Skip to main content
Nucleic Acids Research logoLink to Nucleic Acids Research
. 2026 Feb 10;54(4):gkag099. doi: 10.1093/nar/gkag099

Nucleotide salvage, genome instability, and potential therapeutic applications

Pengcheng Wang 1, Chen Wang 2, Yinsheng Wang 3,✉
PMCID: PMC12887539  PMID: 41665004

Abstract

Nucleotide salvage is crucial for maintaining DNA replication when de novo nucleotide synthesis is limited, but this metabolic flexibility poses potential threats to genome stability. Salvage kinases phosphorylate nucleosides broadly, allowing for oxidized and alkylated 2′-deoxynucleosides as well as posttranscriptionally modified ribonucleosides to enter the 2′-deoxynucleoside triphosphate (dNTP) pool. The ensuing contamination of the dNTP pool and the subsequent incorporation of modified nucleotides into genomic DNA promote mutagenesis, induce replication stress, elicit double-strand breaks, and disrupt epigenetic signaling. Although only a small subset of modified nucleosides have been assessed for salvage and genomic incorporation, the scope of salvageable substrates is probably much wider, with significant implications in mutational burden, chromatin instability, and epigenetic regulation. This overlooked aspect of genome instability is especially relevant in biological contexts of high salvage activity or elevated nucleoside damage, including chronic inflammation, cancer, aging, and dietary/microbiome exposures. Emerging evidence links salvage metabolism to tumor progression, where incorporation of salvage-derived nucleotides may contribute to unexplainable mutational signatures detected in cancers, such as gastrointestinal cancer. Recognizing salvage as a hidden source of mutagenesis reshapes our understanding of genome instability and provides potential opportunities for disease prevention, diagnosis, and therapeutic intervention.

Graphical Abstract

Graphical Abstract.

Graphical Abstract

Introduction

Accurate DNA replication and repair require a balanced supply of canonical 2′-deoxyribonucleoside triphosphates (dNTPs). Human cells maintain dNTP pool through the coordinated action of two metabolic routes, i.e. de novo nucleotide biosynthesis, which converts simple metabolites into nucleotides, and the nucleotide salvage pathway, which recycles preformed nucleobases and nucleosides originating from endogenous turnover, extracellular nutrients, or the gut microbiome [1, 2].

De novo nucleotide biosynthesis is metabolically expensive, consuming substantial amounts of ATP, and is tightly regulated through multiple mechanisms, such as transcriptional control, posttranscriptional modifications, feedback inhibition, and the assembly of multienzyme complexes [2]. In contrast, the salvage pathway produces nucleotides in an energy-efficient manner and is generally considered beneficial by reducing waste and facilitating genome preservation under replication stress and/or resource scarcity [2]. Additionally, nucleotide salvage was shown to be important for telomere length maintenance [3, 4]. Although neither de novo synthesis nor salvage pathway possesses intrinsic quality control mechanisms, de novo synthesis is tightly regulated to maintain dNTP abundance and pool balance, whereas salvage lacks upstream regulatory checkpoints and directly activates preformed nucleosides with a broad substrate scope [1, 2].

A defining feature of salvage is its high substrate tolerance. Human nucleoside kinases phosphorylate purine and pyrimidine nucleosides with limited discrimination against chemical modifications [1, 2]. As a result, noncanonical or damaged nucleotides can be metabolically activated to yield the corresponding dNTPs, thereby resulting in their erroneous incorporation into genomic DNA (Fig. 1) [5–17]. These include oxidized nucleosides [e.g. 8-oxo-7,8-dihydro-2′-deoxyguanosine (8-oxodG)] [6–8], alkylated nucleosides (e.g. N2-alkyl-dG) [5, 8, 14–17], deaminated nucleosides [e.g. 2′-deoxyuridine (dU)] [9], a nucleoside derived from a posttranscriptionally modified ribonucleoside via the salvage pathway [i.e. N6-methyl-2′-deoxyadenosine (N6-MedA), through salvage-mediated conversion of N6-methyladenosine (m6A) into N6-MedATP and its subsequent incorporation into DNA] [10, 11, 18, 19], and ribonucleotides when the balance between ribonucleoside triphosphate (rNTP) and dNTP pools is disturbed [12, 13, 20]. Upon incorporation, these aberrant nucleotides may evade DNA repair, induce DNA strand breaks, alter chromatin structure, and promote mutagenesis.

Figure 1.

Figure 1.

Salvage-driven entry of modified nucleosides into the genome. De novo synthesis generates canonical nucleotides, whereas salvage pathways recycle modified nucleosides directly into the dNTP pool. The chemical structures illustrate the canonical (top) and modified (bottom) nucleosides. Sanitization enzymes safeguard the integrity of the dNTP pool.

Recent studies suggest that salvage-mediated entry of modified nucleotides into genomic DNA constitutes an overlooked source of genome instability. This perspective synthesizes recent findings linking nucleotide salvage to genome instability and explores its consequences on mutagenesis, replicative stress, and epigenetic regulation. By reevaluating this metabolic recycling process, we reveal a crucial link between metabolism and genomic integrity, with implications in inflammation, cancer, and natural process of aging.

Nucleotide salvage and the dNTP pool

Salvage pathways maintain nucleotide homeostasis. In human cells, salvage encompasses enzymes located in both the cytosol and mitochondria that convert nucleobases or nucleosides into nucleoside monophosphates (NMPs), which are subsequently phosphorylated to nucleoside diphosphates and NTPs [2, 21, 22]. Unlike de novo biosynthesis, salvage is primarily constrained by substrate availability and kinase expression, rendering it a metabolically efficient, albeit potentially less discriminating source of dNTPs.

Human nucleotide salvage recycles purine and pyrimidine bases and nucleosides derived from endogenous nucleic acid turnover or extracellular sources to sustain nucleotide pools (Fig. 2). Purine bases are salvaged through phosphoribosyltransferase-dependent reactions, with hypoxanthine-guanine phosphoribosyltransferase (HPRT1) catalyzing the conversions of hypoxanthine and guanine to inosine monophosphate (IMP) and guanosine monophosphate (GMP), respectively, and adenine phosphoribosyltransferase (APRT) converting adenine to adenosine monophosphate (AMP), where phosphoribosyl pyrophosphate (PRPP) serves as the ribose donor [23–25]. In parallel, purine and pyrimidine nucleosides are recycled by nucleoside kinases, including adenosine kinase (ADK), deoxycytidine kinase (dCK), thymidine kinases 1 and 2 (TK1/TK2), and uridine–cytidine kinases 1 and 2 (UCK1/2), generating NMPs that support ribonucleotide and deoxyribonucleotide syntheses [26–30]. Notably, uracil phosphoribosyltransferase—which catalyzes uracil salvage in plants, protozoa, and bacteria—lacks detectable catalytic activity in humans [31]; physiological pyrimidine salvage in human cells, therefore, proceeds exclusively through nucleoside-based pathways. While unmodified uracil cannot enter the nucleotide pool via the salvage pathway, anti-cancer drug 5-fluorouracil could be activated by orotate phosphoribosyltransferase to yield 5-FUMP, which can be converted into 5-FdUTP and incorporated into DNA [32].

Figure 2.

Figure 2.

Salvage pathways of purines and pyrimidines to dNTPs in human cells. In the cytosol, purine bases are salvaged via PRPP-dependent phosphoribosyltransferases, with HPRT1 generating IMP and GMP, and APRT producing AMP. In parallel, purine and pyrimidine nucleosides are phosphorylated by ADK, dCK, TK1, and UCK1/2. Mitochondrial nucleotide salvage is mediated primarily by deoxyguanosine kinase (DGUOK) and TK2. Salvage-derived NMPs are sequentially converted to diphosphates and triphosphates by NMP kinases and nucleoside diphosphate kinase (NDPK), with ribonucleoside diphosphates reduced to their 2′-deoxy counterparts by class I ribonucleotide reductase (RNR).

Mitochondrial nucleotide salvage is mediated primarily by DGUOK and TK2, sustaining mitochondrial DNA replication and repair [22, 33–35]; mutations in genes encoding these two proteins could give rise to mitochondrial DNA depletion syndrome and neurogastrointestinal encephalomyopathy [33–35].

Ribonucleoside diphosphates (rNDPs) produced through salvage are converted to their 2′-deoxy counterparts by class I ribonucleotide reductase (RNR), which reduces rNDPs to dNDPs [36]. These dNDPs are subsequently phosphorylated by NDPK to yield the corresponding dNTPs [37].

The activities of these enzymes are dynamically regulated at both the transcriptional and posttranslational levels, and nucleotide salvage is often elevated under disease or stress conditions. For instance, the MYC oncoprotein broadly upregulates nucleotide metabolic enzymes, including those involved in the salvage pathway [38], while hypoxia-inducible factors (e.g. HIF-1α) reprogram purine and pyrimidine metabolisms in hypoxic tumor microenvironments [39, 40]. As such, salvage activity is generally elevated in cancerous and inflamed tissues, increasing the likelihood that noncanonical substrates enter the dNTP pool.

Because neither de novo nor salvage pathways proofread nucleotide chemical integrity, genome protection after metabolic activation depends largely on nucleotide sanitization enzymes, which can be divided into four super families, all-β dUTPases, ITPases, all-α NTP pyrophosphatases, and NUDIX hydrolases [41]. These enzymes degrade inappropriate nucleotides before their utilization by DNA polymerases, thereby limiting mutagenic or replication-perturbing events. In human cells, key representatives of these families include DUT (dUTPase) [42], ITPA [43], the NUDIX hydrolases NUDT1 (MTH1) [44, 45], NUDT15 [46], and NUDT16 [47], and the all-α dNTP triphosphohydrolase SAMHD1 [48], which collectively safeguard dNTP pool integrity (Fig. 1). DUT hydrolyzes dUTP to prevent uracil incorporation [42], while ITPA removes deaminated purine triphosphates, e.g. 2′-deoxyinosine triphosphate (dITP), that would otherwise promote mispairing and replication stress [43]. Oxidized purine triphosphates, including 8-oxo-dGTP and 2-hydroxy-dATP, are efficiently hydrolyzed by NUDT1 (MTH1) [44, 45], whereas SAMHD1 regulates overall dNTP abundance and pool balance [48], and is involved in the sanitization of therapeutic nucleotide analogs [49–51]. Additional NUDIX enzymes, e.g. NUDT15, sanitize thiopurine metabolites and are particularly relevant in the context of thiopurine therapy [46]. Collectively, these enzymes form a defense system that intercepts aberrant nucleotides to safeguard genome integrity. However, when nucleotide salvage is upregulated and/or sanitization enzymes are overwhelmed or dysregulated, such as in disease contexts [52–54], this defense becomes insufficient, resulting in elevated incorporation of aberrant nucleotides into genomic DNA.

