Xeroderma pigmentosum (XP) is an inherited disease in which cells from patients exhibit defects in nucleotide excision repair (NER). XP proteins A–G are crucial in the processes of DNA damage recognition and incision, and patients with XP can carry mutations in any of the genes that specify these proteins. In mammalian cells, NER is a dynamic process in which a variety of proteins interact with one another, via modular domains, to carry out their functions. XP proteins are key players in several steps of the NER process, including DNA strand discrimination (XPA, in complex with replication protein A), repair complex formation (XPC, in complex with hHR23B; XPF, in complex with ERCC1) and repair factor recruitment (transcription factor IIH, in complex with XPG). Through these protein–protein interactions, various types of bulky DNA adducts can be recognized and repaired. Communication between the NER system and other cellular pathways is also achieved by selected binding of the various structural domains. Here, we summarize recent studies on the domain structures of human NER components and the regulatory networks that utilize these proteins. Data provided by these studies have helped to illuminate the complex molecular interactions among NER factors in the context of DNA repair.

The cis–syn cyclobutane pyrimidine dimer (CPD) is a cytotoxic, mutagenic and carcinogenic DNA photoproduct and is repaired by the nucleotide excision repair (NER) pathway in mammalian cells. The XPC–hHR23B complex as the initiator of global genomic NER binds to sites of certain kinds of DNA damage. Although CPDs are rarely recognized by the XPC–hHR23B complex, the presence of mismatched bases opposite a CPD significantly increased the binding affinity of the XPC–hHR23B complex to the CPD. In order to decipher the properties of the DNA structures that determine the binding affinity for XPC–hHR23B to DNA, we carried out structural analyses of the various types of CPDs by NMR spectroscopy. The DNA duplex which contains a single 3′ T·G wobble pair in a CPD (CPD/GA duplex) induces little conformational distortion. However, severe distortion of the helical conformation occurs when a CPD contains double T·G wobble pairs (CPD/GG duplex) even though the T residues of the CPD form stable hydrogen bonds with the opposite G residues. The helical bending angle of the CPD/GG duplex was larger than those of the CPD/GA duplex and properly matched CPD/AA duplex. The fluctuation of the backbone conformation and significant changes in the widths of the major and minor grooves at the double T·G wobble paired site were also observed in the CPD/GG duplex. These structural features were also found in a duplex that contains the (6–4) adduct, which is efficiently recognized by the XPC–hHR23B complex. Thus, we suggest that the unique structural features of the DNA double helix (that is, helical bending, flexible backbone conformation, and significant changes of the major and/or minor grooves) might be important factors in determining the binding affinity of the XPC–hHR23B complex to DNA.

In mammalian cells, nucleotide excision repair (NER) is the major pathway for the removal of bulky DNA adducts. Many of the key NER proteins are members of the XP family (XPA, XPB, etc.), which was named on the basis of its association with the disorder xerodoma pigmentosum. Human replication protein A (RPA), the ubiquitous single‐stranded DNA‐binding protein, is another of the essential proteins for NER. RPA stimulates the interaction of XPA with damaged DNA by forming an RPA–XPA complex on damaged DNA sites. Binding of RPA to the undamaged DNA strand is most important during NER, because XPA, which directs the excision nucleases XPG and XPF, must bind to the damaged strand. In this study, nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) spectroscopy was used to assess the binding of the tandem high affinity DNA‐binding domains, RPA‐AB, and of the isolated domain RPA‐A, to normal DNA and damaged DNA containing the cyclobutane pyrimidine dimer (CPD) lesion. Both RPA‐A and RPA‐AB were found to bind non‐ specifically to both strands of normal and CPD‐ containing DNA duplexes. There were no differences observed when binding to normal DNA duplex was examined in the presence of the minimal DNA‐binding domain of XPA (XPA‐MBD). However, there is a drastic difference for CPD‐damaged DNA duplex as both RPA‐A and RPA‐AB bind specifically to the undamaged strand. The strand‐specific binding of RPA and XPA to the damaged duplex DNA shows that RPA and XPA play crucial roles in damage verification and guiding cleavage of damaged DNA during NER.