The DNA damage induced by 7-chloro-3-[[(N,N-dimethylamino)propyl]amino]-2-quinoxalinecarbonitrile 1,4-di-N-oxide hydrochloride (Q-85 HCl) in Caco-2 cells under hypoxic and well-oxygenated conditions has been studied by using the comet assay. This compound has shown a good in vitro profile of high selective toxicity in hypoxia, but its mechanism of action is unknown. The DNA damage has been evaluated by performing the comet assay after a 2-h treatment with Q-85 HCl (0.1, 0.2, 0.4 microM in hypoxia; 20, 40 microM in well-oxygenated conditions). The number of cells in apoptosis has also been assessed by flow cytometry analysis of Annexin V-FITC staining. The capability of the cells to repair the DNA damage and the proliferation rate was evaluated at different times after the treatment (24-168 h). Under hypoxic conditions, a clear dose-dependent increase in the number of nuclei with a comet was observed (comet score: 132 +/- 13, 343 +/- 30 and 399 +/- 1; control comet score: 42 +/- 14). Under well-oxygenated conditions, the number of nuclei with comet increased significantly with respect to the control (comet score: 273 +/- 14 and 312 +/- 9; control comet score: 27 +/- 4). Cells in apoptosis were not detected by the comet assay nor by flow cytometry. The recovery from DNA damage was time- and concentration-dependent in hypoxia (cells treated with the highest concentration still showed DNA damage after 72 h) and rather time-dependent in well-oxygenated conditions (DNA was completely repaired after 24 h). In conclusion, Q-85 HCl acts by DNA damage and not only the reduced intermediate is genotoxic but also some other derivatives and Q-85 HCl itself may be acting.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Pachón et al. (2005) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched one closely related paper. Consider it for comparative context: