Facts
Ionizing radiation is a common cancer treatment, but it is often accompanied by side effects which cause normal tissue injuries and a decline in the quality of life. Radioprotective drugs have been proven effective in vitro but fail to replicate their effect in vivo; the only FDA-approved drug available, Amifostine, is currently used to reduce xerostomia but it has also been proven to offer protection against several chemotherapeutic agents. The loss of the stem cell pool is believed to be the cause of the normal tissue injuries and stem cells have been proven to be highly radiosensitive compared to differentiated cells. Stem cell radiosensitivity is regulated by pluralistic mechanisms that involve both epigenetic and molecular signaling. Improved understanding of the regulatory pathways that make stem cells radiosensitive would lead to innovative radioprotective drug development and novel therapies to eradicate cancer while preserving the stem/progenitor cells.
Open questions
Do stem and non-stem cells respond differently to DNA breaks? Are stem cells epigenetically programmed to favor cell death instead of repair and survival after radiation exposure? What are the molecular mechanisms involved in the stem cell radiosensitivity?
Introduction
Following induction of DNA damage, cells respond in different ways and this DNA damage response (DDR) depends on several variables, such as cell cycle, post-translational modifications of the signaling cascade, and chromatin configuational changes 1 – 3 . When the DNA strand break is not severe or irreparable, cells respond by activating DNA repair pathways. Double-strand break repair is achieved by two major DNA repair pathways: homologous recombinational repair pathway (HR) which operates only in the post-replicative S or G2/M phases of cell division cycle and requires a homologous sister chromatid and non-homologous end joining (NHEJ) which operates mostly in the pre-replicative G1 phase of the cell cycle and is the most prominent form of DNA repair mechanism in terminally differentiated cells. When the damage is irreparable, cells respond with cell cycle arrest, apoptosis, senescence, or several other cell mechanisms 4 , 5 .
Ionizing radiation (IR) therapy is commonly used to treat cancers with the aim of inducing DNA double-strand breaks (DSBs) in cancer cells. The use of radiation therapy to kill cancer cells also causes DNA damage in the surrounding normal tissue and patients who undergo IR exposure experience treatment-related symptoms during therapy, months or even years after. Early side effects include erythema, dry desquamation, intestinal malabsorption, hyperpigmentation, and hair loss 6 – 8 . Late effects include skin atrophy, dryness, telangiectasia, dyschromia, dyspigmentation, fibrosis, ulcers, and neurocognitive decline 9 – 12 . Many decades ago it was perceived that a single stem cell was able to partially replenish the physiology of IR-damaged tissues 13 , 14 and lack of this cell pool can lead to different side effects, such as accelerated aging, cognitive impairment, and poor learning and memory, especially in pediatric brain cancer patients. Stem cells at the pluripotent stage are capable of self-renewal and can produce all undifferentiated cell types of the tissue of origin, serving as an internal repair system by dividing and replenishing/replacing the dead cell populations. Because of their ability to restore damaged tissue, research has been driven towards the pathway of stem cell transplantation: although the only approved stem cell transplant in clinical practice is the bone marrow transplant used for cancers affecting the blood or immune system such as leukemia, lymphoma, or multiple myeloma, many other fields have been explored and recent findings suggest stem cell transplantation may provide a useful intervention strategy for minimizing the adverse effects of several pathologies such as Parkinson’s disease, amyotrophic later sclerosis, diabetes mellitus, heart disease, and much more 15 – 20 . However, application of stem cell transplant therapy to alleviate cognitive deficits in CNS malignancy treatment regimen has enormous practical limitations. Therefore, in loco stem cells could restore the normal physiology for tissues that have been injured by IR, given that the radiation did not cause any DNA damage in those cells 21 , 22 . Current studies in the literature are, however, inconclusive regarding the capability of DNA repair in stem cells after IR exposure, with several studies suggesting stem cells are more prone to activate apoptotic response pathway instead of DDR 23 – 30 .
This review will give an overview of normal tissue injury after radiation exposure and normal stem cell radiosensitivity to elucidate the developments in known mechanisms underlying radiation response in order to find a suitable pharmacological approach to protect stem cells from radiation-induced cell death.
Tissue injury after irradiation and known mitigation/radioprotection agents
The response of normal tissues to radiotherapy differs from one another after a chemical, thermal, or mechanical stress: radiation therapy damages DNA, proteins, and lipids in the cell through direct ionization or by production of free radicals, such as reactive oxygen species 31 . It also increases apoptosis, chromosomal aberrations, and mutation frequency in cells 32 . Fluorescence in situ hybridization probes show significant increases in chromosomal aberrations in murine splenocytes after total body irradiation, with a high number of translocations 33 , while in human lymphocytes a radiation dose-dependent increase of micronuclei formation has been observed, with multi-chromosome material detected above 2 Gy 34 .
These injuries can initiate several signaling pathways, including the inflammatory response, eventually leading to cell death, senescence, or disruption of tissue physiological functions 35 , 36 . Radiation injury-directed therapies can be divided into three groups: prevention of radiation damage by intervention before treatment, injection of a radioprotective agent during or immediately after radiation therapy in order to minimize the development of clinical injury, and treatment of radiation injury after therapy to prevent the progression to clinical impact 37 . Some commonly available treatments have shown promise in prevention or mitigation of normal tissue injury after irradiation, making drug-based approaches important for normal tissue radioprotection. Sulfhydryl (SH) compounds are known for their ability to act as radioprotectors; both cysteine and cysteamine have been proven to protect animals from the effects of total body radiation if they are injected or ingested before the radiation exposure. Sh-mediated cytoprotection has mainly two components: these radioprotectors are free-radical scavenging which are able to withdraw oxygen-based free-radical generation; moreover, their ability to donate hydrogen atoms has the potential of improving DNA repair. The only radioprotective drug approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for use in radiation therapy is amifostine, a non-reactive phosphorothioate which is converted to its active form by the enzyme alkaline phosphatase. This drug has been proven to reduce side effects such as dry mouth and difficulties in eating or speaking in patients with head and neck cancer treated with radiotherapy, but it also showed significant protection against several chemotherapeutic agents. Amifostine, in pratice, is used only for the reduction of xerostomia 38 .
Another treatment of radiation injury after therapy to prevent the progression to clinical impact is stem cell transplantation. It is known that the stem cell pool has the ability to restore normal tissue structure/function: in fact, in 1967 an experiment by Withers elegantly showed that even one stem cell was sufficient to regrow nodules on a confined annulus of irradiated mouse skin 39 . Later on, the technique was perfected to obtain the survival characteristics of crypt cells of the mouse jejunum 40 , testicular stem cells 41 , and kidney tubules 42 . It has also been shown that stem cells are able to produce colonies when transplanted from a donor animal to a different site in a recipient mouse 43 , 44 . Due to their ability to repopulate an injured tissue, adult stem cells have been proposed for use in the treatment of radiation-induced tissue damage. Hematopoietic stem cell transplantation is currently used to reinstate blood production in leukemia patients, but several pre-clinical treatments with stem cells have shown promising results in different organs (i.e. skin, eye, lung, kidney) and might potentially translate into tissue radioprotection strategies 45 . However, there are many issues regarding use of stem cell therapy, including the lack of definitive markers for stem cells in different tissues, the rarity of the population for a successful transplant, together with major ethical and expense concerns covering the conventional radiotherapy. Therefore, a possible way to avoid complications related to transplant is to find new ways to protect the stem cell pool residing in the irradiated tissue. It is in fact suggested that stem cells are highly sensitive to IR; thus their ability to repopulate an injured tissue could be compromised after radiotheraphy. The mechanisms responsible for stem cell radiosensitivity have not been completely elucidated yet.
Embryonic and fetal DDR and sensitivity to IR
Radiation exposure of embryos and fetuses is of great concern for radiological diagnostics, radioprotection, and human health. Typical fetal doses from diagnostic radiology are usually low but some radio-diagnostic-specific treatments like cancer radiotherapy can expose the fetus to higher and potentially unsafe radiation doses 46 . The deleterious effect of IR to the embryo or fetus is strongly dependent on the stage of development, the absorbed dose, and fractionation 47 – 49 . According to extensive studies performed on animal models, a dose of 0.05–0.5Gy at the first and second week of pregnancy will slightly increase the incidence of implantation failure, but surviving embryos will probably have no significant health effects. During early organogenesis (third to sixth week postconception) the embryo is very vulnerable to growth retardation, teratogenic, and lethal effects of high-dose irradiation, while during early fetal stage the fetus develops a higher tolerance to radiation exposure, although the central nervous system can be seriously affected by high levels of IR exposure. At the end of pregnancy, the fetuses generally do not show any malformation after exposure to low amounts of radiation 50 . Moreover, some effects of radiation can only be observed many years post-exposure, such as behavioral disorders, infertility, neoplasia, and shorter life span 51 . Therefore, a definitive trend of hypersensitivity of embryonic cells has been observed in vivo over the past many decades in clinics and in experimental models as well.