Perturbations in dNTP pool composition and balance provide a direct mechanistic link between salvage activity and genome instability. Imbalanced nucleotide pools lead to augmented base misincorporation rates and diminished polymerase fidelity [55], whereas dNTP pool depletion can impede DNA polymerases and induce replication fork stalling [56]. Under these conditions, increased reliance on translesion synthesis (TLS) polymerases, including Pol κ and Pol η, promotes the incorporation of noncanonical substrates, further destabilizing genomic integrity [56]. These effects establish a metabolism–DNA replication paradigm where aberrant salvage activity confers mutagenesis, replication stress, and genome instability.

Incorporation of aberrant nucleotides

Oxidized nucleosides

Oxidative stress has long been found to induce DNA oxidation, resulting in a plethora of DNA modifications [57]. Among the oxidatively generated DNA adducts, 8-oxodG has received the most attention due to the lowest oxidation potential of dG among the four canonical 2′-deoxynucleosides [57]. Hence, the occurrence and biological consequences of 8-oxodG salvage have been extensively investigated [6, 54, 58–63]. Research indicates that 8-oxodG can be salvaged into the nucleotide pool, where it is hydrolyzed by purine nucleoside phosphorylase (PNP) to yield 8-oxoguanine instead of being directly phosphorylated. This process then leads to the formation of the corresponding nucleoside triphosphates, 8-oxorGTP and 8-oxodGTP [6]. The 8-oxodGTP can be utilized by DNA polymerases and incorporated into genomic DNA [58, 60–63]. For instance, DNA polymerase β (Pol β) can incorporate 8-oxodGTP with the formation of 8-oxodG:dC and 8-oxodG:dA mispairs within DNA trinucleotide repeat [59]. This also holds true for Pol η and Pol κ, which can efficiently insert 8-oxodGMP opposite a template dA [60, 63, 64]. The reported level of salvaged 8-oxodG incorporation is of the same order of magnitude as basal level of genomic 8-oxodG [6, 65]. The measurement, however, was conducted under experimental conditions involving near-saturating extracellular 8-oxodG, and thus may represent an upper bound for salvage-mediated incorporation [6].

Under normal conditions, this threat is mitigated by NUDT1 (MTH1), which hydrolyzes 8-oxodGTP to 8-oxodGMP [44, 45]. When nucleotide sanitization is inadequate, e.g. during oxidative stress or elevated salvage flux, misincorporation increases substantially, promoting mutagenesis.

Alkylated lesions

Alkylated DNA lesions represent another major type of extensively studied DNA damage [57, 66]. The ubiquitous presence of alkylating agents in the environment and inside cells renders this type of lesions generally unavoidable [67, 68]. Aside from being generated by alkylating agents, DNA alkylation may arise from the salvage of alkylated nucleosides and their subsequent incorporation into genomic DNA. Indeed, Spratt and coworkers [5] demonstrated that N2-substituted dGTP derivatives with methyl (Me), n-butyl (nBu), benzyl or 4-ethynylbenzyl group are robust substrates for human DNA Pol κ, as evidenced by both in vitro and cellular experiments. In addition, work from our laboratory showed that feeding cultured human cells with N2-MedG and N2-nBudG resulted in augmented levels of the two modified nucleosides in genomic DNA [8, 14]. Interestingly, Spratt and we found that incorporation of N²-alkyl-dG occurs preferentially during early S-phase DNA replication [15, 69]. In addition, DNA Pol κ and, to a lesser extent, Pol η facilitate the incorporation of N2-MedG and N2-nBudG into genomic DNA [5, 8, 14]. Furthermore, depletion of ALKBH3 in cultured human cells led to increased accumulation of N2-MedG and N2-nBudG [8].

Food consumption

Cooking food, especially at high temperatures, has long been shown to be associated with adverse health consequences, including higher tendency to develop colorectal cancer and diabetes [70]. Conventionally, DNA adducts induced by chemical species generated during cooking process, e.g. polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons and heterocyclic aromatic amines, are of primary concern when considering genotoxic agents induced by cooking [71]. The DNA in food itself, however, received little attention. High-temperature treatment can produce oxidized purines, thymine glycol, and hydrolytic deamination products [72, 73]. Consequently, dietary DNA can carry pre-existing lesions formed during cooking and/or food processing/storage. Upon digestion, these pre-existing modified nucleosides can be absorbed, enter salvage pathways, and become available for incorporation into DNA. A recent study by the Kool laboratory showed that HeLa cells exhibit elevated levels of DNA double-strand breaks (DSBs) upon incubation with damaged nucleosides, e.g. dU, 5-hydroxy-2′-deoxyuridine (5-OHdU), 5-hydroxy-2′-deoxycytidine (5-OHdC), 5,6-dihydro-thymidine (DH-dT), and thymidine glycol (dTg) [9]. This finding supports that deaminated and oxidatively damaged nucleosides can be taken up into cells, metabolically activated and incorporated into genomic DNA, ultimately resulting in DSBs [9]. However, it is important to note that dTg nucleotide is more difficult to be utilized by polymerases during DNA synthesis [74]. Furthermore, oral administration of mice with dU led to augmented levels of dU in genomic DNA isolated from small intestine [9]. Therefore, salvage of damaged DNA components from food can be a potential contributor to genome instability [9].

Ribonucleotide oversupply

rNTPs are normally present at levels that are orders of magnitude higher than dNTPs [75]. Although DNA polymerases are capable of excluding rNTPs, such exclusion is incomplete; hence, even high-fidelity replicative DNA polymerases can incorporate rNMPs during DNA synthesis [12, 13]. For instance, human lagging-strand replicative polymerase Pol δ was shown to incorporate approximately one rNTP in every 2 000 dNTPs, although the experiment was performed in vitro using purified protein [12]. Moreover, a substantial amount of inserted rNTPs by leading-strand replicative polymerase Pol ε escape 3′→5′ exonucleolytic proofreading [13]. In addition to replicative polymerases, human Pol η is capable of incorporating rCMP opposite dG and 8-oxodG [76]. The misincorporation of ribonucleotides into genomic DNA has been extensively investigated, and its prevalence and biological implications have been reviewed elsewhere [77, 78].

RNA-derived modifications

Different from its DNA counterpart, RNA carries a diverse array of chemical modifications, with more than 150 distinct modifications identified to date [79]. In addition, some of these modifications occur at high stoichiometries [80, 81]. Degradation of RNA continuously releases these modified nucleosides, which can be recycled through salvage pathways to produce not only rNTPs, but also chemically modified dNTPs. Once in the nucleotide pool, these aberrant substrates may be utilized by DNA polymerases and incorporated into genomic DNA.

This is the case for N6-MedA. Several reports in 2015 proposed that N6-MedA can act as an epigenetic mark in eukaryotes [82–84], and aberrant deposition of N6-MedA was shown to modulate gene expression and contribute to the proliferation of glioblastoma cells [19, 85, 86]. This role of N6-MedA, however, remains controversial, where multiple studies revealed extremely low levels of N6-MedA in mammalian genomes [19, 87, 88]. Moreover, recent studies indicate that m6A from RNA degradation can be metabolically activated to yield N6-MedATP, which can be incorporated into genomic DNA by DNA polymerases [10, 11]. Importantly, isotope tracing experiments revealed that a substantial portion of the genomic N6-MedA in cultured mammalian cells originates not from DNA methyltransferase-mediated methylation, but rather from m6A [10, 11]. These findings challenge the view of N6-MedA as an epigenetic mark in mammalian cells, and suggest that N6-MedA in DNA may arise from a byproduct of metabolic recycling.

Consistent with stringent cellular control over this process, a recent study by Chen et al. [18] identified an active checkpoint that limits aberrant DNA N6-MedA arising from RNA m6A turnover. In particular, the adenosine deaminase-like protein ADAL catabolizes N6-MedAMP in vivo, thereby preventing its accumulation and subsequent incorporation into DNA. Loss of ADAL results in elevated levels of free m6A species and augmented misincorporation of N6-MedAMP into DNA, which is suppressed by AK1 depletion [18]. Together, these findings support a model where RNA-derived m6A can enter salvage pathways, but is normally intercepted by dedicated sanitization mechanisms, thereby minimizing the incorporation of N6-MedA into genomic DNA. In addition, the salvage pathway may constitute an important route for incorporating other RNA-derived modifications into DNA.

Biological consequences of salvage-driven incorporation

The incorporation of salvage-derived modified nucleotides into genomic DNA may confer adverse biological consequences, including induction of mutagenesis, replication stress and strand breaks, as well as disruption of epigenetic regulation, all of which can ultimately lead to genome instability (Fig. 3).

Figure 3.

Figure 3.

Biological consequences of salvage-driven incorporation.

Mutagenesis

Once modified nucleotides are incorporated into DNA, the DNA replication machinery often struggles to maintain fidelity. To prevent replication fork collapse, cells rely on TLS DNA polymerases, e.g. Pol η, Pol ι, Pol κ, Pol ζ, and REV1 [56, 89]. These polymerases can accommodate bulky or noncanonical nucleobases into their active sites, facilitating bypass of those lesions that stall replicative polymerases, albeit sometimes at the expense of fidelity. For example, Pol κ often inserts mismatched nucleotides opposite oxidized purines [90], while REV1 specializes in incorporating dCMP regardless of the template base [91]. In addition, modified bases can pair with incorrect nucleotides. A well-studied example is 8-oxodG, which can adopt the syn N-glycosidic bond configuration, facilitating Hoogsteen pairing with dA, though it pairs correctly with dC when in the anti configuration [92]. As such, 8-oxodG can result in G → T transversion [93].

