients with diabetes. Oncotarget 2014;5:2542-50.  
    [PUBMED]    
    44.
    Scully R, Livingston DM. In search of the tumour-suppressor functions of BRCA1 and BRCA2. Nature 2000;408:429-32.  
    [PUBMED]    
    45.
    Blasiak J, Arabski M, Krupa R, Wozniak K, Zadrozny M, Kasznicki J, et al. DNA damage and repair in type 2 diabetes mellitus. Mutat Res 2004;554:297-304.  
    [PUBMED]    
    46.
    Lan A, Du J. Potential role of Akt signaling in chronic kidney disease. Nephrol Dial Transplant 2015;30:385-94.  
    [PUBMED]    
    47.
    Pu J, Peng G, Li L, Na H, Liu Y, Liu P. Palmitic acid acutely stimulates glucose uptake via activation of Akt and ERK1/2 in skeletal muscle cells. J Lipid Res 2011;52:1319-27.  
    [PUBMED]    
    48.
    Dan HC, Sun M, Yang L, Feldman RI, Sui XM, Ou CC, et al. Phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase/Akt pathway regulates tuberous sclerosis tumor suppressor complex by phosphorylation of tuberin. J Biol Chem 2002;277:35364-70.  
    [PUBMED]    
    49.
    Xu N, Lao Y, Zhang Y, Gillespie DA. Akt: A double-edged sword in cell proliferation and genome stability. J Oncol 2012;2012:951724.  
    [PUBMED]    
    50.
    Nacerddine K, Beaudry JB, Ginjala V, Westerman B, Mattiroli F, Song JY, et al. Akt-mediated phosphorylation of Bmi1 modulates its oncogenic potential, E3 ligase activity, and DNA damage repair activity in mouse prostate cancer. J Clin Invest 2012;122:1920-32.  
    [PUBMED]    
    51.
    Habib SL, Phan MN, Patel SK, Li D, Monks TJ, Lau SS. Reduced constitutive 8-oxoguanine-DNA glycosylase expression and impaired induction following oxidative DNA damage in the tuberin deficient Eker rat. Carcinogenesis 2003;24:573-82.  
    [PUBMED]    
    52.
    Habib SL. Molecular mechanism of regulation of OGG1: Tuberin deficiency results in cytoplasmic redistribution of transcriptional factor NF-YA. J Mol Signal 2009;4:8.  
    [PUBMED]    
    53.
    Sakofsky CJ, Ayyar S, Malkova A. Break-induced replication and genome stability. Biomolecules 2012;2:483-504.  
    [PUBMED]    
    54.
    Cooke MS, Evans MD, Dizdaroglu M, Lunec J. Oxidative DNA damage: Mechanisms, mutation, and disease. FASEB J 2003;17:1195-214.  
    [PUBMED]    
    55.
    Retèl J, Hoebee B, Braun JE, Lutgerink JT, van den Akker E, Wanamarta AH, et al. Mutational specificity of oxidative DNA damage. Mutat Res 1993;299:165-82.  
        
    56.
    Klaunig JE, Kamendulis LM, Hocevar BA. Oxidative stress and oxidative damage in carcinogenesis. Toxicol Pathol 2010;38:96-109.  
    [PUBMED]    
    57.
    Soto AM, Sonnenschein C. One hundred years of somatic mutation theory of carcinogenesis: Is it time to switch? Bioessays 2014;36:118-20.  
    [PUBMED]    
    58.
    Pitot HC. Fundamentals of Oncology. 4 th ed. New York: Marcel Dekker; 2002. p. 223-72, 335-71.  
        
    59.
    Kender Z, Fleming T, Kopf S, Torzsa P, Grolmusz V, Herzig S, et al. Effect of metformin on methylglyoxal metabolism in patients with type 2 diabetes. Exp Clin Endocrinol Diabetes 2014;122:316-9.  
    [PUBMED]    
    60.
    Na HJ, Park JS, Pyo JH, Lee SH, Jeon HJ, Kim YS, et al. Mechanism of metformin: Inhibition of DNA damage and proliferative activity in Drosophila midgut stem cell. Mech Ageing Dev 2013;134:381-90.  
        