However, research on embryonic stem cell in “culture” models have been inconclusive and often contradict the in vivo observations most likely due to late-passage spontaneous transformation effects in culture. It has been reported that DSBs caused by IR exposure in human embryonic stem cells (hESC) lead to the activation of the ataxia telangiectasia mutated (ATM) signaling pathway 52 , 53 , activating several proteins such as p53, Chk2, and Nbs1. Additionally, the number of γ-H2AX IR-induced foci (IRIF) increases dramatically within minutes following IR and returns almost to control levels in unexposed hESCs cultures within 24 h 54 . Besides the role of ATM in H2AX phosphorylation, Rad3-related (ATR) kinase was also proposed to play a role in the process 53 , 55 . However, our studies on multiple stem cell tissue niches in vivo and early-passage primary stem and isogenic differentiated non-stem cells have shown that murine embryonic stem cells are unable to activate ATM after IR-induced DNA DSB 24 , 30 and that the γ-H2AX IRIF are significantly reduced compared to differentiated counterparts 23 . Similar results were observed by Suchorska and colleagues comparing human embryonic SCs, human induced pluripotent SCs, and primary human dermal fibroblasts 56 . Human embryonic stem cells show a robust apoptotic response after low IR exposure 25 , 57 and a dramatic decrease in cell viability 26 , 56 in a cell-cycle-dependent fashion 58 , 59 . Interestingly, the surviving hESCs continued to express common pluripotency markers and embryonic transcription factors, such as Oct4, Sox2, and Nanog 25 , 52 , 53 , 56 , 60 . The protection of hESCs from apoptosis following different exposures has been investigated and many biological pathways are shown to be involved 61 – 67 , but there are insufficient details regarding the response of hESCs after IR exposure. DNA synthesis and cell proliferation were partially inhibited 68 – 71 but high expressions of anti-apoptotic protein Bcl-2 were found after irradiation together with low levels of pro-apoptotic proteins, indicating that the apoptotic response was not induced after IR exposure 68 , 72 – 75 . In contrast, early-passage primary murine embryonic stem cells showed high apoptotic response after 6 Gy exposure compared to their differentiated isogenic progeny 23 , 24 together with high levels of pro-apoptotic factor Bax and low levels of anti-apoptotic protein Bcl-2 (ref. 30 ). hESCs show a higher number of aberrant mitotics after 2 Gy dose of irradiation compared with negative control and an arrest of the cell cycle in G(2)/M 52 . The influence of IR exposure on hESCs transcriptional response has been analyzed by Sokolov and colleagues: they found that hESCs have a clear pro-apoptotic transcriptional response 2 h after IR exposure, with upregulation of several genes such as BTG2, CDKN1A, SESN1, IER5, GADD45A which are genes often associated with temporal cell cycle arrest. At 16 h post IR the transcription patterns change, showing a strong expression of genes involved in pro-survival pathways and general metabolic signaling 54 . We observed IR-induced changes in the murine embryonic stem cell transcriptome which were associated with affecting biosynthesis, such as ribosome expression, while the non-stem cell transcriptome promoted activation of survival signaling pathways as well as protein digestion and absorption 30 . This aspect of the IR influence on hESCs has not been scrutinized deeply yet; thus, further studies are required. We therefore believe there is a need of serious evaluation of appropriate stem cell radiosensitivity and DDR research models to establish a common platform for inferring and proposing mitigating and/or preventive measures for radioprotection.
Adult stem cells sensitivity to IR
Adult stem cells have the tendency to respond differently from embryonic stem cells after IR-induced DNA damage. While hESC preferentially undergo apoptosis after IR treatment, adult stem cells exhibit a broad variety of responses and studies of stem cell radiosensitivity/radioresistance in literature are generally inconclusive (reviewed in refs. 76 , 77 ). A possible explanation is that stem cells in different tissues reside in niches that have tissue-specific environmental factors needed for stemness maintenance; moreover, the cell cycle status seems likely to play a role. Most importantly, the stem cell models used for studying the phenomenon or the mechanism is crucial in drawing inferences. It is in fact known that some adult stem cells are in the G0 phase of the cell cycle and are therefore quiescent. Many factors intervene in the maintenance of this status, which is believed to be important to preserve long-term proliferative potential and genomic integrity 78 , 79 . However, as quiescent cells, adult stem cells lack DNA damage checkpoints and are unable to activate cell cycle-dependent repair pathways, thus genomic integrity is not maintained 80 – 83 .
DDR activation
Human mesenchymal stem cells (hMSCs) are believed to be relatively resistant to IR exposure 84 – 87 . The proposed explanation for hMSCs is that their niche in vivo is hypoxic, so hMSCs may already be able to hinder the IR effects by having signaling machinery capable of responding to several insults at normoxic conditions 88 . DDR, like ATM protein phosphorylation, cell-cycle checkpoint activation, and DSB repair are some of the cellular mechanisms proposed to explain hMSCs radioresistance 72 , 85 , 89 , 90 . Some studies observed high levels of phosphorylated histone H2AX in MSC after IR exposure as a marker of DNA DSB repair process 74 , 85 – 87 , 91 , 92 , while other studies found overexpression 3 days post IR indicating a possible execution of cell senescence program 68 . Recently, it has been proposed that human MSCs exposed to prolonged X-irradiation accumulated γ-H2AX and 53BP1 foci differently compared to acute X-irradiation 93 ; a careful distinction between the roles of apoptosis-related pan-nuclear γ-H2AX versus DDR-related γ-H2AX IRIF specific to the DSBs is required 23 .
After 4 Gy of IR treatment, human hematopoietic stem cells (hHSCs) did not show any activation of the cell cycle checkpoints 29 , but high levels of γ-H2AX have been reported in hHSC subpopulations when compared to more mature progenitors at 12 h post 3 Gy of IR, indicative of persistent DNA DSBs in these cells 94 . These results are in contrast to those presented after non-IR-related oxidative stress induction in hHSCs. It has been shown that hHSCs respond to oxidative damage with a strong activation of ATM, p53, 53BP1, CHK2, and FOXO3a and a senescence-like cell cycle arrest 95 , 96 . Recently, Biechonski and colleagues 97 found that hematopoietic stem and early progenitor cells exhibit reduced NHEJ activities in comparison to non-lineage committed progenitors, along with more persistent 53BP1 foci. Moreover, the DNA repair process in hHSCs needs the presence of thrombopoietin, which supports important microenvironmental factors in the regulation of hHSCs IR exposure response 98 . Keratinocyte and melanocyte stem cells have reportedly shown high levels of γ-H2AX IRIF after 5 Gy irradiation with reduced colony-forming activity in culture and delayed hair cycle in vivo 99 while lower dose of IR did not exert any effect on cell survival 100 .
Limited studies on DNA DSB repair in human neural stem cell (hNSC) cultures have reported the presence of γ-H2AX foci after irradiation, which reaches the IRIF level of non-IR treated cells 3 h after IR exposure 27 . However, careful in vivo experimentations by our group that has been published in recent years are in contrast with these findings where we demonstrate that instead of foci formation, pan-nuclear H2AX-S139 phosphorylation is observed and that murine neural stem cells selectively undergo IR-induced apoptosis compared to the non-stem differentiated cells in the hippocampal tissue niche (Fig. 1a ). Stem cells in intestine (Fig. 1b ) and testis (Fig. 1c ) showed the same response, with superficial tissues like testis showing massive depletion of spermatogenesis in response to irradiation (Fig. 1d ). As mentioned before, careful observation of DSB IRIFs versus pan-nuclear apoptotic γ-H2AX in multiple tissue niches and primary culture models, noγ-H2AX IRIFs were detected in stem cells (Fig. 2 ), indicating that stem cells are deficient in enabling DDR activation and DNA repair after radiation exposure 23 . Fig. 1 Stem cells are more radiosensitive than their differentiated progeny. a TUNEL staining (yellow-green signals) was performed in the dentate gyrus of the hippocampus obtained from brains of C57BL/6 mice after 6 Gy whole-body IR. b TUNEL staining was performed in tissue sections of adult murine intestine after 6 Gy IR. c TUNEL staining was performed in tissue sections of adult murine testis after 6 Gy IR. d TUNEL staining was performed in tissue sections of adult murine testis after 12 Gy IR. Scale bar = 10 µm. Original picture included for illustrative purposes, referring to ref. 23 Fig. 2 Stem cells (marked with red signals) fail to form γ-H2AX foci (green signals) after ionizing radiation treatment. γ-H2AX was detected in adult murine testis stem cells by immunostaining after 0Gy (A) and 6 Gy IR (B). Scale bar = 10 µm. Original picture included for illustrative purposes, referring to ref. 23
More detailed studies are required to determine whether the varying DDRs observed in several stem cell populations is due to dissimilar cell cycle status, since stem cells from diverse niches proliferate at different rates or may be in a quiescent or proliferative stage.