It should be noted that TLS polymerases are required for the error-free bypass of N2-alkyldG lesions [94–97]. In this vein, our laboratory showed that loss of Pol ι, Pol κ, or REV1 diminishes bypass efficiency and results in substantial frequencies of G → A transition and G → T transversion mutations at the site of N2-alkyldG lesions in mammalian cells [95, 97]. Moreover, simultaneous depletion of Pol ζ together with Pol κ or Pol ι further aggravates the frequencies of these mutations, suggesting the cooperation of TLS polymerases in mitigating replication errors [95].

Apart from nucleobase modifications, unrepaired ribonucleotides embedded in DNA can promote genome instability. In mammalian cells, ribonucleotides incorporated into genomic DNA are primarily removed by RNase H2-dependent ribonucleotide excision repair, where impairment in RNase H2 activity leads to ribonucleotide accumulation and increased DNA damage [98, 99]. In biochemical and cellular systems, human topoisomerase I (Top1) exhibits endoribonuclease activity and cleaves ribonucleotide-containing DNA, generating strand breaks and repair intermediates [100]. Moreover, defective ribonucleotide excision repair in mammals is associated with the ID4 signature mutation—an insertion-deletion mutation detected in human cancers characterized by short 2–5 base pair deletion—occurring at a TNT sequence motif, suggesting a mechanism involving TOP1 activity at ribonucleotide sites embedded in the genome [101].

Replication stress and DNA strand breaks

Lesions that escape from repair can stall DNA polymerases and block replication fork progression. Persistent stalling promotes fork reversal, collapse and ultimately DSB induction. Oxidatively generated DNA lesions such as 8-oxodG were shown to elicit structural changes around the replication fork, interfering with DNA replication [102, 103]. N2-alkyldG lesions also impede DNA replication with lower bypass efficiencies [95] and were recently linked to R-loop accumulation [16], leading to genome instability. In addition, salvage of damaged nucleosides, e.g. dU, 8-oxodG, 5-OHdU and 5-OHdC, could give rise to high activities of base excision repair (BER), resulting in DSBs [9]. Feeding cells with dU, 5-OHdU and 5-OHdC also leads to chromosomal aberrations, although this effect was not significant for 8-oxodG [9]. Moreover, mice administered with dU exhibited elevated DNA repair activity and increased level of DSBs [9]. Apart from BER, additional repair pathways are also involved in mitigating salvage-elicited genomic instability.

Mismatch repair (MMR) corrects mispairs like 8-oxodG:dA [102], preventing mutagenic G→ T transversions, where oxidized dNTP pool was shown to result in genomic instability in MMR-deficient Msh2−/− mouse embryonic fibroblasts [104]. In addition, nucleotide excision repair (NER) excises bulky and minor-groove lesions like N2-alkyl-dG [105], which can otherwise be bypassed accurately by Pol κ [94–97]. Under conditions of high salvage flux, however, the capacity of MMR and NER to process these lesions may be overwhelmed, exacerbating replication stress and genome instability.

Ribonucleotides embedded in DNA confer structural distortions that hinder replication and transcription. Even a single ribonucleotide alters DNA electrostatic potential, groove width, and duplex elasticity, and RNA’s intrinsically high hydrolytic instability accelerates single-strand break formation [98, 106].

Epigenetic regulation

An additional layer of complexity arises when RNA-derived modifications, such as m6A, enter the nucleotide pool via salvage. Once converted into N6-MedATP and incorporated into DNA [10, 11], this aberrant nucleotide may confer epigenetic-like effects. Indeed, N6-MedA has been reported as an emerging DNA modification capable of modulating gene expression, chromatin organization, and processes such as DNA replication and recombination in mammals [19, 87, 107]. Notably, functional roles for DNA N6-MedA have also been described in certain pathophysiological settings, including glioblastoma [19, 85]. In this vein, salvage-mediated misincorporation of N6-MedA may perturb normal epigenetic regulation by introducing noncanonical modifications into DNA, rather than representing a bona fide epigenetic mark.

Likewise, some oxidatively damaged nucleosides, e.g. 8-oxodG, are also implicated in modulating G-quadruplex folding in gene promoters to regulate gene expression [108–110], and were found to crosstalk with histone epigenetic marks and DNA methylation [111–114]. In this context, 8-oxodG at CpG site was shown to alter DNA methyltransferase binding and modulate DNA cytosine methylation in vitro [112, 114]. In addition, 8-oxodG arising from histone demethylation-induced ROS was shown to recruit 8-oxoguanine-DNA glycosylase 1 and topoisomerase 2β, which elicit chromatin and DNA conformational changes that are essential for estrogen-induced transcription [113]. As such, salvage-driven recycling of 8-oxodG into the nucleotide pool, followed by misincorporation into DNA, may not only compromise genome integrity, but also disrupt epigenetic signaling.

Relevant biological contexts

The detrimental impact of the salvage-driven incorporation of aberrant nucleotides is not uniform, which depends on cell type, metabolic state, environmental exposure and the capacity of DNA repair and nucleotide sanitization systems. The salvage-driven genome instability may be more pronounced in biological contexts of high salvage demand or elevated nucleoside damage, such as in rapidly proliferating cancer cells and aged tissues, during chronic inflammation, and through exposure from diet and/or gut microbiome (Fig. 4).

Figure 4.

Figure 4.

Nucleotide salvage in relevant biological contexts and potential therapeutic implications.

Cancer

Cancer cells frequently upregulate nucleotide salvage to meet elevated dNTP demand associated with rapid proliferation while simultaneously experiencing oxidative stress, hypoxia, inflammation, high nucleic acid turnover, and altered nucleoside transporter activity [115]. Oncogene amplification (e.g. MYC) and activation (e.g. HIF1A) induce expression of salvage enzymes (TK1, dCK, HPRT1, and UCK2) [40, 116, 117], thereby increasing intracellular access to preformed modified nucleosides.

Elevated salvage flux increases the probability that chemically modified nucleosides are phosphorylated to triphosphates and incorporated into DNA. In tumors, this risk is exacerbated by chronic ROS production [118], dysregulated nucleotide sanitization due to altered NUDT1 or SAMHD1 activity [49, 119], and increased reliance on TLS polymerases [120, 121]. Together, these features create an environment that is conducive for salvage-driven mutagenesis and genome instability.

Chronic inflammation

Chronically inflamed tissues generate high levels of reactive oxygen and nitrogen species, as well as hypohalous acids, which damage endogenous DNA, RNA, and dietary or microbial nucleic acids [122–125]. Salvage pathways can convert these modified nucleosides into dNTPs, increasing the likelihood of their incorporation into genomic DNA. Recurrent cycles of damage and repair in conditions such as inflammatory bowel disease, gastritis, and chronic hepatitis may therefore create a cellular environment particularly susceptible to salvage-driven genome instability.

Aging and neurodegeneration

Aging is associated with diminished expression and/or activity of nucleotide sanitization enzymes, e.g. NUDT1 [53], mitochondrial dysfunction [21, 126], increased ROS burden [127], and imbalanced dNTP pool arising from a proof-reading-deficient mutant of replicative DNA polymerase in mitochondria (i.e. Pol γD257A) [128]. This mutant Pol γ-elicited dNTP pool imbalance, however, could not reproduced in a subsequent study [129]. These age-related changes collectively confer heightened vulnerability to salvage-derived lesions. Post-mitotic tissues such as neurons, which rely heavily on salvage pathways due to limited de novo nucleotide synthesis [130, 131], may be especially susceptible to incorporation of noncanonical nucleotides [132]. Although neurons do not divide, mitochondrial biogenesis and robust DNA repair required to preserve cell integrity can create opportunities for modified nucleotides to be incorporated into mitochondrial and nuclear DNA [132–134]. Elevated levels of oxidized nucleosides observed in neurodegenerative disorders such as Parkinson’s disease and Alzheimer’s disease raise the possibility that salvage-mediated incorporation of modified nucleotides contributes to mitochondrial genome instability and impaired neuronal survival [135–137].

Microbiome- and diet-derived nucleosides

The gut microbiome represents a continuous source of chemically modified nucleosides, including deaminated purines, alkylated bases, and oxidized products arising from microbial metabolism and host–microbe redox interactions [138, 139]. These nucleosides can traverse the intestinal epithelium and enter systemic circulation [9], rendering them accessible to salvage pathways in mammalian systems.

Dietary intake constitutes an additional exogenous source of damaged nucleosides. Heat-processed foods contain oxidized purines, thymine glycol, and deaminated cytosine or adenine derivatives [9]. Experimental evidence demonstrates that mammalian cells readily uptake such damaged nucleosides, leading to elevated DNA DSBs and chromosomal aberrations in cultured cells and in vivo [9]. Hence, salvage provides a direct metabolic route through which dietary DNA damage may intersect with genome integrity.

Therapeutic implications and opportunities

Salvage enzyme targets for therapeutic intervention

Several salvage enzymes represent potential therapeutic targets. TK1 is highly upregulated in proliferating cancer cells and is central to the activation of many pyrimidine analog drugs, rendering it a candidate for synthetic lethal strategies in salvage-dependent tumors [140, 141]. dCK activates numerous anticancer nucleoside analogs, including gemcitabine and cytarabine [142]. Inhibition of dCK can sensitize tumors to replication stress [141]. PNP, a key enzyme in purine salvage, has been extensively explored as a therapeutic target in T-cell malignancies [143], and its inhibition may also limit the metabolic activation of damaged purine nucleosides. HPRT1 and APRT, essential for purine base salvage, may be exploited in MYC-driven cancers that exhibit heightened reliance on salvage pathways [144, 145].

Nucleotide sanitization enzymes as therapeutic modulators

Nucleotide sanitization enzymes offer complementary therapeutic leverage. Inhibition of NUDT1 (MTH1) increases incorporation of oxidized purine nucleotides, driving toxic mispairing in ROS-rich tumors [54], and high level of NUDT15 protein expression is positively correlated with tolerance to 6-mercaptopurine [146]. DUT inhibition elevates dUTP levels, promoting lethal cycles of uracil incorporation and BER [147, 148]. ITPA minimizes incorporation of deaminated purines [43] and 6-thioguanine [149], while SAMHD1 constitutes a biomarker for cytarabine response and a therapeutic target in acute myeloid leukemia [50, 51]. Modulating these enzymes can amplify or suppress salvage-associated genotoxic stress.

Nucleoside analog therapies

Current cancer therapies already exploit salvage-dependent activation mechanisms. Examples include 5-fluorouracil, 6-thioguanine, azacytidine/decitabine, and gemcitabine, which rely on salvage enzymes for metabolic activation and incorporation into DNA [150–153]. Understanding salvage-driven mutagenesis provides a framework for interpreting differential sensitivity and resistance to these agents.

Patient-selection biomarkers and precision oncology

Dependence on salvage pathways varies widely across tumors, creating opportunities for biomarker-guided therapy. Candidate biomarkers include expression levels of TK1, dCK, NUDT1, DUT, and SAMHD1 [50, 51, 54, 141, 147], dNTP pool measurements by LC–MS [75], isotope-tracing of salvage flux [141, 154], and mutation spectra indicative of salvage-driven incorporation, such as elevated G→T transversions due to 8-oxodG:dA mispairing [155]. These metrics may guide patient stratification for nucleoside analog therapies or salvage-pathway inhibitors.

Combination strategies

Aside from targeting individual enzymes or steps within salvage pathways, combinatorial strategies may be particularly effective. Coupling enhanced salvage flux with inhibition of nucleotide sanitization is expected to amplify genotoxic stress. For example, driving incorporation of oxidized nucleosides while blocking NUDT1 [54], or coupling nucleoside analog therapy with checkpoint inhibition to exploit replication stress [156, 157] may constitute viable strategies. Tumors lacking de novo synthesis capacity, such as methylthioadenosine phosphorylase (MTAP)-deficient cancers [158], may be particularly vulnerable to such approaches.

Perspectives and outlook

Nucleotide salvage is essential for sustaining DNA replication and repair when de novo synthesis is limited; however, its biochemical permissiveness introduces an overlooked vulnerability for genome stability. By phosphorylating preformed nucleosides, such as oxidized, alkylated, RNA-derived, dietary, and microbiome-associated species, salvage delivers chemically diverse substrates directly to DNA polymerases [6–13]. The broad substrate tolerance of salvage kinases enables metabolic activation of noncanonical nucleosides arising from endogenous metabolism, inflammation, environmental exposure, and diet [1, 2]. Whether these activated substrates accumulate in the dNTP pool is governed by the capacity of nucleotide sanitization enzymes, including NUDT1, ITPA, DUT, and SAMHD1 [41–45, 48], while the balance between replicative and TLS polymerase engagement determines the fidelity of DNA synthesis. Downstream processing by DNA repair pathways, including BER, MMR, NER, and RNase H2-dependent mechanisms, further shapes mutagenic outcomes, replication stress, and genome instability.

Thus far, only a limited subset of modified nucleosides have been assessed for their abilities to undergo metabolic salvage and subsequent incorporation into DNA. Given the diverse array of DNA lesions and RNA modifications, it is important to determine the scope of salvageable substrates. Further studies are needed to uncover which modified nucleosides are efficiently recycled, how they are phosphorylated, and how their incorporation into genomic DNA contributes to mutagenesis, replication stress, and aberrant epigenetic signaling. In this context, isotope tracing and mass spectrometry approaches may provide critical insights into the metabolic fate of modified nucleosides.

Incorporation of modified dNTPs into genomic DNA entails TLS polymerases. These specialized enzymes also allow DNA replication machinery to bypass noncanonical nucleosides, alleviating replication stress often at the expense of accuracy [159, 160]. Thus, the functions of these polymerases are likely vital not only to the incorporation of salvage-derived nucleotides into the genome, but also to the biological consequences of such incorporation. Evaluating the interplay between salvage metabolism and TLS polymerase function will be essential to understand the full consequence of salvage-induced genome instability and may reveal therapeutic opportunities in contexts with heightened dependency on TLS and/or elevated vulnerability to nucleotide salvage, such as cancer [54, 120, 121].

Salvage pathways may also contribute to mutational signatures of unknown etiology, especially in gastrointestinal (GI) cancers. Large-scale sequencing studies have identified recurring single-base substitution (SBS) signatures in GI tract cancers [161–164]. However, the origins of some mutational signatures, such as SBS17a/b, remain unknown [165]. Although some mutational signatures are attributed to oxidative stress and/or exogenous exposure [161–164], salvage-mediated entry of oxidized or alkylated nucleosides into the genome offers an additional plausible route [166]. The salvage of oxidized purines or deaminated pyrimidines may elicit replication errors in specific sequence contexts, potentially aligning with reported, yet unexplained mutational patterns in GI cancers. Moreover, environmental–microbial axis may be especially relevant in GI cancers, where microbiome-derived damaged nucleosides could contribute to such signatures [167]. Hence, a systematic assessment of incorporation of salvage-derived nucleotides into the genome, especially the development of sequencing methods for mapping their incorporation and repair at the genome-wide scale [168–172], may help illustrate new origins of mutational signatures in human cancer as well as other diseases.

Viewing genome instability through the dual lens of direct DNA damage and metabolic recycling opens novel avenues for disease diagnosis, prevention and therapeutic interventions. The salvage pathway, in particular, may represent an important, yet overlooked driver of mutagenesis. Its characterization and management are therefore essential for safeguarding genomic integrity across a spectrum of health and disease states.

Acknowledgements

Author contributions: Pengcheng Wang (Conceptualization [supporting], Writing—original draft [lead]), Chen Wang (Writing—original draft [supporting]), and Yinsheng Wang (Conceptualization [lead], Writing—review & editing [lead]).

Contributor Information

Pengcheng Wang, Department of Chemistry, University of California Riverside, Riverside, CA 92521-0403, United States.

Chen Wang, Department of Chemistry, University of California Riverside, Riverside, CA 92521-0403, United States.

Yinsheng Wang, Department of Chemistry, University of California Riverside, Riverside, CA 92521-0403, United States.

Conflict of interest

None declared.

Funding

This work was supported by the National Institutes of Health (R35 ES031707). Funding to pay the Open Access publication charges for this article was provided by NIH grant (R35 ES031707).

Data availability

No new data were generated or analyzed in support of this research.

