biological activities,12 as the metabolically activated epoxides
located either in a bay or fiord region display different
carcinogenic properties. For instance, the tumorigenic activity
adducts formed upon the reaction of B[a]PDE with naked DNA,
or cell lines and tissue extract of mice that have been exposed to
alkylating agents.27-29 Nonetheless, these methodologies have
some limitations, for example, large amounts of sample require-
ment, extensive liquid-liquid extraction, time-consuming HPLC
or chromatographic purification, as well as expensive instrumenta-
tion. Furthermore, the full product ion scan mode, used in LC-
ESI-triple quadrupole-MS/MS analysis, can not be employed for
the characterization of unknown DNA adducts at trace level,
because of the slow scan rate and the low sensitivity in such scan
mode. Alternatively, an analysis rely on the characteristic retention
time, but searches based on selected reaction monitoring (SRM),
do not permit de novo identification of DNA adducts.30 Taking
all this into account, the availability of a sensitive, accurate and
reliable methodology for the molecular characterization would be
of great interest. To this end, MALDI-TOF-MS, as introduced by
Karas and Hillenkamp in 1987,31 has rapidly become a valuable
technique for the analysis of a wide range of molecules with
sensitivities in the attomole range.32,33
We therefore report the development of a robust and simple
method for the detection and characterization of PAHDE-DNA
adducts based on MALDI-MS. We employ micro solid phase
extraction (µ-SPE) to remove efficiently salt and other contami-
nants of the PAHDE-DNA reaction products. Then MALDI-MS
spectra are recorded to obtain DNA-adduct mass fingerprint
(DMF). Subsequent, MS/MS-CID of selected DMF ions produce
diagnostic fragments that permit an identification and molecular
characterization of PAHDE and the nucleotide involved in the
alkylation, that is, DNA-adducts fragment fingerprint (DFF). The
usefulness of the method is afforded by characterization of adducts
formed in vitro with calf thymus DNA upon reaction with several
different PAHDE. Finally, the MALDI-MS method is also com-
pared with the 32P-postlabeling assay in regards to sensitivity
and specificity.
of fjord region PAHDE is remarkably higher than of the
,13
structurally related bay region PAHDE.7
While guanine
residues are the principal site of reaction for PAHDE derived from
planar hydrocarbons such as B[a]P,14 adenine residues are
targeted as well or more effectively than guanine residues when
the reactive metabolite is derived from a nonplanar hydrocarbon
such as B[c]Ph.15
Much research has been invested for an identification of PAH-
DNA adducts and included HPLC separation techniques coupled
with ultraviolet, or NMR, circular dichroism (CD), UV/visible,
fluorescence spectroscopy and immunoassays.16-19 However, the
most common method used for the sensitive detection of DNA
adducts is the 32P-postlabeling assay. This method involves the
reduction of genomic DNA to single deoxynucleosides-3′-
monophosphate by enzymatic hydrolysis. Then, the enzymatic
transfer of radiolabeled phosphate groups from [32P]-ATP to
nucleotides, followed by the multidimensional thin layer chro-
matography (TLC) allows the separation and detection of
modified nucleotides. This method is widely used, in part, due
to the small amounts of the DNA required and its high
sensitivity, that is, one adduct per 106-108 nonadducted
nucleotides (5 µg DNA)20,21 can be detected, but the method is
laborious with significant inter- and intralaboratory variations.22
Unfortunately, the chemical nature and molecular structure of the
alkylating agent can not be analyzed by this method and cochro-
matographic studies with DNA adduct reference materials resulted
in erroneous information as recently reported.23 There is need
for a method of high sensitivity that permits chemical identification
and characterization of the DNA adducts at the same time. In this
regard, mass spectrometry (MS) based methods were developed
for the study of PAH-DNA adducts, and are based on liquid
chromatography (LC), capillary LC or capillary electrophoresis
(CE) coupled to Electrospray ionization (ESI) tandem mass
spectrometry (MS/MS).24-26 For example, LC-ESI/MS/MS has
been used for the structural characterization of B[a]P-derived DNA
EXPERIMENTAL SECTION
Safety Considerations. Caution: B[a]PDE and B[c]ChDE are
potential mutagenic and carcinogenic agents and must be handled
with care. Protective clothing must be worn. Appropriate safety
procedures should be followed when working with this compound and
for discarded waste materials.