Apoptotic response activation
hHSCs respond with massive apoptotic activation following low dose IR, showing both dose and time dependency 28 , 29 , 101 , 102 and an implication of Bcl-2, p53, and ASPP1 in the process 94 . The same response has been observed in murine HSCs after 2 Gy treatment 30 . The clonogenic potential in 2 Gy-irradiated hHSCs decreased to ∼50–60% compared with the non-irradiated control 103 while Wang et al. 104 , 105 found that 6.5 Gy total body irradiation drove HSC to senescence. On the contrary, Chang and collaborators 106 found that in vivo 1 Gy exposure was sufficient to drive HSC to quiescence, without any apoptotic effect observed in stem cells. No significant alterations in cellular senescence and apoptosis were detected in HSCs after exposure to low dose of radiation 107 .
hNSCs were previously shown to undergo programmed cell death after low, modest, and high doses of IR 24 , 27 , 57 , 108 in a dose-dependent way 27 , with the surviving populations mostly starting a senescence process 109 , although hNSC radiosensitivity seems to be subpopulation-dependent 110 . Additionally, it has been recently observed that 10 Gy treatment affected both the cell survival and degree of differentiation in NSC through a bystander effect and activation of pro-apoptotic factors 111 . The apoptosis-susceptible nature of the irradiated hNSCs has been associated with a TRAIL-R2-mediated signaling cascade with activation of caspase-3 (ref. 112 ) and with prolonged upregulation of phosphorylated p53 (ref. 113 ). Activation of caspase-3 was found in murine spermatogonial stem cells after 6 Gy IR exposure (Fig. 3 ) and has been published before 23 , 24 , 30 . Fig. 3 Stem cells undergo apoptosis after ionizing radiation treatment. Cleaved caspase-3 (CC-3) was detected in adult murine testis stem cells by immunostaining after 6 Gy IR. Scale bar = 10 µm. Original picture included for illustrative purposes, referring to ref. 23
P53-dependent apoptosis has also been observed in Lgr5+ intestinal stem cells after irradiation in culture and mice 114 . In vivo experiments on mice show that 10% of intestinal stem cells initiate apoptosis after low doses, although cell death had no appreciable effect on tissue architecture 115 , 116 , while 15 Gy treatment caused more widespread apoptosis of Lgr5+ intestinal stem cells, resulting in a failure to restore viability of the small intestines 117 . We found Lgr5+ intestinal stem cells in ex vivo organoid cultures undergo massive apoptosis after 6 Gy irradiation while proliferative cells marked with Ki67 positivity largely comprised of SSEA1-negative non-stem cells in the same organoids showed greater radioresistance 30 .
The effect of IR on mesenchymal stem cells has been widely scrutinized in the past: minimal induction of cellular apoptosis was observed after treatment up to 20 Gy, with MSCs showing high expression levels of anti-apoptotic proteins BCL-2 and BCL-XL and low levels of pro-apoptotic proteins such as Puma (reviewed in ref. 73 ).
Although different stem cell populations respond with a diverse degree of programmed cell death, the dose utilized seems to play a fundamental role in the process.
Cell cycle arrest
hMSCs show a high and constant level of p53 after high doses of gamma-irradiation 68 , with ATM implicated in the post -translational modifications of p53 on ser 15, Chk1 on ser 345, and Chk2 on thr 68 (ref. 118 ). On the contrary, Kurpinski et al. 119 found a modest gene expression change 5 h post 1 Gy of IR in hMSCs, although the downregulation of cyclin E2 (CCNE2) caused cell cycle arrest at this time point, while Jin et al. 120 observed a complex response in the transcriptomic analysis of hMSCs after IR exposures, with early-response genes expressed at low doses and late-response gene at the highest doses. These conflicting results can be explained in the elegant work of Wu and colleagues: using early- and late-passage mesenchymal stem cells, they found IR exposure resulted in a decreasing trend in arresting both early- and late-passage MSCs in the G0/G1 phase up to 72 h post IR, and a substantial accumulation of early-passage MSCs in the G2/M phase. These results indicate that early-passage MSCs possess more effective cell cycle checkpoints in G2/M following IR exposure. It is likely that DNA damage is repaired through error-free HR in early-passage MSCs. Given that more late-passage MSCs were in the G0/G1 phase, the error-prone NHEJ can be the major DNA repair mechanism for late-passage MSCs, which may result in more genomic alterations 87 .
Intestinal stem cells undergo massive apoptosis after 20 Gy irradiation and show G2/M arrest induced by radiation to prevent mitotic catastrophe in a p53-independent manner 121 . In contrast, lower doses induced p53-mediated cell cycle arrest and protect the stem cell niche after DNA damage 122 . Lgr5+ intestinal stem cell radiosensitivity has been suggested to be CDK 4/6-dependent 123 , although a more recent study suggested that their radiosensitivity is related to DNA damage-dependent activation of Wnt signaling 124 . Moreover, although small and large intestines possess seemingly similar Lgr5+ stem cells, colonic epithelial stem cells (CESC) have been shown to be markedly more radioresistant in vivo than small intestinal crypt base columnar stem cells. Lgr5+ CESCs displayed delayed checkpoint recovery at 48 h post-19 Gy, which correlated with complete DSB repair and regeneration of colonic mucosa 125 .
It seems therefore that the cell cycle status might play an important role in stem cell radiosensitivity, dictating the activation of error-prone or error-free DNA repair mechanism after IR.
The pluralistic regulatory mechanisms of stem cell sensitivity to IR
Stem cell radiosensitivity is due to several signaling pathways that are activated/deactivated in response to irradiation. We believe that pluralistic interaction of molecular and epigenetic mechanisms collectively regulate and impart IR hypersensitive phenotype to the normal stem cells. Recently, we have found that stem cells constitutively express PP2A, which antagonizes and impairs DDR activation and promotes apoptosis at 0 Gy (Fig 4a, b ) and after 6 Gy treatment (Fig. 4c ), as has been published before 30 , confirming the hypothesis of Chowdhury et al. 126 . Fig. 4 Stem cells display constitutively elevated IR-induced PP2A levels. a PP2A detected in adult murine intestine by immunostaining at 0 Gy. b PP2A detected in adult murine testis by immunostaining at 0 Gy. c PP2A detected in adult murine testis by immunostaining at 30 min after 6 Gy. Scale bar = 10 µm. Original picture included for illustrative purposes, referring to ref. 30
The method by which gene expression is regulated without altering the genomic sequence, known as epigenetics, is another key factor involved in this multifaceted mechanism. Epigenetic changes include DNA methylation, histone acetylation, and miRNA-regulated gene expression 127 , 128 . Epigenetic alterations have been found to contribute to the pathogenesis of radiation-induced carcinogenesis 129 by the reactivation of oncogenes and the silencing of tumor suppressor genes 130 . These events can result in genomic instability and consequent carcinogenesis in many models 131 – 134 .
Many epigenetic studies on ESC and induced pluripotent SC maintenance and differentiation have been extensively reviewed 135 – 140 , while little is known about epigenetic modifications after IR exposure.