    61.
    Kong AP, Yang X, So WY, Luk A, Ma RC, Ozaki R, et al. Additive effects of blood glucose lowering drugs, statins and renin-angiotensin system blockers on all-site cancer risk in patients with type 2 diabetes. BMC Med 2014;12:76.  
    [PUBMED]    
    62.
    Yang X, So WY, Ma RC, Kong AP, Xu G, Chan JC. Diabetes and cancer: The mechanistic implications of epidemiological analyses from the Hong Kong Diabetes Registry. Diabetes Metab Res Rev 2012;28:379-87.  
    [PUBMED]    


        Figures

      [Figure 1], [Figure 2]
     
     
        Tables

      [Table 1]

    This article has been cited by
    1Hesperidin Supplementation Alleviates Oxidative DNA Damage and Lipid Peroxidation in Type 2 Diabetes: A Randomized Double-Blind Placebo-Controlled Clinical Trial
    Fatemeh Homayouni,Fatemeh Haidari,Mehdi Hedayati,Mehrnoosh Zakerkish,Kambiz Ahmadi
    Phytotherapy Research. 2017;
    [Pubmed] | [DOI]
    2The Emerging Role of Epigenetic Modifiers in Repair of DNA Damage Associated with Chronic Inflammatory Diseases
    Ning Ding,Ashley R. Maiuri,Heather M. O’Hagan
    Mutation Research/Reviews in Mutation Research. 2017;
    [Pubmed] | [DOI]
    3Taurine counteracts the neurotoxic effects of streptozotocin-induced diabetes in rats
    Greice Caletti,Ana P. Herrmann,Rianne Remus Pulcinelli,Luiza Steffens,Ana Moira Morás,Priscila Vianna,José Artur Bogo Chies,Dinara Jaqueline Moura,Helena Maria Tanhauser Barros,Rosane Gomez
    Amino Acids. 2017;
    [Pubmed] | [DOI]
    4Genetic variants including markers from the exome chip and metabolite traits of type 2 diabetes
    Susanne Jäger,Simone Wahl,Janine Kröger,Sapna Sharma,Per Hoffmann,Anna Floegel,Tobias Pischon,Cornelia Prehn,Jerzy Adamski,Martina Müller-Nurasyid,Melanie Waldenberger,Konstantin Strauch,Annette Peters,Christian Gieger,Karsten Suhre,Harald Grallert,Heiner Boeing,Matthias B. Schulze,Karina Meidtner
    Scientific Reports. 2017; 7(1)
    [Pubmed] | [DOI]
    5Oxidative Damage to the Salivary Glands of Rats with Streptozotocin-Induced Diabetes-Temporal Study: Oxidative Stress and Diabetic Salivary Glands
    M. Knas,M. Maciejczyk,I. Daniszewska,A. Klimiuk,J. Matczuk,U. Kolodziej,D. Waszkiel,J. R. Ladny,M. Zendzian-Piotrowska,A. Zalewska
    Journal of Diabetes Research. 2016; 2016: 1
    [Pubmed] | [DOI]
    6Association of elevated frequency of micronuclei in peripheral blood lymphocytes of type 2 diabetes patients with nephropathy complications
    Mahdieh Salimi,Behrouz Broumand,Hossein Mozdarani
    Mutagenesis. 2016; : gew029
    [Pubmed] | [DOI]
    7The inhibitory influence of 3-ß-hydroxybutyrate on calf thymus DNA glycation by glucose
    M. Bohlooli,M. Miri,M. Khajeh,F. Ghamari,A. Khatibi,M. Ghaffari-Moghaddam,N. Poormolaie,N. Sheibani
    RSC Adv.. 2016; 6(87): 83880
    [Pubmed] | [DOI]
    8Oxidative Stress, DNA Damage and DNA Repair in Female Patients with Diabetes Mellitus Type 2
    Annemarie Grindel,Bianca Guggenberger,Lukas Eichberger,Christina Pöppelmeyer,Michaela Gschaider,Anela Tosevska,George Mare,David Briskey,Helmut Brath,Karl-Heinz Wagner,Víctor Sánchez-Margalet
    PLOS ONE. 2016; 11(9): e0162082
    [Pubmed] | [DOI]
    9Oxidative stress-mediated mouse liver lesions caused by Clonorchis sinensis infection
    Sejung Maeng,Hye Won Lee,Qudsia Bashir,Tae Im Kim,Sung-Jong Hong,Tae Jin Lee,Woon-Mok Sohn,Byoung-Kuk Na,Tong-Soo Kim,Jhang Ho Pak
    International Journal for Parasitology. 2016; 46(3): 195
    [Pubmed] | [DOI]