In Time and Space: Laser Microirradiation and the DNA Damage Response

Endogenous DNA damage at sites of terminated transcripts

DNA damage promotes mutations that fuel cancer, ageing and neurodegenerative diseases1-3, but surprisingly, the causes and types of damage remain largely unknown. There are three identified mechanisms that damage DNA during transcription: collision of RNA polymerase (RNAP) with the DNA-replication machinery head-on and co-directionally4-6, and R-loop-induced DNA breakage7-10. Here we identify novel DNA damage reaction intermediates11,12 and uncover a fourth transcription-related source of DNA damage: endogenous DNA damage at sites of terminated transcripts. We engineered proteins to capture single-stranded DNA (ssDNA) ends with 3' polarity in bacterial and human cells. In Escherichia coli, spontaneous 3'-ssDNA-end foci were unexpectedly frequent, at one or more per cell division, and arose via two identifiable pathways, both of which were dependent on DNA replication. A pathway associated with double-strand breaks was suppressed by overexpression of replicative DNA polymerase (pol) III, suggesting competition between pol III and DNA damage-promoting proteins. Mapping of recurrent 3'-ssDNA-ends identified distinct 3'-ssDNA-end-hotspots, mostly unrelated to double-strand breaks, next to the 5'-CCTTTTTT transcription-terminator-like sequence. These 3'-ssDNA-termini coincide with RNA 3'-termini identified by DirectRNA sequencing13 or simultaneous 5' and 3' end RNA sequencing (SEnd-seq)14 and were prevented by a mutant RNAP that reads through terminators. Our findings reveal that transcription termination or pausing can promote DNA damage and subsequent genomic instability.

The impact of chromatin on double-strand break repair: Imaging tools and discoveries

Eukaryotic nuclei are constantly being exposed to factors that break or chemically modify the DNA. Accurate repair of this DNA damage is crucial to prevent DNA mutations and maintain optimal cell function. To overcome the detrimental effects of DNA damage, a multitude of repair pathways has evolved. These pathways need to function properly within the different chromatin domains present in the nucleus. Each of these domains exhibit distinct molecular- and bio-physical characteristics that can influence the response to DNA damage. In particular, chromatin domains highly enriched for repetitive DNA sequences, such as nucleoli, centromeres and pericentromeric heterochromatin require tailored repair mechanisms to safeguard genome stability. Work from the past decades has led to the development of innovative imaging tools as well as inducible DNA damage techniques to gain new insights into the impact of these repetitive chromatin domains on the DNA repair process. Here we summarize these tools with a particular focus on Double-Strand Break (DSB) repair, and discuss the insights gained into our understanding of the influence of chromatin domains on DSB -dynamics and -repair pathway choice.

Imaging the Response to DNA Damage in Heterochromatin Domains

The eukaryotic genome is assembled in a nucleoprotein complex called chromatin, whose organization markedly influences the repair of DNA lesions. For instance, compact chromatin states, broadly categorized as heterochromatin, present a challenging environment for DNA damage repair. Through transcriptional silencing, heterochromatin also plays a vital role in the maintenance of genomic integrity and cellular homeostasis. It is thus of critical importance to decipher whether and how heterochromatin affects the DNA damage response (DDR) to understand how this chromatin state is preserved after DNA damage. Here, we present two laser micro-irradiation-based methods for imaging the DDR in heterochromatin domains in mammalian cells. These methods allow DNA damage targeting to specific subnuclear compartments, direct visualization of the DDR and image-based quantification of the repair response. We apply them to study DNA double-strand break repair pathways in facultative heterochromatin and the repair of UV photoproducts in constitutive heterochromatin. We discuss the advantages and limitations of these methods compared to other targeted approaches for DNA damage induction.

ZMYM2 restricts 53BP1 at DNA double-strand breaks to favor BRCA1 loading and homologous recombination