Recently, the relationship between histone modifications and stem cell radiation responses has led to new insights: acetylation and methylation on different residues of H3 histone has been shown to play an important role in the radiosensitivity of stem cells. H3K9 modifications have been previously analyzed in ES cells 141 – 143 . Local downregulation of H3K9ac has been reported in ES cells, accompanying recruitment of the transcription factor OCT4 to DNA lesions 144 . In contrast, we found that ES cells are unable to deacetylate H3K9 at the DNA damage site compared to differentiated cells (Fig 5a, b ), thereby limiting trimethylation on the same amino acid residue and consequent DNA damage repair as has been published before 24 (Fig. 5c, d ). In fact, H3K9 trimethylation is fundamental in the regulation of ATM activation after DNA DSB 145 , 146 . Deacetylation of H3K9 and consequent trimethylation has been proven to increase stem cells radioresistance, decrease IR-induced apoptotic response, and induce DDR activation 24 . Moreover, constitutively elevated histone-3 lysine-56 acetylation (H3K56ac) in stem cells results in a repressive chromatin environment that interferes with DDR activation and promotes radiosensitivity. Recruitment of histone deacetylases and deacetylation of H3K56ac is required at DSB for adequate DDR activation in non-stem cells 147 , 148 . We have observed higher H3K56 acetylation levels exclusively in neural stem cells of the dentate gyrus displaying elevated H3K56ac 23 (Fig 6a, b ). Knockdown of H3K56 acetyltransferase p300 reduced H3K56ac and significantly decreased radiosensitivity, restored DDR function, and increased stem cell survival 23 . Fig. 5 Stem cells fail to deacetylate H3K9 after ionizing radiation treatment and trimethylate the same residue. a H3K9 acetylation was detected in hippocampal stem cells obtained from brains of WT C57BL/6 mice by immunostaining after 6 Gy IR. b H3K9 acetylation was detected in adult murine testis stem cells by immunostaining after 6 Gy IR. c H3K9 trimethylation was detected in hippocampal stem cells obtained from brains of WT C57BL/6 mice by immunostaining after 6 Gy IR. d H3K9 trimethylation was detected in adult murine testis stem cells by immunostaining after 6 Gy IR. Scale bar = 10 µm. Original picture included for illustrative purposes, referring to ref. 24 Fig. 6 Stem cells display higher levels of H3K56ac (red signals) and pan-nuclear apoptotic H2AX-S139 phosphorylation 6 h after irradiation. H3K56 acetylation and H2AX phosphorylation was detected in hippocampal stem cells obtained from brains of C57BL/6 mice by immunostaining a 3 h and b 6 h after 6 Gy IR. Scale bar = 10 µm. Original picture included for illustrative purposes, referring to ref. 23
A constitutively elevated level of H2AX-Y142 phosphorylation has been found in stem cells compared to differentiated counterparts 23 . The relationship between γ-H2AX IRIF, pan-γ-H2AX, and H2AX-pY142 has been previously elucidated 149 , suggesting that the close proximity of persistent H2AX-pY142 sterically hinders access to the S139 site in stem cells, thereby inhibiting DDR signaling and promoting IR-induced apoptosis.
Alterations in methylation levels after 3 Gy of IR have been reported in vivo 150 – 152 and a correlation between global DNA hypomethylation and increased radiosensitivity has been observed in somatic cell lines 127 , 153 – 155 . On the contrary, exposure to 3 Gy X-irradiation does not lead to changes in DNA methylation in murine ES cells and radiosensitivity is independent of DNA methylation levels. However, de novo methyltransferases DNMT3A and DNMT3B may play a role in modulating sensitivity to X-rays in mESCs as their absence seems to have a modest radioprotective effect 156 . Moreover, DNA methylation status of 50 Long Interspersed Nuclear Element 1 (LINE-1) did not differ significantly in HSCs, hematopoietic progenitor cells, and mononuclear cells in C57BL/6J compared to radiosensitive CBA/J mice immediately after IR. In contrast, a significant decrease in LINE-1 DNA methylation in HSCs was observed in CBA/J 2 months post-treatment, suggesting that epigenetic alterations may potentially serve as driving forces of radiation-induced carcinogenesis 157 .
5-Hydroxylmethylcytosine (5hmC) is a potential indicator of active DNA demethylation and its distribution patterns provide a global view of gene activation. Murine pluripotent cells have been reported to have constitutively high levels of 5hmC 158 , 159 together with elevated γ-H2AX foci 160 while only a minor subset of γ-H2AX foci colocalized with 5hmC in human embryonic stem cells 161 , 162 . There is no correlation between 5hmC and radiation response in stem cells. While the role of epigenetics in stem cell pluripotency maintenance and self-renewal as well as differentiation has been largely investigated 163 , further investigations are needed to elucidate its role in stem-cell-specific IR response (Fig. 7 ). Fig. 7 Graphical abstract summarizing the concept of this review. Stem cells reside inside tissue niches together with differentiated non-stem cells. After radiation therapy, non-stem cells respond with chromatin modifications which allows the damage site to become accessible to DDR and repairosome complex to repair the DNA damage. On the contrary, stem cells chromatin configuration remains non-permissive and DNA repair factors are not recruited on damage site. This attenuated DDR, impaired signaling, and induction of apoptosis leads to radiation hypersensitivity of stem cells
Conclusions
Radiation therapy treats many types of cancer effectively, but like other treatments, it can cause complications. Tissue injuries are observed in many cancer patients undergoing IR treatment and the preservation of healthy cells has become an important medical concern, especially in pediatric oncology. Stem cell transplants, although effective in hematopoietic cancer patients, have enormous practical limitations and therefore the protection of in loco radiosensitive stem cells seems to be a more feasible strategy. Our present knowledge on mechanisms of normal stem cell radiosensitivity is still evolving in a piecemeal manner, but clearly the stem cell-specific responses to IR exposure involve molecular genetic, signaling, and epigenetic regulations. Discovering the pluralistically interacting mechanisms and regulatory molecular targets involved in normal stem cell radiosensitivity could lead to innovative therapies that can eradicate cancer while preserving the stem/progenitor cells.
Edited by I. Lavrik
Publisher’s note: Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Acknowledgements
We would like to apologize to all colleagues whose work could not be cited due to space limitations. We acknowledge work of all previous members of the our laboratory. Funding was provided by NIH R01CA174966 and Department of Radiation Oncology of Washington University School of Medicine.
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
References
1. Orthwein A Mitosis inhibits DNA double-strand break repair to guard against telomere fusions Science 2014 344 189 193 10.1126/science.1248024 24652939
2. Biehs R DNA double-strand break resection occurs during non-homologous end joining in G1 but is distinct from resection during homologous recombination Mol. Cell 2017 65 671 684 e675 10.1016/j.molcel.2016.12.016 28132842 PMC5316416
3. Tsouroula K Temporal and spatial uncoupling of DNA double strand break repair pathways within mammalian heterochromatin Mol. Cell 2016 63 293 305 10.1016/j.molcel.2016.06.002 27397684
4. Campisi J d'Adda di Fagagna F Cellular senescence: when bad things happen to good cells Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 2007 8 729 740 10.1038/nrm2233 17667954
5. Edinger A Thompson C Death by design: apoptosis, necrosis and autophagy Curr. Opin. Cell Biol. 2004 16 663 669 10.1016/j.ceb.2004.09.011 15530778