References

  • 1. Ali  ES, Ben-Sahra  I.  Regulation of nucleotide metabolism in cancers and immune disorders. Trends Cell Biol. 2023;33:950–66. 10.1016/j.tcb.2023.03.003. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2. Mathews  CK.  Deoxyribonucleotide metabolism, mutagenesis and cancer. Nat Rev Cancer. 2015;15:528–39. 10.1038/nrc3981. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3. Mannherz  W, Agarwal  S.  Thymidine nucleotide metabolism controls human telomere length. Nat Genet. 2023;55:568–80. 10.1038/s41588-023-01339-5. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4. Mannherz  W, Crompton  A, Lampl  N  et al.  Metabolic constraint of human telomere length by nucleotide salvage efficiency. Nat Commun. 2025;16:3000. 10.1038/s41467-025-58221-7. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5. Gowda  AS, Lee  M, Spratt  TE. N2-substituted 2'-deoxyguanosine triphosphate derivatives as selective substrates for human DNA polymerase κ. Angew Chem Int Ed. 2017;56:2628–31. 10.1002/anie.201611607. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6. Mundt  JM, Hah  SS, Sumbad  RA  et al.  Incorporation of extracellular 8-oxodG into DNA and RNA requires purine nucleoside phosphorylase in MCF-7 cells. Nucleic Acids Res. 2008;36:228–36. 10.1093/nar/gkm1032. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7. Henderson  PT, Evans  MD, Cooke  MS. Salvage of oxidized guanine derivatives in the (2'-deoxy)ribonucleotide pool as source of mutations in DNA. Mutat Res. 2010;703:11–7. 10.1016/j.mrgentox.2010.08.021. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8. Guo  S, Li  L, Yu  K  et al.  LC–MS/MS for assessing the incorporation and repair of N2-alkyl-2'-deoxyguanosine in genomic DNA. Chem Res Toxicol. 2022;35:1814–20. 10.1021/acs.chemrestox.2c00101. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9. Jun  YW, Kant  M, Coskun  E  et al.  Possible genetic risks from heat-damaged DNA in food. ACS Cent Sci. 2023;9:1170–9. 10.1021/acscentsci.2c01247. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10. Musheev  MU, Baumgärtner  A, Krebs  L  et al.  The origin of genomic N6-methyl-deoxyadenosine in mammalian cells. Nat Chem Biol. 2020;16:630–4. 10.1038/s41589-020-0504-2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11. Liu  X, Lai  W, Li  Y  et al.  N6-methyladenine is incorporated into mammalian genome by DNA polymerase. Cell Res. 2021;31:94–7. 10.1038/s41422-020-0317-6. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12. Clausen  AR, Zhang  S, Burgers  PM  et al.  Ribonucleotide incorporation, proofreading and bypass by human DNA polymerase δ. DNA Repair (Amst). 2013;12:121–7. 10.1016/j.dnarep.2012.11.006. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13. Göksenin  AY, Zahurancik  W, LeCompte  KG  et al.  Human DNA polymerase ε is able to efficiently extend from multiple consecutive ribonucleotides. J Biol Chem. 2012;287:42675–84. 10.1074/jbc.M112.422733. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14. Tan  Y, Guo  S, Wu  J  et al.  DNA polymerase η promotes the transcriptional bypass of N2-alkyl-2'-deoxyguanosine adducts in human cells. J Am Chem Soc. 2021;143:16197–205. 10.1021/jacs.1c07374. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15. Tang  F, Wang  Y, Zhao  T  et al.  DNA polymerase κ participates in early S-phase DNA replication in human cells. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2024;121:e2405473121. 10.1073/pnas.2405473121. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16. Wang  Y, Tang  F, Zhao  T  et al.  N2-Alkyl-dG lesions elicit R-loop accumulation in the genome. Nucleic Acids Res. 2024;52:12487–97. 10.1093/nar/gkae845. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17. Zhao  T, He  X, Liang  X  et al.  HMGB3 and SUB1 bind to and facilitate the repair of N2-alkylguanine lesions in DNA. J Am Chem Soc. 2024;146:22553–62. 10.1021/jacs.4c06680. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18. Chen  S, Lai  W, Li  Y  et al.  Aberrant DNA N6-methyladenine incorporation via adenylate kinase 1 is suppressed by ADAL deaminase-dependent 2'-deoxynucleotide pool sanitation. EMBO J. 2023;42:e113684. 10.15252/embj.2023113684. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19. Lyu  C, Niu  Y, Lai  W  et al.  Rare and misincorporated DNA N6-methyladenine is a hallmark of cytotoxic stresses for selectively stimulating the stemness and proliferation of glioblastoma cells. Cell Discov. 2022;8:39. 10.1038/s41421-022-00399-x. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20. Berglund  AK, Navarrete  C, Engqvist  MK  et al.  Nucleotide pools dictate the identity and frequency of ribonucleotide incorporation in mitochondrial DNA. PLoS Genet. 2017;13:e1006628. 10.1371/journal.pgen.1006628. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21. Bahat  A, Milenkovic  D, Cors  E  et al.  Ribonucleotide incorporation into mitochondrial DNA drives inflammation. Nature. 2025;647:726–34. 10.1038/s41586-025-09541-7. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22. Lin  S, Huang  C, Sun  J  et al.  The mitochondrial deoxyguanosine kinase is required for cancer cell stemness in lung adenocarcinoma. EMBO Mol Med. 2019;11:e10849. 10.15252/emmm.201910849. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23. Vogel  M, Moehrle  B, Brown  A  et al.  HPRT and purine salvaging are critical for hematopoietic stem cell function. Stem Cells. 2019;37:1606–14. 10.1002/stem.3087. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24. Fridman  A, Saha  A, Chan  A  et al.  Cell cycle regulation of purine synthesis by phosphoribosyl pyrophosphate and inorganic phosphate. Biochem J. 2013;454:91–9. 10.1042/BJ20130153. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25. Craig  SP  3rd, Eakin  AE. Purine phosphoribosyltransferases. J Biol Chem. 2000;275:20231–4. 10.1074/jbc.R000002200. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26. Ogawa  A, Watanabe  S, Ozerova  I  et al.  Adenosine kinase and ADAL coordinate detoxification of modified adenosines to safeguard metabolism. Cell. 2025;188, 6151–69. 10.1016/j.cell.2025.07.041. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27. Arnér  ES, Spasokoukotskaja  T, Eriksson  S. Selective assays for thymidine kinase 1 and 2 and deoxycytidine kinase and their activities in extracts from human cells and tissues. Biochem Biophys Res Commun. 1992;188:712–8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28. Van Rompay  AR, Norda  A, Lindén  K  et al.  Phosphorylation of uridine and cytidine nucleoside analogs by two human uridine–cytidine kinases. Mol Pharmacol. 2001;59:1181–6. 10.1016/S0026-895X(24)12578-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29. Johansson  M, Karlsson  A. Cloning of the cDNA and chromosome localization of the gene for human thymidine kinase 2. J Biol Chem. 1997;272:8454–8. 10.1074/jbc.272.13.8454. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30. Wang  L, Munch-Petersen  B, Herrstrom Sjoberg  A  et al.  Human thymidine kinase 2: molecular cloning and characterisation of the enzyme activity with antiviral and cytostatic nucleoside substrates. FEBS Lett. 1999;443:170–4. 10.1016/S0014-5793(98)01711-6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31. Li  J, Huang  S, Chen  J  et al.  Identification and characterization of human uracil phosphoribosyltransferase (UPRTase). J Hum Genet. 2007;52:415–22. 10.1007/s10038-007-0129-2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32. Wang  W, Cassidy  J, O’Brien  V  et al.  Mechanistic and predictive profiling of 5-Fluorouracil resistance in human cancer cells. Cancer Res. 2004;64:8167–76. 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-04-0970. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33. Mandel  H, Szargel  R, Labay  V  et al.  The deoxyguanosine kinase gene is mutated in individuals with depleted hepatocerebral mitochondrial DNA. Nat Genet. 2001;29:337–41. 10.1038/ng746. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34. Saada  A, Shaag  A, Mandel  H  et al.  Mutant mitochondrial thymidine kinase in mitochondrial DNA depletion myopathy. Nat Genet. 2001;29:342–4. 10.1038/ng751. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 35. Spinazzola  A, Marti  R, Nishino  I  et al.  Altered thymidine metabolism due to defects of thymidine phosphorylase. J Biol Chem. 2002;277:4128–33. 10.1074/jbc.M111028200. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 36. Nordlund  P, Reichard  P. Ribonucleotide reductases. Annu Rev Biochem. 2006;75:681–706. 10.1146/annurev.biochem.75.103004.142443. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 37. Gilles  AM, Presecan  E, Vonica  A  et al.  Nucleoside diphosphate kinase from human erythrocytes. Structural characterization of the two polypeptide chains responsible for heterogeneity of the hexameric enzyme. J Biol Chem. 1991;266:8784–9. 10.1016/S0021-9258(18)31515-1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 38. Meena  JK, Wang  JH, Neill  NJ  et al.  MYC induces oncogenic stress through RNA decay and ribonucleotide catabolism in breast cancer. Cancer Discov. 2024;14:1699–716. 10.1158/2159-8290.CD-22-0649. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 39. Nemkov  T, Sun  K, Reisz  JA  et al.  Hypoxia modulates the purine salvage pathway and decreases red blood cell and supernatant levels of hypoxanthine during refrigerated storage. Haematologica. 2018;103:361–72. 10.3324/haematol.2017.178608. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 40. Geng  P, Ye  F, Dou  P  et al.  HIF-1α-HPRT1 axis promotes tumorigenesis and gefitinib resistance by enhancing purine metabolism in EGFR-mutant lung adenocarcinoma. J Exp Clin Cancer Res. 2024;43:269. 10.1186/s13046-024-03184-8. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 41. Broderick  K, Moutaoufik  MT, Aly  KA  et al.  Sanitation enzymes: exquisite surveillance of the noncanonical nucleotide pool to safeguard the genetic blueprint. Semin Cancer Biol. 2023;94:11–20. 10.1016/j.semcancer.2023.05.005. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 42. Mol  CD, Harris  JM, McIntosh  EM  et al.  Human dUTP pyrophosphatase: uracil recognition by a β hairpin and active sites formed by three separate subunits. Structure. 1996;4:1077–92. 10.1016/S0969-2126(96)00114-1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 43. Lin  S, McLennan  AG, Ying  K  et al.  Cloning, expression, and characterization of a human inosine triphosphate pyrophosphatase encoded by the ITPAGene*. J Biol Chem. 2001;276:18695–701. 10.1074/jbc.M011084200. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 44. Tsuzuki  T, Egashira  A, Igarashi  H  et al.  Spontaneous tumorigenesis in mice defective in the MTH1 gene encoding 8-oxo-dGTPase. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2001;98:11456–61. 10.1073/pnas.191086798. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 45. Fujikawa  K, Kamiya  H, Yakushiji  H  et al.  