A broad scientific community is involved in investigations aimed at delineating the mechanisms of formation and cellular processing of oxidatively generated damage to nucleic acids. Perhaps as a consequence of this breadth of research expertise, there are nomenclature problems for several of the oxidized bases including 8-oxo-7,8-dihydroguanine (8-oxoGua), a ubiquitous marker of almost every type of oxidative stress in cells. Efforts to standardize the nomenclature and abbreviations of the main DNA degradation products that arise from oxidative pathways are reported. Information is also provided on the main oxidative radicals, non-radical oxygen species, one-electron agents and enzymes involved in DNA degradation pathways as well in their targets and reactivity. A brief classification of oxidatively generated damage to DNA that may involve single modifications, tandem base modifications, intrastrand and interstrand cross-links together with DNA-protein cross-links and base adducts arising from the addition of lipid peroxides breakdown products is also included.

8-Oxo–2′-deoxyguanosine 5′-triphosphate (8-oxo-dGTP) is a product of oxidative modification of dGTP, that can be misincorporated into DNA, causing AT->CG mutations. Cells are protected against 8-oxo-dGTP by 8-oxo-dGTP 5′-pyrophosphohydrolases (8-oxo-dGTP-ases) that convert it to 8-oxo-dGMP. Thus, inhibition of 8-oxo-dGTPases may lead to cancer. To elucidate the involvement of 8-oxo-dGTPases in carcinogenesis, an assay of the 8-oxo-dGTPase activity is required. This paper presents such an assay developed for Chinese hamster ovary (CHO) cells that can be applied to any biological material. It includes: (i) a convenient method for preparing 8-oxo-2′-deoxyguanosine 5′-phosphates; (ii) an HPLC/UV quantification of 8-oxo-dGTP hydrolysis products and (iii) separation of 8-oxo-dGTPase activity from interfering 8-oxo-dGTP phosphatase(s). The 8-oxo-dGTPase activity of CHO cells depends on magnesium, has a pH optimum of 8.5, K m for 8-oxo-dGTP of 9.3 µM, and is inhibited by 8-oxo-dGDP, the product of interfering 8-oxo-dGTP phosphatases. The latter must be removed from the assayed samples by ultrafiltration through 30 kDa cut-off membranes. The method was used to test the inhibition by cadmium ions of the activity of 8-oxo-dGTPase in CHO cells. The cells cultured with 0.3-3 µM cadmium(II) acetate for up to 24 h had their 8-oxo-dGTPase activity suppressed in a Cd(II) concentration-dependent manner, down to 70% of the control value.

The aim of ESCODD, a European Commission funded Concerted Action, is to improve the precision and accuracy of methods for measuring 8-oxo-7,8-dihydroguanine (8-oxoGua) or the nucleoside (8-oxodG). On two occasions, participating laboratories received samples of different concentrations of 8-oxodG for analysis. About half the results returned (for 8-oxodG) were within 20% of the median values. Coefficients of variation (for three identical samples) were commonly around 10%. A sample of calf thymus DNA was sent, dry, to all laboratories. Analysis of 8-oxoGua/8-oxodG in this sample was a test of hydrolysis methods. Almost half the reported results were within 20% of the median value, and half obtained a CVof less than 10%. In order to test sensitivity, as well as precision, DNA was treated with photosensitiser and light to introduce increasing amounts of 8-oxoGua and samples were sent to members. Median values calculated from all returned results were 45.6 (untreated), 53.9, 60.4 and 65.6 8-oxoGua/10(6) Gua; only seven laboratories detected the increase over the whole range, while all but one detected a dose response over two concentration intervals. Results in this trial reflect a continuing improvement in precision and accuracy. The next challenge will be the analysis of 8-oxodG in DNA isolated from cells or tissue, where the concentration is much lower than in calf thymus DNA.

The field of oxidative stress, and the study of oxidatively damaged DNA, in particular, is a subject of intense, and growing interest. This has, in part, benefited from the availability of kits from commercial suppliers which are advertised as reporting on markers of oxidative stress. Such widespread use has inevitably led to an increase in the number of concerns, amongst experts in the field, editors and referees, over appropriateness of terminology and methodology. Thus, the widely used term “oxidative DNA damage” is misleading as it implies that the damage, i.e. the lesion per se, is oxidative and thus capable of oxidising other substrates. We would encourage the use of such terms as ‘oxidatively damaged DNA’, ‘oxidatively generated DNA damage’, ‘oxidatively-derived damage to DNA’ or ‘oxidation-induced DNA damage’ to describe the consequence of the interaction of reactive oxygen species with DNA. One of the most studied nucleic acid-derived biomarkers of oxidative stress is 8-oxo-7,8-dihydro-2′-deoxyguanosine (8-oxodG). Yet, in the literature, this compound has been referred to using a number of different terms, sometimes leading to confusion over the designation of the modified nucleobase or (2′-deoxy)ribonucleoside. Standardisation of nomenclature would not only simplify literature searches, but also clarify the lesion in question. Herein, we provide justification for our preferred nomenclature, and suggest a number of steps by which we may work towards standardisation of calibration, and with it improved inter-laboratory agreement, for assays of 8-oxodG, in order to achieve accurate measurements.