6. Heydarirad G Rezaeizadeh H Choopani R Mosavat SH Ameri A Efficacy of a traditional Persian medicine preparation for radiation-induced xerostomia: a randomized, open-label, active-controlled trial J. Integr. Med. 2017 15 201 208 10.1016/S2095-4964(17)60333-9 28494850
7. Ryan JL Ionizing radiation: the good, the bad, and the ugly J. Invest. Dermatol. 2012 132 985 993 10.1038/jid.2011.411 22217743 PMC3779131
8. McQuestion M Evidence-based skin care management in radiation therapy Semin. Oncol. Nurs. 2006 22 163 173 10.1016/j.soncn.2006.04.004 16893745
9. Hymes SR Strom EA Fife C Radiation dermatitis: clinical presentation, pathophysiology, and treatment 2006 J. Am. Acad. Dermatol. 2006 54 28 46 10.1016/j.jaad.2005.08.054 16384753
10. Chang DW te Marvelde L Chua BH Prospective study of local control and late radiation toxicity after intraoperative radiation therapy boost for early breast cancer Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys. 2014 88 73 79 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2013.09.049 24331652
11. Hoeller U Bonacker M Bajrovic A Alberti W Adam G Radiation-induced plexopathy and fibrosis. Is magnetic resonance imaging the adequate diagnostic tool? Strahlenther. Onkol. 2004 180 650 654 10.1007/s00066-004-1240-3 15480514
12. Dorr W Hendry JH Consequential late effects in normal tissues Radiother. Oncol. 2001 61 223 231 10.1016/S0167-8140(01)00429-7 11730991
13. Hellman S Botnick L Stem cell depletion: an explanation of the late effects of cytotoxins Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys. 1977 2 181 184 10.1016/0360-3016(77)90028-1 849898
14. Thotala DK Geng L Dickey AK Hallahan DE Yazlovitskaya EM A new class of molecular targeted radioprotectors: GSK-3beta inhibitors Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys. 2010 76 557 565 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2009.09.024 20117291 PMC2873869
15. Kim HW Dual effects of human placenta-derived neural cells on neuroprotection and the inhibition of neuroinflammation in a rodent model of Parkinson's disease Cell Transplant. 2018 27 814 830 10.1177/0963689718766324 29871515 PMC6047269
16. Eve DJ Reduction of microhemorrhages in the spinal cord of symptomatic ALS mice after intravenous human bone marrow stem cell transplantation accompanies repair of the blood-spinal cord barrier Oncotarget 2018 9 10621 10634 10.18632/oncotarget.24360 29535831 PMC5828209
17. Thomsen, G. M. et al. Transplantation of neural progenitor cells expressing glial cell line-derived neurotrophic factor into the motor cortex as a strategy to treat amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. Stem Cells 10.1002/stem.2825 (2018). 10.1002/stem.2825 29656478
18. Yin Y The homing of human umbilical cord-derived mesenchymal stem cells and the subsequent modulation of macrophage polarization in type 2 diabetic mice Int. Immunopharmacol. 2018 60 235 245 10.1016/j.intimp.2018.04.051 29778021
19. Mucci, A.et al. iPSC-derived macrophages effectively treat pulmonary alveolar proteinosis in Csf2rb-deficient mice. Stem Cell Rep . 10.1016/j.stemcr.2018.07.006 (2018). 10.1016/j.stemcr.2018.07.006 PMC6135208 30100408
20. Zhang, D. Y. et al. Sirtuin3 protects aged human mesenchymal stem cells against oxidative stress and enhances efficacy of cell therapy for ischaemic heart diseases. J. Cell Mol. Med. 10.1111/jcmm.13821 (2018). 10.1111/jcmm.13821 PMC6201360 30091830
21. Acharya MM Rosi S Jopson T Limoli CL Human neural stem cell transplantation provides long-term restoration of neuronal plasticity in the irradiated hippocampus Cell Transplant. 2015 24 691 702 10.3727/096368914X684600 25289634 PMC5027839
22. Baulch JE Cranial grafting of stem cell-derived microvesicles improves cognition and reduces neuropathology in the irradiated brain Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 2016 113 4836 4841 10.1073/pnas.1521668113 27044087 PMC4855546
23. Jacobs KM Unique epigenetic influence of H2AX phosphorylation and H3K56 acetylation on normal stem cell radioresponses Mol. Biol. Cell 2016 27 1332 1345 10.1091/mbc.E16-01-0017 26941327 PMC4831886
24. Meyer B Histone H3 lysine 9 acetylation obstructs ATM activation and promotes ionizing radiation sensitivity in normal stem cells Stem Cell Rep. 2016 7 1013 1022 10.1016/j.stemcr.2016.11.004 PMC5161741 27974220
25. Solokov, M. & Neumman, R. Human embryonic stem cell responses to ionizing radiation exposures: current state of knowledge and future challenges. Stem Cells Int . 2012 , 579104 (2012). 10.1155/2012/579104 PMC3431129 22966236
26. Filion T Survival responses of human embryonic stem cells to DNA damage J. Cell. Physiol. 2009 220 586 592 10.1002/jcp.21735 19373864 PMC2925401
27. Acharya M Consequences of ionizing radiation-induced damage in human neural stem cells Free Radic. Biol. Med 2010 49 1846 1855 10.1016/j.freeradbiomed.2010.08.021 20826207
28. Katoh O Tauchi H Kawaishi K Kimura A Satow Y Expression of the vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) receptor gene, KDR, in hematopoietic cells and inhibitory effect of VEGF on apoptotic cell death caused by ionizing radiation Cancer Res. 1995 55 5687 5692 7585655
29. Becker D Response of human hematopoietic stem and progenitor cells to energetic carbon ions Int. J. Radiat. Biol. 2009 85 1051 1059 10.3109/09553000903232850 19895282
30. Fabbrizi MR Transient PP2A inhibition alleviates normal tissue stem cell susceptibility to cell death during radiotherapy Cell Death Dis. 2018 9 492 10.1038/s41419-018-0559-0 29706648 PMC5924762
31. Lomax ME Folkes LK O'Neill P Biological consequences of radiation-induced DNA damage: relevance to radiotherapy Clin. Oncol. (R. Coll. Radiol.) 2013 25 578 585 10.1016/j.clon.2013.06.007 23849504
32. Close DM Nelson WH Bernhard WA DNA damage by the direct effect of ionizing radiation: products produced by two sequential one-electron oxidations J. Phys. Chem. A 2013 117 12608 12615 10.1021/jp4084844 24131335
33. Katsube T Effects of chronic restraint-induced stress on radiation-induced chromosomal aberrations in mouse splenocytes Mutat. Res. 2017 813 18 26 10.1016/j.mrgentox.2016.11.005 28010925
34. Balajee AS Bertucci A Taveras M Brenner DJ Multicolour FISH analysis of ionising radiation induced micronucleus formation in human lymphocytes Mutagenesis 2014 29 447 455 10.1093/mutage/geu041 25217771 PMC4201842
35. Fajardo LF The pathology of ionizing radiation as defined by morphologic patterns Acta Oncol. 2005 44 13 22 10.1080/02841860510007440 15848902
36. Denham JW Hauer-Jensen M The radiotherapeutic injury—a complex 'wound' Radiother. Oncol. 2002 63 129 145 10.1016/S0167-8140(02)00060-9 12063002
37. Kalman NS Zhao SS Anscher MS Urdaneta AI Current status of targeted radioprotection and radiation injury mitigation and treatment agents: a critical review of the literature Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys. 2017 98 662 682 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2017.02.211 28581409
38. Hall, E. J. & Giaccia, A. J. Radiobiology for the Radiologist . 6th edn (Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, 2006).
39. Withers HR The dose-survival relationship for irradiation of epithelial cells of mouse skin Br. J. Radiol. 1967 40 187 194 10.1259/0007-1285-40-471-187 6019041
40. Withers HR Regeneration of intestinal mucosa after irradiation Cancer 1971 28 75 81 10.1002/1097-0142(197107)28:1<75::AID-CNCR2820280115>3.0.CO;2-8 5110648
41. Withers HR Hunter N Barkley HT Jr Reid BO Radiation survival and regeneration characteristics of spermatogenic stem cells of mouse testis Radiat. Res. 1974 57 88 103 10.2307/3573759 10874929
42. Withers HR Mason KA Thames HD Jr. Late radiation response of kidney assayed by tubule-cell survival Br. J. Radiol. 1986 59 587 595 10.1259/0007-1285-59-702-587 3708268
43. McCulloch EA Till JE The sensitivity of cells from normal mouse bone marrow to gamma radiation in vitro and in vivo Radiat. Res. 1962 16 822 832 10.2307/3571281 16722000