The oxidized forms of dATP are substrates for the human MutT homologue, the hMTH1 protein. J Biol Chem. 1999;274:18201–5. 10.1074/jbc.274.26.18201. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 46. Moriyama  T, Nishii  R, Perez-Andreu  V  et al.  NUDT15 polymorphisms alter thiopurine metabolism and hematopoietic toxicity. Nat Genet. 2016;48:367–73. 10.1038/ng.3508. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 47. Iyama  T, Abolhassani  N, Tsuchimoto  D  et al.  NUDT16 is a (deoxy)inosine diphosphatase, and its deficiency induces accumulation of single-strand breaks in nuclear DNA and growth arrest. Nucleic Acids Res. 2010;38:4834–43. 10.1093/nar/gkq249. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 48. Franzolin  E, Pontarin  G, Rampazzo  C  et al.  The deoxynucleotide triphosphohydrolase SAMHD1 is a major regulator of DNA precursor pools in mammalian cells. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2013;110:14272–7. 10.1073/pnas.1312033110. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 49. Clifford  R, Louis  T, Robbe  P  et al.  SAMHD1 is mutated recurrently in chronic lymphocytic leukemia and is involved in response to DNA damage. Blood. 2014;123:1021–31. 10.1182/blood-2013-04-490847. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 50. Herold  N, Rudd  SG, Ljungblad  L  et al.  Targeting SAMHD1 with the Vpx protein to improve cytarabine therapy for hematological malignancies. Nat Med. 2017;23:256–63. 10.1038/nm.4265. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 51. Schneider  C, Oellerich  T, Baldauf  HM  et al.  SAMHD1 is a biomarker for cytarabine response and a therapeutic target in acute myeloid leukemia. Nat Med. 2017;23:250–5. 10.1038/nm.4255. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 52. Furuta  A, Iida  T, Nakabeppu  Y  et al.  Expression of hMTH1 in the hippocampi of control and Alzheimer’s disease. Neuroreport. 2001;12:2895–9. 10.1097/00001756-200109170-00028. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 53. Song  XN, Zhang  LQ, Liu  DG  et al.  Oxidative damage to RNA and expression patterns of MTH1 in the hippocampi of senescence-accelerated SAMP8 mice and Alzheimer’s disease patients. Neurochem Res. 2011;36:1558–65. 10.1007/s11064-011-0484-4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 54. Gad  H, Koolmeister  T, Jemth  AS  et al.  MTH1 inhibition eradicates cancer by preventing sanitation of the dNTP pool. Nature. 2014;508:215–21. 10.1038/nature13181. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 55. Kumar  D, Abdulovic  AL, Viberg  J  et al.  Mechanisms of mutagenesis in vivo due to imbalanced dNTP pools. Nucleic Acids Res. 2011;39:1360–71. 10.1093/nar/gkq829. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 56. Tonzi  P, Yin  Y, Lee  CWT.  et al.  Translesion polymerase κ-dependent DNA synthesis underlies replication fork recovery. eLife. 2018;7:e41426. 10.7554/eLife.41426. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 57. Yu  Y, Wang  P, Cui  Y  et al.  Chemical analysis of DNA damage. Anal Chem. 2018;90:556–76. 10.1021/acs.analchem.7b04247. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 58. Burak  MJ, Guja  KE, Garcia-Diaz  M. Nucleotide binding interactions modulate dNTP selectivity and facilitate 8-oxo-dGTP incorporation by DNA polymerase λ. Nucleic Acids Res. 2015;43:8089–99. 10.1093/nar/gkv760. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 59. Cilli  P, Ventura  I, Minoprio  A  et al.  Oxidized dNTPs and the OGG1 and MUTYH DNA glycosylases combine to induce CAG/CTG repeat instability. Nucleic Acids Res. 2016;44:5190–203. 10.1093/nar/gkw170. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 60. Hidaka  K, Yamada  M, Kamiya  H  et al.  Specificity of mutations induced by incorporation of oxidized dNTPs into DNA by human DNA polymerase η. DNA Repair (Amst). 2008;7:497–506. 10.1016/j.dnarep.2007.12.005. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 61. Katafuchi  A, Nohmi  T. DNA polymerases involved in the incorporation of oxidized nucleotides into DNA: their efficiency and template base preference. Mutat Res. 2010;703:24–31. 10.1016/j.mrgentox.2010.06.004. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 62. Shimizu  M, Gruz  P, Kamiya  H  et al.  Erroneous incorporation of oxidized DNA precursors by Y-family DNA polymerases. EMBO Rep. 2003;4:269–73. 10.1038/sj.embor.embor765. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 63. Shimizu  M, Gruz  P, Kamiya  H  et al.  Efficient and erroneous incorporation of oxidized DNA precursors by human DNA polymerase η. Biochemistry. 2007;46:5515–22. 10.1021/bi062238r. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 64. Katafuchi  A, Sassa  A, Niimi  N  et al.  Critical amino acids in human DNA polymerases η and κ involved in erroneous incorporation of oxidized nucleotides. Nucleic Acids Res. 2010;38:859–67. 10.1093/nar/gkp1095. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 65. Park  EM, Shigenaga  MK, Degan  P  et al.  Assay of excised oxidative DNA lesions: isolation of 8-oxoguanine and its nucleoside derivatives from biological fluids with a monoclonal antibody column. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 1992;89:3375–9. 10.1073/pnas.89.8.3375. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 66. Liu  S, Wang  Y. Mass spectrometry for the assessment of the occurrence and biological consequences of DNA adducts. Chem Soc Rev. 2015;44:7829–54. 10.1039/C5CS00316D. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 67. Xiao  W, Samson  L. In vivo evidence for endogenous DNA alkylation damage as a source of spontaneous mutation in eukaryotic cells. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 1993;90:2117–21. 10.1073/pnas.90.6.2117. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 68. Saini  N, Sterling  JF, Sakofsky  CJ  et al.  Mutation signatures specific to DNA alkylating agents in yeast and cancers. Nucleic Acids Res. 2020;48:3692–707. 10.1093/nar/gkaa150. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 69. Torres  MC, Rebok  A, Sun  D  et al.  Activity of DNA polymerase κ across the genome in human fibroblasts. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2024;121:e2403130121. 10.1073/pnas.2403130121. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 70. Liu  G, Zong  G, Wu  K  et al.  Meat cooking methods and risk of type 2 diabetes: results from three prospective cohort studies. Diabetes Care. 2018;41:1049–60. 10.2337/dc17-1992. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 71. Bellamri  M, Brandt  K, Cammerrer  K  et al.  Nuclear DNA and mitochondrial damage of the cooked meat carcinogen 2-amino-1-methyl-6-phenylimidazo[4,5-b]pyridine in human neuroblastoma cells. Chem Res Toxicol. 2023;36:1361–73. 10.1021/acs.chemrestox.3c00109. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 72. Bruskov  VI, Malakhova  LV, Masalimov  ZK  et al.  Heat-induced formation of reactive oxygen species and 8-oxoguanine, a biomarker of damage to DNA. Nucleic Acids Res. 2002;30:1354–63. 10.1093/nar/30.6.1354. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 73. Lindahl  T, Nyberg  B. Heat-induced deamination of cytosine residues in deoxyribonucleic acid. Biochemistry. 1974;13:3405–10. 10.1021/bi00713a035. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 74. Aller  P, Rould  MA, Hogg  M  et al.  A structural rationale for stalling of a replicative DNA polymerase at the most common oxidative thymine lesion, thymine glycol. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2007;104:814–8. 10.1073/pnas.0606648104. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 75. Ferraro  P, Franzolin  E, Pontarin  G  et al.  Quantitation of cellular deoxynucleoside triphosphates. Nucleic Acids Res. 2010;38:e85. 10.1093/nar/gkp1141. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 76. Mentegari  E, Crespan  E, Bavagnoli  L  et al.  Ribonucleotide incorporation by human DNA polymerase η impacts translesion synthesis and RNase H2 activity. Nucleic Acids Res. 2017;45:2600–14. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 77. Williams  JS, Lujan  SA, Kunkel  TA. Processing ribonucleotides incorporated during eukaryotic DNA replication. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol. 2016;17:350–63. 10.1038/nrm.2016.37. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 78. Zhou  ZX, Williams  JS, Lujan  SA  et al.  Ribonucleotide incorporation into DNA during DNA replication and its consequences. Crit Rev Biochem Mol Biol. 2021;56:109–24. 10.1080/10409238.2020.1869175. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 79. Boccaletto  P, Stefaniak  F, Ray  A  et al.  MODOMICS: a database of RNA modification pathways. 2021 update. Nucleic Acids Res. 2022;50:D231–5. 10.1093/nar/gkab1083. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 80. Lucas  MC, Pryszcz  LP, Medina  R  et al.  Quantitative analysis of tRNA abundance and modifications by nanopore RNA sequencing. Nat Biotechnol. 2024;42:72–86. 10.1038/s41587-023-01743-6. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 81. Zhang  Y-Y, Li  C-T, Zhou  Y-J  et al.  A cohort of mRNAs undergo high-stoichiometry NSUN6-mediated site-specific m5C modification. Nat Commun. 2025;16:6119. 10.1038/s41467-025-60873-4. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 82. Fu  Y, Luo  G-Z, Chen  K  et al.  N6-methyldeoxyadenosine marks active transcription start sites in Chlamydomonas. Cell. 2015;161:879–92. 10.1016/j.cell.2015.04.010. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 83. Greer  EL, Blanco  MA, Gu  L  et al.  DNA methylation on N6-adenine in C. elegans. Cell. 2015;161:868–78. 10.1016/j.cell.2015.04.005. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 84. Zhang  G, Huang  H, Liu  D  et al.  N6-methyladenine DNA modification in Drosophila. Cell. 2015;161:893–906. 10.1016/j.cell.2015.04.018. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 85. Xie  Q, Wu  TP, Gimple  RC  et al.  N6-methyladenine DNA modification in glioblastoma. Cell. 2018;175:1228–1243.e20. 10.1016/j.cell.2018.10.006; [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 86. Broche  J, Köhler  AR, Kühnel  F  et al.  Genome-wide deposition of 6-methyladenine in human DNA reduces the viability of HEK293 cells and directly influences gene expression. Commun Biol. 2023;6:138. 10.1038/s42003-023-04466-1. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 87. Huang  W, Xiong  J, Yang  Y  et al.  Determination of DNA adenine methylation in genomes of mammals and plants by liquid chromatography/mass spectrometry. RSC Adv. 2015;5:64046–54. 10.1039/C5RA05307B. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 88. Kong  Y, Cao  L, Deikus  G  et al.  Critical assessment of DNA adenine methylation in eukaryotes using quantitative deconvolution. Science. 2022;375:515–22. 10.1126/science.abe7489. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 89. Yoon  JH, Bhatia  G, Prakash  S  et al.  Error-free replicative bypass of thymine glycol by the combined action of DNA polymerases κ and ζ in human cells. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2010;107:14116–21. 10.1073/pnas.1007795107. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 90. Lone  S, Townson  SA, Uljon  SN  et al.  Human DNA polymerase κ encircles DNA: implications for mismatch extension and lesion bypass. Mol Cell. 2007;25:601–14. 10.1016/j.molcel.2007.01.018. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 91. Zhang  Y, Wu  X, Rechkoblit  O  et al.  Response of human REV1 to different DNA damage: preferential dCMP insertion opposite the lesion. Nucleic Acids Res. 2002;30:1630–8. 10.1093/nar/30.7.1630. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 92. Shibutani  S, Takeshita  M, Grollman  AP. Insertion of specific bases during DNA synthesis past the oxidation-damaged base 8-oxodG. Nature. 1991;349:431–4. 10.1038/349431a0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 93. Cheng  KC, Cahill  DS, Kasai  H  et al.  8-Hydroxyguanine, an abundant form of oxidative DNA damage, causes G-T and A-C substitutions. J Biol Chem. 1992;267:166–72. 10.1016/S0021-9258(18)48474-8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 94. Jarosz  DF, Godoy  VG, Delaney  JC  et al.  A single amino acid governs enhanced activity of DinB DNA polymerases on damaged templates. Nature. 2006;439:225–8. 10.1038/nature04318. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 95. Wu  J, Du  H, Li  L  et al.  The impact of minor-groove N2-alkyl-2'-deoxyguanosine lesions on DNA replication in human cells. ACS Chem. Biol.  2019;14:1708–16. 10.1021/acschembio.9b00129. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 96. Yuan  B, Cao  H, Jiang  Y  et al.  Efficient and accurate bypass of N2-(1-carboxyethyl)-2’-deoxyguanosine by DinB DNA polymerase in vitro and in vivo. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2008;105:8679–84. 10.1073/pnas.0711546105. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 97. Yuan  B, You  C, Andersen  N  et al.  The roles of DNA polymerases κ and ι in the error-free bypass of N2-carboxyalkyl-2'-deoxyguanosine lesions in mammalian cells. J Biol Chem. 2011;286:17503–11. 10.1074/jbc.M111.232835. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 98. Reijns  MA, Rabe  B, Rigby  RE  et al.  Enzymatic removal of ribonucleotides from DNA is essential for mammalian genome integrity and development. Cell. 2012;149:1008–22. 10.1016/j.cell.2012.04.011. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 99. Hiller  B, Achleitner  M, Glage  S  et al.  Mammalian RNase H2 removes ribonucleotides from DNA to maintain genome integrity. J Exp Med. 2012;209:1419–26. 10.1084/jem.20120876. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 100. Sekiguchi  J, Shuman  S. Site-specific ribonuclease activity of eukaryotic DNA topoisomerase I. Mol Cell. 1997;1:89–97. 10.1016/S1097-2765(00)80010-6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 101. Reijns  MAM, Parry  DA, Williams  TC  et al.  Signatures of TOP1 transcription-associated mutagenesis in cancer and germline. Nature. 2022;602:623–31. 10.1038/s41586-022-04403-y. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 102. Rodriguez  GP, Song  JB, Crouse  GF. In vivo bypass of 8-oxodG. PLoS Genet. 2013;9:e1003682. 10.1371/journal.pgen.1003682. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 103. Plum  GE, Grollman  AP, Johnson  F  et al.  Influence of the oxidatively damaged adduct 8-oxodeoxyguanosine on the conformation, energetics, and thermodynamic stability of a DNA duplex. Biochemistry. 1995;34:16148–60. 10.1021/bi00049a030. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 104. Russo  MT, Blasi  MF, Chiera  F  et al.  The oxidized deoxynucleoside triphosphate pool is a significant contributor to genetic instability in mismatch repair-deficient cells. Mol Cell Biol. 2004;24:465–74. 10.1128/MCB.24.1.465-474.2004. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 105. You  C, Dai  X, Yuan  B  et al.  A quantitative assay for assessing the effects of DNA lesions on transcription. Nat Chem Biol. 2012;8:817–22. 10.1038/nchembio.1046. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 106. Meroni  A, Mentegari  E, Crespan  E  et al.  The incorporation of ribonucleotides induces structural and conformational changes in DNA. Biophys J. 2017;113:1373–82. 10.1016/j.bpj.2017.07.013. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 107. Wu  TP, Wang  T, Seetin  MG  et al.  DNA methylation on N6-adenine in mammalian embryonic stem cells. Nature. 2016;532:329–33. 10.1038/nature17640. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 108. Fleming  AM, Ding  Y, Burrows  CJ. Oxidative DNA damage is epigenetic by regulating gene transcription via base excision repair. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2017;114:2604–9. 10.1073/pnas.1619809114. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 109. Fleming  AM, Zhu  J, Ding  Y  et al.  8-Oxo-7,8-dihydroguanine in the context of a gene promoter G-quadruplex is an on–off switch for transcription. ACS Chem Biol. 2017;12:2417–26. 10.1021/acschembio.7b00636. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 110. Fleming  AM, Zhu  J, Howpay Manage  SA  et al.  Human NEIL3 gene expression regulated by epigenetic-like oxidative DNA modification. J Am Chem Soc. 2019;141:11036–49. 10.1021/jacs.9b01847. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 111. Bielskutė  S, Plavec  J, Podbevšek  P. Impact of oxidative lesions on the human telomeric G-quadruplex. J Am Chem Soc. 2019;141:2594–603. 10.1021/jacs.8b12748. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 112. Maltseva  DV, Baykov  AA, Jeltsch  A  et al.  Impact of 7,8-dihydro-8-oxoguanine on methylation of the CpG site by Dnmt3a. Biochemistry. 2009;48:1361–8. 10.1021/bi801947f. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 113. Perillo  B, Ombra  MN, Bertoni  A  et al.  DNA oxidation as triggered by H3K9me2 demethylation drives estrogen-induced gene expression. Science. 2008;319:202–6. 10.1126/science.1147674. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 114. Turk  PW, Laayoun  A, Smith  SS  et al.  DNA adduct 8-hydroxyl-2'-deoxyguanosine (8-hydroxyguanine) affects function of human DNA methyltransferase. Carcinogenesis. 1995;16:1253–5. 10.1093/carcin/16.5.1253. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 115. Mullen  NJ, Singh  PK. Nucleotide metabolism: a pan-cancer metabolic dependency. Nat Rev Cancer. 2023;23:275–94. 10.1038/s41568-023-00557-7. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 116. Liu  YC, Li  F, Handler  J  et al.  Global regulation of nucleotide biosynthetic genes by c-Myc. PLoS One. 2008;3:e2722. 10.1371/journal.pone.0002722. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 117. Mannava  S, Grachtchouk  V, Wheeler  LJ  et al.  Direct role of nucleotide metabolism in C-MYC-dependent proliferation of melanoma cells. Cell Cycle. 2008;7:2392–400. 10.4161/cc.6390. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 118. Szatrowski  TP, Nathan  CF. Production of large amounts of hydrogen peroxide by human tumor cells. Cancer Res. 1991;51:794–8. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 119. Patel  A, Burton  DG, Halvorsen  K  et al.  MutT Homolog 1 (MTH1) maintains multiple KRAS-driven pro-malignant pathways. Oncogene. 2015;34:2586–96. 10.1038/onc.2014.195. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 120. Temprine  K, Campbell  NR, Huang  R  et al.  Regulation of the error-prone DNA polymerase Polκ by oncogenic signaling and its contribution to drug resistance. Sci Signal. 2020;13:eaau1453. 10.1126/scisignal.aau1453. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 121. Tomicic  MT, Aasland  D, Naumann  SC  et al.  Translesion polymerase η is upregulated by cancer therapeutics and confers anticancer drug resistance. Cancer Res. 2014;74:5585–96. 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-14-0953. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 122. Pinlaor  S, Ma  N, Hiraku  Y  et al.  Repeated infection with opisthorchis viverrini induces accumulation of 8-nitroguanine and 8-oxo-7,8-dihydro-2'-deoxyguanine in the bile duct of hamsters via inducible nitric oxide synthase. Carcinogenesis. 2004;25:1535–42. 10.1093/carcin/bgh157. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 123. Masi  A, Fortini  P, Krokidis  MG  et al.  Increased levels of 5',8-cyclopurine DNA lesions in inflammatory bowel diseases. Redox Biol. 2020;34:101562. 10.1016/j.redox.2020.101562. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 124. Cao  Y, Oh  J, Xue  M  et al.  Commensal microbiota from patients with inflammatory bowel disease produce genotoxic metabolites. Science. 2022;378:eabm3233. 10.1126/science.abm3233. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 125. Horiike  S, Kawanishi  S, Kaito  M  et al.  Accumulation of 8-nitroguanine in the liver of patients with chronic hepatitis C. J Hepatol. 2005;43:403–10. 10.1016/j.jhep.2005.03.026. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 126. Maynard  S, Hejl  AM, Dinh  TS  et al.  Defective mitochondrial respiration, altered dNTP pools and reduced AP endonuclease 1 activity in peripheral blood mononuclear cells of Alzheimer’s disease patients. Aging. 2015;7:793–810. 10.18632/aging.100810. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 127. Wang  J, Clauson  CL, Robbins  PD  et al.  The oxidative DNA lesions 8,5'-cyclopurines accumulate with aging in a tissue-specific manner. Aging Cell. 2012;11:714–6. 10.1111/j.1474-9726.2012.00828.x. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 128. Hamalainen  RH, Landoni  JC, Ahlqvist  KJ  et al.  Defects in mtDNA replication challenge nuclear genome stability through nucleotide depletion and provide a unifying mechanism for mouse progerias. Nat Metab. 2019;1:958–65. 10.1038/s42255-019-0120-1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 129. Sharma  S, Koolmeister  C, Tran  P  et al.  Proofreading deficiency in mitochondrial DNA polymerase does not affect total dNTP pools in mouse embryos. Nat Metab. 2020;2:673–5. 10.1038/s42255-020-0264-z. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 130. Gessner  P, Lum  J, Frenguelli  BG. The mammalian purine salvage pathway as an exploitable route for cerebral bioenergetic support after brain injury. Neuropharmacology. 2023;224:109370. 10.1016/j.neuropharm.2022.109370. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 131. Mizukoshi  T, Yamada  S, Sakakibara  SI. Spatiotemporal regulation of de novo and salvage purine synthesis during brain development. eNeuro. 2023;10:ENEURO.0159–0123.2023., 10.1523/ENEURO.0159-23.2023. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 132. Liu  JC, Wang  D, Callen  E  et al.  Mechanism of cytarabine-induced neurotoxicity. Nature. 