Chemicals and Reagents. Acetonitrile, methanol, and water
were LC-MS grade from JT Baker (Griesheim, Germany). T4
Polynucleotide kinase was from USB Corporation (Cleveland,
OH). Phosphodiesterase II from bovine spleen (SPDE), micro-
coccal nuclease from Staphylococcus aureus (MN) and all other
chemicals were of high-purity grade purchased from Sigma
Chemical Co. (St. Louis, MO).
(12) Dipple, A.; Peltonen, K.; Cheng, S. C.; Ross, H.; Bigger, C. A. Adv. Exp.
Med. Biol. 1994, 354, 101–12
(13) Misra, B.; Amin, S.; Hecht, S. S. Chem. Res. Toxicol. 1992, 5, 242–47
(14) Koreeda, M.; Moore, P. D.; Wislocki, P. G.; Levin, W.; Yagi, H.; Jerina,
D. M. Science 1978, 199, 778–81
(15) Dipple, A.; Pigott, M. A.; Agarwal, S. K.; Yagi, H.; Sayer, J. M.; Jerina, D. M.
Nature 1987, 327, 535–36
(16) Cadet, J.; Weinfeld, M. Anal. Chem. 1993, 65, 675A–82A
.
.
.
.
.
(17) Divi, R. L.; Beland, F. A.; Fu, P. P.; Von Tungeln, L. S.; Schoket, B.; Camara,
J. E.; Ghei, M.; Rothman, N.; Sinha, R.; Poirier, M. C. Carcinogenesis 2002,
23, 2043–49
(18) Amin, S.; Misra, B.; Desai, D.; Huie, K.; Hecht, S. S. Carcinogenesis 1989,
10, 1971–74
(19) Lin, J. M.; Desai, D.; Chung, L.; Hecht, S. S.; Amin, S. Chem. Res. Toxicol.
1999, 12, 341–46
(20) Gupta, R. C. Cancer Res. 1985, 45, 5656–62
(21) Reddy, M. V.; Gupta, R. C.; Randerath, E.; Randerath, K. Carcinogenesis
1984, 5, 231–43
(22) Randerath, K.; Randerath, E. Drug Metab. Rev. 1994, 26, 67–85
(23) Arif, J. M.; Dresler, C.; Clapper, M. L.; Gairola, C. G.; Srinivasan, C.; Lubet,
R. A.; Gupta, R. C. Chem. Res. Toxicol. 2006, 19, 295–99
(24) Singh, R.; Farmer, P. B. Carcinogenesis 2006, 27, 178–96
(25) Barry, J. P.; Norwood, C.; Vouros, P. Anal. Chem. 1996, 68, 1432–38
.
.
(27) Beland, F. A.; Churchwell, M. I.; Von Tungeln, L. S.; Chen, S.; Fu, P. P.;
Culp, S. J.; Schoket, B.; Gyorffy, E.; Minarovits, J.; Poirier, M. C.; Bowman,
.
E. D.; Weston, A.; Doerge, D. R. Chem. Res. Toxicol. 2005, 18, 1306–15.
.
(28) Singh, R.; Gaskell, M.; Le Pla, R. C.; Kaur, B.; Azim-Araghi, A.; Roach, J.;
Koukouves, G.; Souliotis, V. L.; Kyrtopoulos, S. A.; Farmer, P. B. Chem.
.
Res. Toxicol. 2006, 19, 868–78
(29) Wang, J. J.; Marshall, W. D.; Frazer, D. G.; Law, B.; Lewis, D. M. Anal.
Biochem. 2003, 322, 79–88
(30) Paehler, A.; Richoz, J.; Soglia, J.; Vouros, P.; Turesky, R. J. Chem. Res.
Toxicol. 2002, 15, 551–61
(31) Hillenkamp, F.; Karas, M.; Beavis, R. C.; Chait, B. T. Anal. Chem. 1991,
63, 1193A–203A
(32) Garaguso, I.; Borlak, J. Proteomics 2008, 8, 2583–95
(33) Cohen, L. H.; Gusev, A. I. Anal. Bioanal. Chem 2002, 373, 571–86
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
(26) Willems, A. V.; Deforce, D. L.; Van den Eeckhout, E. G.; Lambert, W. E.;
.
Van Peteghem, C. H.; De Leenheer, A. P.; Van Bocxlaer, J. F. Electrophoresis
.
2002, 23, 4092–103
.
.
8574 Analytical Chemistry, Vol. 82, No. 20, October 15, 2010