44. Gould MN Biel WF Clifton KH Morphological and quantitative studies of gland formation from inocula of monodispersed rat mammary cells Exp. Cell Res. 1977 107 405 416 10.1016/0014-4827(77)90362-7 194784
45. Coppes RP van der Goot A Lombaert IM Stem cell therapy to reduce radiation-induced normal tissue damage Semin. Radiat. Oncol. 2009 19 112 121 10.1016/j.semradonc.2008.11.005 19249649
46. Donnelly EH Smith JM Farfan EB Ozcan I Prenatal radiation exposure: background material for counseling pregnant patients following exposure to radiation Disaster Med. Public Health Prep. 2011 5 62 68 10.1001/dmp.2011.2 21402828
47. De Santis M Radiation effects on development Birth Defects Res. C Embryo Today 2007 81 177 182 10.1002/bdrc.20099 17963274
48. Brent RL Protection of the gametes embryo/fetus from prenatal radiation exposure Health Phys. 2015 108 242 274 10.1097/HP.0000000000000235 25551507
49. Shaw P Duncan A Vouyouka A Ozsvath K Radiation exposure and pregnancy J. Vasc. Surg. 2011 53 28S 34S 10.1016/j.jvs.2010.05.140 20869193
50. Brent RL Clinical teratology counseling and consultation case report: exposure to diagnostic radiation early in pregnancy Teratology 1992 46 31 33 10.1002/tera.1420460106 1641809
51. Wakeford R Little MP Risk coefficients for childhood cancer after intrauterine irradiation: a review Int. J. Radiat. Biol. 2003 79 293 309 10.1080/0955300031000114729 12943238
52. Momcilovic O Ionizing radiation induces ataxia telangiectasia mutated-dependent checkpoint signaling and G2 but not G1 cell cycle arrest in pluripotent human embryonic stem cells Stem Cells 2009 27 1822 1835 10.1002/stem.123 19544417 PMC3340923
53. Suvorova II Kozhukharova IV Nikol'skii NN Pospelov VA [ATM/ATR signaling pathway activation in human embryonic stem cells after DNA damage] Tsitologiia 2013 55 841 851 25474902
54. Sokolov M Panyutin I Panyutin I Neumann R Dynamics of the transcriptome response of cultured human embryonic stem cells to ionizing radiation exposure Mutat. Res. 2011 709-710 40 48 10.1016/j.mrfmmm.2011.02.008 21376742 PMC3098609
55. Adams B Golding S Rao R Valerie K Dynamic dependence on ATR and ATM for double-strand break repair in human embryonic stem cells and neural descendants PLoS ONE 2010 5 e10001 10.1371/journal.pone.0010001 20368801 PMC2848855
56. Suchorska WM Augustyniak E Lukjanow M Comparison of the early response of human embryonic stem cells and human induced pluripotent stem cells to ionizing radiation Mol. Med. Rep. 2017 15 1952 1962 10.3892/mmr.2017.6270 28259963 PMC5364988
57. Barazzuol L Jeggo PA In vivo sensitivity of the embryonic and adult neural stem cell compartments to low-dose radiation J. Radiat. Res. 2016 57 Suppl 1 i2 i10 10.1093/jrr/rrw013 27125639 PMC4990107
58. Dumitru R Human embryonic stem cells have constitutively active Bax at the Golgi and are primed to undergo rapid apoptosis Mol. Cell 2012 46 573 583 10.1016/j.molcel.2012.04.002 22560721 PMC3372694
59. Mujoo K Differentiation of human induced pluripotent or embryonic stem cells decreases the DNA damage repair by homologous recombination Stem Cell Rep. 2017 9 1660 1674 10.1016/j.stemcr.2017.10.002 PMC5831054 29103969
60. Wilson K Effects of ionizing radiation on self-renewal and pluripotency of human embryonic stem cells Cancer Res. 2010 70 5539 5548 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-09-4238 20530673 PMC3014320
61. Yang C Opposing putative roles for canonical and noncanonical NFkappaB signaling on the survival, proliferation, and differentiation potential of human embryonic stem cells Stem Cells 2010 28 1970 1980 10.1002/stem.528 20882529
62. Bai H Bcl-xL enhances single-cell survival and expansion of human embryonic stem cells without affecting self-renewal Stem Cell Res. 2012 8 26 37 10.1016/j.scr.2011.08.002 22099018 PMC3222876
63. Conklin J Baker J Sage J The RB family is required for the self-renewal and survival of human embryonic stem cells Nat. Commun. 2012 3 1244 10.1038/ncomms2254 23212373
64. Ardehali R Overexpression of BCL2 enhances survival of human embryonic stem cells during stress and obviates the requirement for serum factors Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 2011 108 3282 3287 10.1073/pnas.1019047108 21300885 PMC3044421
65. Edel M Rem2 GTPase maintains survival of human embryonic stem cells as well as enhancing reprogramming by regulating p53 and cyclin D1 Genes Dev. 2010 24 561 573 10.1101/gad.1876710 20231315 PMC2841334
66. Vinarsky V Human embryonic and induced pluripotent stem cells express TRAIL receptors and can be sensitized to TRAIL-induced apoptosis Stem. Cells Dev. 2013 22 2964 2974 10.1089/scd.2013.0057 23806100 PMC3822377
67. Zhang L Activated mitochondrial apoptosis in hESCs after dissociation involving the PKA/p-p53/Bax signaling pathway Exp. Cell Res. 2018 369 226 233 10.1016/j.yexcr.2018.05.024 29802837
68. Cmielova J Gamma radiation induces senescence in human adult mesenchymal stem cells from bone marrow and periodontal ligaments Int. J. Radiat. Biol. 2012 88 393 404 10.3109/09553002.2012.666001 22348537
69. Ko E Lee K Hwang D Human umbilical cord blood-derived mesenchymal stem cells undergo cellular senescence in response to oxidative stress Stem. Cells Dev. 2012 21 1877 1886 10.1089/scd.2011.0284 22066510 PMC3396141
70. Havelek R Ionizing radiation induces senescence and differentiation of human dental pulp stem cells Folia Biol. (Krakow) 2013 59 188 197 10.14712/fb2013059050188 24280141
71. Sergeeva VA Low-dose ionizing radiation affects mesenchymal stem cells via extracellular oxidized cell-free DNA: a possible mediator of bystander effect and adaptive response Oxid. Med. Cell Longev. 2017 2017 9515809 10.1155/2017/9515809 28904740 PMC5585687
72. Nicolay N Mesenchymal stem cells retain their defining stem cell characteristics after exposure to ionizing radiation Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys. 2013 87 1171 1178 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2013.09.003 24351412
73. Nicolay N Mesenchymal stem cells are resistant to carbon ion radiotherapy Oncotarget 2015 6 2076 2087 25504442 10.18632/oncotarget.2857 PMC4385837
74. Alessio N Low dose radiation induced senescence of human mesenchymal stromal cells and impaired the autophagy process Oncotarget 2015 6 8155 8166 10.18632/oncotarget.2692 25544750 PMC4480742
75. Li XH Ha CT Xiao M MicroRNA-30 inhibits antiapoptotic factor Mcl-1 in mouse and human hematopoietic cells after radiation exposure Apoptosis 2016 21 708 720 10.1007/s10495-016-1238-1 27032651 PMC4853469
76. Prise KM Saran A Concise review: stem cell effects in radiation risk Stem Cells 2011 29 1315 1321 21755574 10.1002/stem.690
77. Squillaro T Galano G De Rosa R Peluso G Galderisi U Concise review: the effect of low-dose ionizing radiation on stem cell biology: a contribution to radiation risk Stem Cells 2018 10.1002/stem.2836 29664142
78. Fuchs E The tortoise and the hair: slow-cycling cells in the stem cell race Cell 2009 137 811 819 10.1016/j.cell.2009.05.002 19490891 PMC2716122
79. Cheung TH Rando TA Molecular regulation of stem cell quiescence Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 2013 14 329 340 10.1038/nrm3591 23698583 PMC3808888
80. Kim JS Independent and sequential recruitment of NHEJ and HR factors to DNA damage sites in mammalian cells J. Cell Biol. 2005 170 341 347 10.1083/jcb.200411083 16061690 PMC2171485
81. Delacote F Lopez BS Importance of the cell cycle phase for the choice of the appropriate DSB repair pathway, for genome stability maintenance: the trans-S double-strand break repair model Cell Cycle 2008 7 33 38 10.4161/cc.7.1.5149 18196958
82. Mao Z Bozzella M Seluanov A Gorbunova V Comparison of nonhomologous end joining and homologous recombination in human cells DNA Repair (Amst.). 2008 7 1765 1771 10.1016/j.dnarep.2008.06.018 18675941 PMC2695993