2025;643:1400–9. 10.1038/s41586-025-09210-9. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 133. Vaarmann  A, Mandel  M, Zeb  A  et al.  Mitochondrial biogenesis is required for axonal growth. Development. 2016;143:1981–92. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 134. Reid  DA, Reed  PJ, Schlachetzki  JCM  et al.  Incorporation of a nucleoside analog maps genome repair sites in postmitotic human neurons. Science. 2021;372:91–4. 10.1126/science.abb9032. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 135. Sliwinska  A, Kwiatkowski  D, Czarny  P  et al.  The levels of 7,8-dihydrodeoxyguanosine (8-oxoG) and 8-oxoguanine DNA glycosylase 1 (OGG1)—a potential diagnostic biomarkers of Alzheimer’s disease. J Neurol Sci. 2016;368:155–9. 10.1016/j.jns.2016.07.008. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 136. Alam  ZI, Jenner  A, Daniel  SE  et al.  Oxidative DNA damage in the parkinsonian brain: an apparent selective increase in 8-hydroxyguanine levels in substantia nigra. J Neurochem. 1997;69:1196–203. 10.1046/j.1471-4159.1997.69031196.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 137. Nakabeppu  Y, Tsuchimoto  D, Yamaguchi  H  et al.  Oxidative damage in nucleic acids and Parkinson’s disease. J of Neuroscience Research. 2007;85:919–34. 10.1002/jnr.21191. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 138. Kasahara  K, Kerby  RL, Zhang  Q.  et al.  Gut bacterial metabolism contributes to host global purine homeostasis. Cell Host Microbe. 2023;31:1038–1053.e1010. 10.1016/j.chom.2023.05.011. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 139. Hsiao  YC, Liu  CW, Chi  L  et al.  Effects of gut microbiome on carcinogenic DNA damage. Chem Res Toxicol. 2020;33:2130–8. 10.1021/acs.chemrestox.0c00142. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 140. Li  Z, Wu  Z, You  X  et al.  Pan-cancer analysis reveals that TK1 promotes tumor progression by mediating cell proliferation and Th2 cell polarization. Cancer Cell Int. 2024;24:329. 10.1186/s12935-024-03515-x. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 141. Austin  WR, Armijo  AL, Campbell  DO  et al.  Nucleoside salvage pathway kinases regulate hematopoiesis by linking nucleotide metabolism with replication stress. J Exp Med. 2012;209:2215–28. 10.1084/jem.20121061. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 142. Kocabas  NA, Aksoy  P, Pelleymounter  LL  et al.  Gemcitabine pharmacogenomics: deoxycytidine kinase and cytidylate kinase gene resequencing and functional genomics. Drug Metab Dispos. 2008;36:1951–9. 10.1124/dmd.108.020925. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 143. Gandhi  V, Kilpatrick  JM, Plunkett  W  et al.  A proof-of-principle pharmacokinetic, pharmacodynamic, and clinical study with purine nucleoside phosphorylase inhibitor immucillin-H (BCX-1777, forodesine). Blood. 2005;106:4253–60. 10.1182/blood-2005-03-1309. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 144. Tabata  S, Umemura  S, Narita  M  et al.  Metabolic hallmarks for purine nucleotide biosynthesis in small cell lung carcinoma. Mol. Cancer Res. 2024;22:82–93. 10.1158/1541-7786.MCR-23-0386. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 145. Pey  J, San José-Eneriz  E, Ochoa  MC  et al.  In-silico gene essentiality analysis of polyamine biosynthesis reveals APRT as a potential target in cancer. Sci Rep. 2017;7:14358. 10.1038/s41598-017-14067-8. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 146. Yoshida  M, Brown  SA, Moriyama  T  et al.  Low NUDT15 expression levels due to biallelic NUDT15 variants and 6-mercaptopurine intolerance. Br J Haematol. 2022;199:270–6. 10.1111/bjh.18375. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 147. Wilson  PM, LaBonte  MJ, Lenz  HJ  et al.  Inhibition of dUTPase induces synthetic lethality with thymidylate synthase-targeted therapies in non-small cell lung cancer. Mol Cancer Ther. 2012;11:616–28. 10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-11-0781. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 148. Yokogawa  T, Yano  W, Tsukioka  S  et al.  dUTPase inhibition confers susceptibility to a thymidylate synthase inhibitor in DNA-repair-defective human cancer cells. Cancer Sci. 2021;112:422–32. 10.1111/cas.14718. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 149. Marinaki  AM, Ansari  A, Duley  JA  et al.  Adverse drug reactions to azathioprine therapy are associated with polymorphism in the gene encoding inosine triphosphate pyrophosphatase (ITPase). Pharmacogenetics. 2004;14:181–7. 10.1097/00008571-200403000-00006. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 150. An  Q, Robins  P, Lindahl  T  et al.  5-Fluorouracil incorporated into DNA is excised by the Smug1 DNA glycosylase to reduce drug cytotoxicity. Cancer Res. 2007;67:940–5. 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-06-2960. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 151. Bemi  V, Turchi  G, Margotti  E  et al.  6-Thioguanine resistance in a human colon carcinoma cell line with unaltered levels of hypoxanthine guanine phosphoribosyltransferase activity. Int J Cancer. 1999;82:556–61. 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0215(19990812)82:4<556::AID-IJC14>3.0.CO;2-Y. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 152. Gore  SD, Baylin  S, Sugar  E  et al.  Combined DNA methyltransferase and histone deacetylase inhibition in the treatment of myeloid neoplasms. Cancer Res. 2006;66:6361–9. 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-06-0080. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 153. Yang  AS, Doshi  KD, Choi  SW  et al.  DNA methylation changes after 5-aza-2'-deoxycytidine therapy in patients with leukemia. Cancer Res. 2006;66:5495–503. 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-05-2385. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 154. Tran  DH, Kim  D, Kesavan  R  et al.  De novo and salvage purine synthesis pathways across tissues and tumors. Cell. 2024;187:3602–18. 10.1016/j.cell.2024.05.011. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 155. Viel  A, Bruselles  A, Meccia  E  et al.  A specific mutational signature associated with DNA 8-oxoguanine persistence in MUTYH-defective colorectal cancer. EBioMedicine. 2017;20:39–49. 10.1016/j.ebiom.2017.04.022. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 156. Ewald  B, Sampath  D, Plunkett  W. H2AX phosphorylation marks gemcitabine-induced stalled replication forks and their collapse upon S-phase checkpoint abrogation. Mol Cancer Ther. 2007;6:1239–48. 10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-06-0633. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 157. Sampath  D, Cortes  J, Estrov  Z  et al.  Pharmacodynamics of cytarabine alone and in combination with 7-hydroxystaurosporine (UCN-01) in AML blasts in vitro and during a clinical trial. Blood. 2006;107:2517–24. 10.1182/blood-2005-08-3351. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 158. Tang  B, Lee  HO, An  SS  et al.  Specific targeting of MTAP-deleted tumors with a combination of 2'-fluoroadenine and 5'-methylthioadenosine. Cancer Res. 2018;78:4386–95. 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-18-0814. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 159. Wu  J, Leng  J, Wang  P  et al.  Cytotoxic and mutagenic properties of minor-groove O2-alkylthymidine lesions in human cells. J Biol Chem. 2018;293:8638–44. 10.1074/jbc.RA118.003133. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 160. You  C, Swanson  AL, Dai  X  et al.  Translesion synthesis of 8,5'-cyclopurine-2'-deoxynucleosides by DNA polymerases η, ι, and ζ. J Biol Chem. 2013;288:28548–56. 10.1074/jbc.M113.480459. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 161. Martincorena  I, Fowler  JC, Wabik  A  et al.  Somatic mutant clones colonize the human esophagus with age. Science. 2018;362:911–7. 10.1126/science.aau3879. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 162. Lee-Six  H, Olafsson  S, Ellis  P  et al.  The landscape of somatic mutation in normal colorectal epithelial cells. Nature. 2019;574:532–7. 10.1038/s41586-019-1672-7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 163. Wang  Y, Robinson  PS, Coorens  THH  et al.  APOBEC mutagenesis is a common process in normal human small intestine. Nat Genet. 2023;55:246–54. 10.1038/s41588-022-01296-5. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 164. Coorens  THH, Collord  G, Jung  H  et al.  The somatic mutation landscape of normal gastric epithelium. Nature. 2025;640:418–26. 10.1038/s41586-025-08708-6. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 165. Alexandrov  LB, Kim  J, Haradhvala  NJ  et al.  The repertoire of mutational signatures in human cancer. Nature. 2020;578:94–101. 10.1038/s41586-020-1943-3. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 166. Tomkova  M, Tomek  J, Kriaucionis  S  et al.  Mutational signature distribution varies with DNA replication timing and strand asymmetry. Genome Biol. 2018;19:129. 10.1186/s13059-018-1509-y. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 167. Su  Q, Jin  C, Bo  Z  et al.  Association between gut microbiota and gastrointestinal cancer: a two-sample bi-directional Mendelian randomization study. Front Microbiol. 2023;14:1181328. 10.3389/fmicb.2023.1181328. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 168. Hu  J, Adar  S, Selby  CP  et al.  Genome-wide analysis of human global and transcription-coupled excision repair of UV damage at single-nucleotide resolution. Genes Dev.  2015;29:948–60. 10.1101/gad.261271.115. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 169. Tang  F, Yuan  J, Yuan  B-F  et al.  DNA–protein cross-linking sequencing for genome-wide mapping of thymidine glycol. J. Am. Chem. Soc.  2022;144:454–62. 10.1021/jacs.1c10490. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 170. Li  J, Li  L, Tan  Y  et al.  Dynamic genome-wide mapping reveals how chromatin context shapes OGG1-mediated repair and related mutagenesis in human cells. Nucleic Acids Res. 2025;53:gkaf1330. 10.1093/nar/gkaf1330. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 171. Jin  SG, Meng  Y, Johnson  J  et al.  Concordance of hydrogen peroxide-induced 8-oxo-guanine patterns with two cancer mutation signatures of upper GI tract tumors. Sci Adv. 2022;8:eabn3815. 10.1126/sciadv.abn3815. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 172. Wu  J, McKeague  M, Sturla  SJ. Nucleotide-resolution genome-wide mapping of oxidative DNA damage by click-code-seq. J Am Chem Soc. 2018;140:9783–7. 10.1021/jacs.8b03715. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Associated Data

This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

Data Availability Statement

No new data were generated or analyzed in support of this research.


Articles from Nucleic Acids Research are provided here courtesy of Oxford University Press

RESOURCES