An inability to repair DNA double-strand breaks (DSBs) threatens genome integrity and can contribute to human diseases, including cancer. Mammalian cells repair DSBs mainly through homologous recombination (HR) and nonhomologous end-joining (NHEJ). The choice between these pathways is regulated by the interplay between 53BP1 and BRCA1, whereby BRCA1 excludes 53BP1 to promote HR and 53BP1 limits BRCA1 to facilitate NHEJ. Here, we identify the zinc-finger proteins (ZnF), ZMYM2 and ZMYM3, as antagonizers of 53BP1 recruitment that facilitate HR protein recruitment and function at DNA breaks. Mechanistically, we show that ZMYM2 recruitment to DSBs and suppression of break-associated 53BP1 requires the SUMO E3 ligase PIAS4, as well as SUMO binding by ZMYM2. Cells deficient for ZMYM2/3 display genome instability, PARP inhibitor and ionizing radiation sensitivity and reduced HR repair. Importantly, depletion of 53BP1 in ZMYM2/3-deficient cells rescues BRCA1 recruitment to and HR repair of DSBs, suggesting that ZMYM2 and ZMYM3 primarily function to restrict 53BP1 engagement at breaks to favor BRCA1 loading that functions to channel breaks to HR repair. Identification of DNA repair functions for these poorly characterized ZnF proteins may shed light on their unknown contributions to human diseases, where they have been reported to be highly dysregulated, including in several cancers.

Systematic overview on the most widespread techniques for inducing and visualizing the DNA double-strand breaks

DNA double-strand breaks (DSBs) are one of the most frequent causes of initiating cancerous malformations, therefore, to reduce the risk, cells have developed sophisticated DNA repair mechanisms. These pathways ensure proper cellular function and genome integrity. However, any alteration or malfunction during DNA repair can influence cellular homeostasis, as improper recognition of the DNA damage or dysregulation of the repair process can lead to genome instability. Several powerful methods have been established to extend our current knowledge in the field of DNA repair. For this reason, in this review, we focus on the methods used to study DSB repair, and we summarize the advantages and disadvantages of the most commonly used techniques currently available for the site-specific induction of DSBs and the subsequent tracking of the repair processes in human cells. We highlight methods that are suitable for site-specific DSB induction (by restriction endonucleases, CRISPR-mediated DSB induction and laser microirradiation) as well as approaches [e.g., fluorescence-, confocal- and super-resolution microscopy, chromatin immunoprecipitation (ChIP), DSB-labeling and sequencing techniques] to visualize and follow the kinetics of DSB repair.

Poly(ADP-ribose) binding and macroH2A mediate recruitment and functions of KDM5A at DNA lesions

The histone demethylase KDM5A erases histone H3 lysine 4 methylation, which is involved in transcription and DNA damage responses (DDRs). While DDR functions of KDM5A have been identified, how KDM5A recognizes DNA lesion sites within chromatin is unknown. Here, we identify two factors that act upstream of KDM5A to promote its association with DNA damage sites. We have identified a noncanonical poly(ADP-ribose) (PAR)–binding region unique to KDM5A. Loss of the PAR-binding region or treatment with PAR polymerase (PARP) inhibitors (PARPi’s) blocks KDM5A–PAR interactions and DNA repair functions of KDM5A. The histone variant macroH2A1.2 is also specifically required for KDM5A recruitment and function at DNA damage sites, including homology-directed repair of DNA double-strand breaks and repression of transcription at DNA breaks. Overall, this work reveals the importance of PAR binding and macroH2A1.2 in KDM5A recognition of DNA lesion sites that drive transcriptional and repair activities at DNA breaks within chromatin that are essential for maintaining genome integrity.

PCAF-Mediated Histone Acetylation Promotes Replication Fork Degradation by MRE11 and EXO1 in BRCA-Deficient Cells

Stabilization of stalled replication forks is a prominent mechanism of PARP (Poly(ADP-ribose) Polymerase) inhibitor (PARPi) resistance in BRCA-deficient tumors. Epigenetic mechanisms of replication fork stability are emerging but remain poorly understood. Here, we report the histone acetyltransferase PCAF (p300/CBP-associated) as a fork-associated protein that promotes fork degradation in BRCA-deficient cells by acetylating H4K8 at stalled replication forks, which recruits MRE11 and EXO1. A H4K8ac binding domain within MRE11/EXO1 is required for their recruitment to stalled forks. Low PCAF levels, which we identify in a subset of BRCA2-deficient tumors, stabilize stalled forks, resulting in PARPi resistance in BRCA-deficient cells. Furthermore, PCAF activity is tightly regulated by ATR (ataxia telangiectasia and Rad3-related), which phosphorylates PCAF on serine 264 (S264) to limit its association and activity at stalled forks. Our results reveal PCAF and histone acetylation as critical regulators of fork stability and PARPi responses in BRCA-deficient cells, which provides key insights into targeting BRCA-deficient tumors and identifying epigenetic modulators of chemotherapeutic responses.