83. Georgoulis, A., Vorgias, C. E., Chrousos, G. P. & Rogakou, E. P. Genome Instability and gammaH2AX. Int. J. Mol. Sci . 18 , 10.3390/ijms18091979 (2017). 10.3390/ijms18091979 PMC5618628 28914798
84. Chen M The sensitivity of human mesenchymal stem cells to ionizing radiation Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys. 2006 66 244 253 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2006.03.062 16839703
85. Prendergast A Cruet-Hennequart S Shaw G Barry F Carty M Activation of DNA damage response pathways in human mesenchymal stem cells exposed to cisplatin or gamma-irradiation Cell Cycle 2011 10 3768 3777 10.4161/cc.10.21.17972 22037398
86. Oliver L Differentiation-related response to DNA breaks in human mesenchymal stem cells Stem Cells 2013 31 800 807 10.1002/stem.1336 23341263
87. Wu PK Early passage mesenchymal stem cells display decreased radiosensitivity and increased DNA repair activity Stem Cells Transl. Med. 2017 6 1504 1514 10.1002/sctm.15-0394 28544661 PMC5689774
88. Sokolov M Neumann R Lessons learned about human stem cell responses to ionizing radiation exposures: a long road still ahead of us Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2013 14 15695 15723 10.3390/ijms140815695 23899786 PMC3759881
89. Sugrue T Lowndes NF Ceredig R Hypoxia enhances the radioresistance of mouse mesenchymal stromal cells Stem Cells 2014 32 2188 2200 10.1002/stem.1683 24578291
90. Islam MS Stemig ME Takahashi Y Hui SK Radiation response of mesenchymal stem cells derived from bone marrow and human pluripotent stem cells J. Radiat. Res. 2015 56 269 277 10.1093/jrr/rru098 25425005 PMC4380046
91. Sugrue T Lowndes N Ceredig R Mesenchymal stromal cells: radio-resistant members of the bone marrow Immunol. Cell Biol. 2013 91 5 11 10.1038/icb.2012.61 23165606
92. Serakinci N Ectopically hTERT expressing adult human mesenchymal stem cells are less radiosensitive than their telomerase negative counterpart Exp. Cell Res. 2007 313 1056 1067 10.1016/j.yexcr.2007.01.002 17274981
93. Tsvetkova A gammaH2AX, 53BP1 and Rad51 protein foci changes in mesenchymal stem cells during prolonged X-ray irradiation Oncotarget 2017 8 64317 64329 10.18632/oncotarget.19203 28969073 PMC5610005
94. Milyavsky M A distinctive DNA damage response in human hematopoietic stem cells reveals an apoptosis-independent role for p53 in self-renewal Cell Stem Cell 2010 7 186 197 10.1016/j.stem.2010.05.016 20619763
95. Yahata T Accumulation of oxidative DNA damage restricts the self-renewal capacity of human hematopoietic stem cells Blood 2011 118 2941 2950 10.1182/blood-2011-01-330050 21734240
96. Li X Binding to WGR domain by salidroside activates PARP1 and protects hematopoietic stem cells from oxidative stress Antioxid. Redox Signal. 2014 20 1853 1865 10.1089/ars.2013.5600 24294904 PMC3967359
97. Biechonski S Attenuated DNA damage responses and increased apoptosis characterize human hematopoietic stem cells exposed to irradiation Sci. Rep. 2018 8 6071 10.1038/s41598-018-24440-w 29666389 PMC5904119
98. de Laval B Thrombopoietin-increased DNA-PK-dependent DNA repair limits hematopoietic stem and progenitor cell mutagenesis in response to DNA damage Cell Stem Cell 2013 12 37 48 10.1016/j.stem.2012.10.012 23246483
99. Aoki H Hara A Motohashi T Kunisada T Keratinocyte stem cells but not melanocyte stem cells are the primary target for radiation-induced hair graying J. Invest. Dermatol. 2013 133 2143 2151 10.1038/jid.2013.155 23549419
100. Rachidi W Sensing radiosensitivity of human epidermal stem cells Radiother. Oncol. 2007 83 267 276 10.1016/j.radonc.2007.05.007 17540468
101. Shao L Luo Y Zhou D Hematopoietic stem cell injury induced by ionizing radiation Antioxid. Redox Signal. 2014 20 1447 1462 10.1089/ars.2013.5635 24124731 PMC3936513
102. Moehrle BM Stem cell-specific mechanisms ensure genomic fidelity within HSCs and upon aging of HSCs Cell Rep. 2015 13 2412 2424 10.1016/j.celrep.2015.11.030 26686632 PMC4691560
103. Ishikawa J Hayashi N Yamaguchi M Monzen S Kashiwakura I Characteristics of human CD34+ cells exposed to ionizing radiation under cytokine-free conditions J. Radiat. Res. 2015 56 678 690 10.1093/jrr/rrv024 25877692 PMC4497397
104. Wang Y Total body irradiation causes residual bone marrow injury by induction of persistent oxidative stress in murine hematopoietic stem cells Free Radic. Biol. Med. 2010 48 348 356 10.1016/j.freeradbiomed.2009.11.005 19925862 PMC2818724
105. Wang Y Kellner J Liu L Zhou D Inhibition of p38 mitogen-activated protein kinase promotes ex vivo hematopoietic stem cell expansion Stem. Cells Dev. 2011 20 1143 1152 10.1089/scd.2010.0413 21198398 PMC3121934
106. Chang J Low doses of oxygen ion irradiation cause acute damage to hematopoietic cells in mice PLoS ONE 2016 11 e0158097 10.1371/journal.pone.0158097 27367604 PMC4930193
107. Miousse IR Exposure to low-dose (56)Fe-ion radiation induces long-term epigenetic alterations in mouse bone marrow hematopoietic progenitor and stem cells Radiat. Res. 2014 182 92 101 10.1667/RR13580.1 24960414 PMC4267532
108. Katsura M Effects of chronic low-dose radiation on human neural progenitor cells Sci. Rep. 2016 6 20027 10.1038/srep20027 26795421 PMC4726121
109. Zou Y Responses of human embryonic stem cells and their differentiated progeny to ionizing radiation Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 2012 426 100 105 10.1016/j.bbrc.2012.08.043 22917535 PMC3498829
110. Li, Y. Q., Cheng, Z. & Wong, S. Differential apoptosis radiosensitivity of neural progenitors in adult mouse hippocampus. Int. J. Mol. Sci . 17 , 10.3390/ijms17060970 (2016). 10.3390/ijms17060970 PMC4926502 27331809
111. Ivanov VN Hei TK Radiation-induced glioblastoma signaling cascade regulates viability, apoptosis and differentiation of neural stem cells (NSC) Apoptosis 2014 19 1736 1754 10.1007/s10495-014-1040-x 25273222 PMC4378234
112. Ivanov VN Hei TK A role for TRAIL/TRAIL-R2 in radiation-induced apoptosis and radiation-induced bystander response of human neural stem cells Apoptosis 2014 19 399 413 10.1007/s10495-013-0925-4 24158598 PMC3945673
113. Isono M Carbon-ion beams effectively induce growth inhibition and apoptosis in human neural stem cells compared with glioblastoma A172 cells J. Radiat. Res. 2015 56 856 861 10.1093/jrr/rrv033 26070322 PMC4577002
114. Wang X Pharmacologically blocking p53-dependent apoptosis protects intestinal stem cells and mice from radiation Sci. Rep. 2015 5 8566 10.1038/srep08566 25858503 PMC4392360
115. Zhu Y Huang YF Kek C Bulavin DV Apoptosis differently affects lineage tracing of Lgr5 and Bmi1 intestinal stem cell populations Cell Stem Cell 2013 12 298 303 10.1016/j.stem.2013.01.003 23415913
116. Metcalfe C Kljavin NM Ybarra R de Sauvage FJ Lgr5+ stem cells are indispensable for radiation-induced intestinal regeneration Cell Stem Cell 2014 14 149 159 10.1016/j.stem.2013.11.008 24332836
117. Hua G Crypt base columnar stem cells in small intestines of mice are radioresistant Gastroenterology 2012 143 1266 1276 10.1053/j.gastro.2012.07.106 22841781 PMC3480544
118. Cmielova J The effect of ATM kinase inhibition on the initial response of human dental pulp and periodontal ligament mesenchymal stem cells to ionizing radiation Int. J. Radiat. Biol. 2013 89 501 511 10.3109/09553002.2013.775530 23425510
119. Kurpinski K Differential effects of x-rays and high-energy 56Fe ions on human mesenchymal stem cells Int. J. Radiat. Oncol. Biol. Phys. 2009 73 869 877 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2008.10.002 19101095
120. Jin Y Comprehensive analysis of time- and dose-dependent patterns of gene expression in a human mesenchymal stem cell line exposed to low-dose ionizing radiation Oncol. Rep. 2008 19 135 144 18097587
121. Liao Y Paradoxical roles of elongation factor-2 kinase in stem cell survival J. Biol. Chem. 2016 291 19545 19557 10.1074/jbc.M116.724856 27466362 PMC5016690
122. Gurley KE Ashley AK Moser RD Kemp CJ Synergy between Prkdc and Trp53 regulates stem cell proliferation and GI-ARS after irradiation Cell Death Differ. 2017 24 1853 1860 10.1038/cdd.2017.107 28686579 PMC5635213
123. Wei L Inhibition of CDK4/6 protects against radiation-induced intestinal injury in mice J. Clin. Invest. 2016 126 4076 4087 10.1172/JCI88410 27701148 PMC5096907
124. Tao S Wnt activity and basal niche position sensitize intestinal stem and progenitor cells to DNA damage EMBO J. 2017 36 2920 2921 10.15252/embj.201797813 28971845 PMC5623846
125. Hua G Distinct levels of radioresistance in Lgr5+ colonic epithelial stem cells versus Lgr5+ small intestinal stem cells Cancer Res. 2017 77 2124 2133 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-15-2870 28202528 PMC5621135
126. Chowdhury D gamma-H2AX dephosphorylation by protein phosphatase 2A facilitates DNA double-strand break repair Mol. Cell 2005 20 801 809 10.1016/j.molcel.2005.10.003 16310392
127. Aypar U Morgan WF Baulch JE Radiation-induced genomic instability: are epigenetic mechanisms the missing link? Int. J. Radiat. Biol. 2011 87 179 191 10.3109/09553002.2010.522686 21039330
128. Kovalchuk O Baulch JE Epigenetic changes and nontargeted radiation effects—is there a link? Environ. Mol. Mutagen. 2008 49 16 25 10.1002/em.20361 18172877
129. Li L Effect of ionizing radiation at low dose on transgenerational carcinogenesis by epigenetic regulation Lab. Anim. Res. 2017 33 92 97 10.5625/lar.2017.33.2.92 28747973 PMC5527152
130. Song W Increased p16 DNA methylation in mouse thymic lymphoma induced by irradiation PLoS ONE 2014 9 e93850 10.1371/journal.pone.0093850 24747802 PMC3991568
131. Yamazaki J The epigenome of AML stem and progenitor cells Epigenetics 2013 8 92 104 10.4161/epi.23243 23249680 PMC3549884
132. Wakita S Mutations of the epigenetics-modifying gene (DNMT3a, TET2, IDH1/2) at diagnosis may induce FLT3-ITD at relapse in de novo acute myeloid leukemia Leukemia 2013 27 1044 1052 10.1038/leu.2012.317 23135354
133. Shih A Abdel-Wahab O Patel J Levine R The role of mutations in epigenetic regulators in myeloid malignancies Nat. Rev. Cancer 2012 12 599 612 10.1038/nrc3343 22898539
134. Holz-Schietinger C Matje D Reich N Mutations in DNA methyltransferase (DNMT3A) observed in acute myeloid leukemia patients disrupt processive methylation J. Biol. Chem. 2012 287 30941 30951 10.1074/jbc.M112.366625 22722925 PMC3438927
135. Harikumar A Meshorer E Chromatin remodeling and bivalent histone modifications in embryonic stem cells EMBO Rep. 2015 16 1609 1619 10.15252/embr.201541011 26553936 PMC4693513
136. Gładych M Andrzejewska A Oleksiewicz U Estécio M Epigenetic mechanisms of induced pluripotency Contemp. Oncol. (Pozn.) 2015 Q19 A30 38 10.5114/wo.2014.47135 PMC4322530 25691819
137. Shiraki N Ogaki S Kume S Profiling of embryonic stem cell differentiation Rev. Diabet. Stud. 2014 11 102 114 10.1900/RDS.2014.11.102 25148369 PMC4295802
138. Kraushaar D Zhao K The epigenomics of embryonic stem cell differentiation Int. J. Biol. Sci. 2013 9 1134 1144 10.7150/ijbs.7998 24339734 PMC3858586
139. Liang G Zhang Y Embryonic stem cell and induced pluripotent stem cell: an epigenetic perspective Cell Res. 2013 23 49 69 10.1038/cr.2012.175 23247625 PMC3541668
140. Ben-David U Kopper O Benvenisty N Expanding the boundaries of embryonic stem cells Cell Stem Cell 2012 10 666 677 10.1016/j.stem.2012.05.003 22704506
141. Etchegaray JP The histone deacetylase SIRT6 controls embryonic stem cell fate via TET-mediated production of 5-hydroxymethylcytosine Nat. Cell Biol. 2015 17 545 557 10.1038/ncb3147 25915124 PMC4593707
142. Qiao Y Wang R Yang X Tang K Jing N Dual roles of histone H3 lysine 9 acetylation in human embryonic stem cell pluripotency and neural differentiation J. Biol. Chem. 2015 290 2508 2520 10.1074/jbc.M114.603761 25519907 PMC4303699
143. Hammoud SS Chromatin and transcription transitions of mammalian adult germline stem cells and spermatogenesis Cell Stem Cell 2014 15 239 253 10.1016/j.stem.2014.04.006 24835570
144. Bartova E Recruitment of Oct4 protein to UV-damaged chromatin in embryonic stem cells PLoS ONE 2011 6 e27281 10.1371/journal.pone.0027281 22164208 PMC3229488
145. Ayrapetov MK Gursoy-Yuzugullu O Xu C Xu Y Price BD DNA double-strand breaks promote methylation of histone H3 on lysine 9 and transient formation of repressive chromatin Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 2014 111 9169 9174 10.1073/pnas.1403565111 24927542 PMC4078803
146. Sun Y Histone H3 methylation links DNA damage detection to activation of the tumour suppressor Tip60 Nat. Cell Biol. 2009 11 1376 1382 10.1038/ncb1982 19783983 PMC2783526
147. Zhu Q Damaged DNA-binding protein down-regulates epigenetic mark H3K56Ac through histone deacetylase 1 and 2 Mutat. Res. 2015 776 16 23 10.1016/j.mrfmmm.2015.01.005 26255936 PMC5053336
148. Miller KM Human HDAC1 and HDAC2 function in the DNA-damage response to promote DNA nonhomologous end-joining Nat. Struct. Mol. Biol. 2010 17 1144 1151 10.1038/nsmb.1899 20802485 PMC3018776
149. Solier S Pommier Y The apoptotic ring: a novel entity with phosphorylated histones H2AX and H2B and activated DNA damage response kinases Cell Cycle 2009 8 1853 1859 10.4161/cc.8.12.8865 19448405
150. Giotopoulos G DNA methylation during mouse hemopoietic differentiation and radiation-induced leukemia Exp. Hematol. 2006 34 1462 1470 10.1016/j.exphem.2006.06.008 17046565
151. Pogribny I Raiche J Slovack M Kovalchuk O Dose-dependence, sex- and tissue-specificity, and persistence of radiation-induced genomic DNA methylation changes Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 2004 320 1253 1261 10.1016/j.bbrc.2004.06.081 15249225
152. Wang J Genome-wide screen of DNA methylation changes induced by low dose X-ray radiation in mice PLoS ONE 2014 9 e90804 10.1371/journal.pone.0090804 24614869 PMC3948688
153. Dote H Enhancement of in vitro and in vivo tumor cell radiosensitivity by the DNA methylation inhibitor zebularine Clin. Cancer Res. 2005 11 4571 4579 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-05-0050 15958643
154. Narayan A Tuck-Muller C Weissbecker K Smeets D Ehrlich M Hypersensitivity to radiation-induced non-apoptotic and apoptotic death in cell lines from patients with the ICF chromosome instability syndrome Mutat. Res. 2000 456 1 15 10.1016/S0027-5107(00)00103-2 11087891
155. Aypar U Morgan WF Baulch JE Radiation-induced epigenetic alterations after low and high LET irradiations Mutat. Res. 2011 707 24 33 10.1016/j.mrfmmm.2010.12.003 21159317
156. Armstrong CA DNMTs are required for delayed genome instability caused by radiation Epigenetics 2012 7 892 902 10.4161/epi.21094 22722331 PMC3427285
157. Miousse, I. R. et al. Inter-strain differences in LINE-1 DNA methylation in the mousehematopoietic system in response to exposure to ionizing radiation. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 18 , 10.3390/ijms18071430 (2017). 10.3390/ijms18071430 PMC5535921 28677663
158. Ruzov A Lineage-specific distribution of high levels of genomic 5-hydroxymethylcytosine in mammalian development Cell Res. 2011 21 1332 1342 10.1038/cr.2011.113 21747414 PMC3193467
159. Tahiliani M Conversion of 5-methylcytosine to 5-hydroxymethylcytosine in mammalian DNA by MLL partner TET1 Science 2009 324 930 935 10.1126/science.1170116 19372391 PMC2715015
160. Banath JP Explanation for excessive DNA single-strand breaks and endogenous repair foci in pluripotent mouse embryonic stem cells Exp. Cell Res. 2009 315 1505 1520 10.1016/j.yexcr.2008.12.007 19154734
161. Kafer GR 5-Hydroxymethylcytosine marks sites of DNA damage and promotes genome stability Cell Rep. 2016 14 1283 1292 10.1016/j.celrep.2016.01.035 26854228
162. Takashima Y Resetting transcription factor control circuitry toward ground-state pluripotency in human Cell 2014 158 1254 1269 10.1016/j.cell.2014.08.029 25215486 PMC4162745
163. Festuccia N Gonzalez I Navarro P The epigenetic paradox of pluripotent ES cells J. Mol. Biol. 2017 429 1476 1503 10.1016/j.jmb.2016.12.009 27988225