HMCES Maintains Replication Fork Progression and Prevents Double-Strand Breaks in Response to APOBEC Deamination and Abasic Site Formation

Cytidine deaminases APOBEC3C and APOBEC3D promote DNA replication stress resistance in pancreatic cancer cells

Gemcitabine is a potent inhibitor of DNA replication and is a mainstay therapeutic for diverse cancers, particularly pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). However, most tumors remain refractory to gemcitabine therapies. Here, to define the cancer cell response to gemcitabine, we performed genome-scale CRISPR-Cas9 chemical-genetic screens in PDAC cells and found selective loss of cell fitness upon disruption of the cytidine deaminases APOBEC3C and APOBEC3D. Following gemcitabine treatment, APOBEC3C and APOBEC3D promote DNA replication stress resistance and cell survival by deaminating cytidines in the nuclear genome to ensure DNA replication fork restart and repair in PDAC cells. We provide evidence that the chemical-genetic interaction between APOBEC3C or APOBEC3D and gemcitabine is absent in nontransformed cells but is recapitulated across different PDAC cell lines, in PDAC organoids and in PDAC xenografts. Thus, we uncover roles for APOBEC3C and APOBEC3D in DNA replication stress resistance and offer plausible targets for improving gemcitabine-based therapies for PDAC.

Novel Processes Associated with the Repair of Interstrand Cross-Links Derived from Abasic Sites in Duplex DNA: Roles for the Base Excision Repair Glycosylase NEIL3 and the SRAP Protein HMCES

Recent studies have defined a novel pathway for the repair of interstrand cross-links derived from the reaction of an adenine residue with an apurinic/apyrimidinic (AP) site on the opposing strand of DNA (dA-AP ICL). Stalling of a replication fork at the dA-AP ICL triggers TRAIP-dependent ubiquitylation of the CMG helicase that recruits the base excision repair glycosylase NEIL3 to the lesion. NEIL3 unhooks the dA-AP ICL to regenerate the native adenine residue on one strand and an AP site on the other strand. Covalent capture of the abasic site by the SRAP protein HMCES protects against genomic instability that would result from cleavage of the abasic site in the context of single-stranded DNA at the replication fork. After repair synthesis moves the HMCES-AP adduct into the context of double-stranded DNA, the DNA-protein cross-link is resolved by a nonproteolytic mechanism involving dissociation of thiazolidine attachment. The AP site in duplex DNA is then repaired by the base excision repair pathway.

Formation and Properties of DNA Adducts Generated by Reactions of Abasic Sites with 1,2-Aminothiols Including Cysteamine, Cysteine Methyl Ester, and Peptides Containing N-Terminal Cysteine Residues

The reaction of 1,2-aminothiol groups with aldehyde residues in aqueous solution generates thiazolidine products, and this process has been developed as a catalyst-free click reaction for bioconjugation. The work reported here characterized reactions of the biologically relevant 1,2-aminothiols including cysteamine, cysteine methyl ester, and peptides containing N-terminal cysteine residues with the aldehyde residue of apurinic/apyrimidinic (AP) sites in DNA oligomers. These 1,2-aminothiol-containing compounds rapidly generated adducts with AP sites in single-stranded and double-stranded DNA. NMR and MALDI-TOF-MS analyses provided evidence that the reaction generated a thiazolidine product. Conversion of an AP site to a thiazolidine-AP adduct protected against the rapid cleavage normally induced at AP sites by the endonuclease action of the enzyme APE1 and the AP-lyase activity of the biogenic amine spermine. In the presence of excess 1,2-aminothiols, the thiazolidine-AP adducts underwent slow strand cleavage via a β-lyase reaction that generated products with 1,2-aminothiol-modified sugar residues on the 3'-end of the strand break. In the absence of excess 1,2-aminothiols, the thiazolidine-AP adducts dissociated to release the parent AP-containing oligonucleotide. The properties of the thiazolidine-AP adducts described here mirror critical properties of SRAP proteins HMCES and YedK that capture AP sites in single-stranded regions of cellular DNA and protect them from cleavage.

C-to-G editing generates double-strand breaks causing deletion, transversion and translocation

Base editors (BEs) introduce base substitutions without double-strand DNA cleavage. Besides precise substitutions, BEs generate low-frequency 'stochastic' byproducts through unclear mechanisms. Here, we performed in-depth outcome profiling and genetic dissection, revealing that C-to-G BEs (CGBEs) generate substantial amounts of intermediate double-strand breaks (DSBs), which are at the centre of several byproducts. Imperfect DSB end-joining leads to small deletions via end-resection, templated insertions or aberrant transversions during end fill-in. Chromosomal translocations were detected between the editing target and off-targets of Cas9/deaminase origin. Genetic screenings of DNA repair factors disclosed a central role of abasic site processing in DSB formation. Shielding of abasic sites by the suicide enzyme HMCES reduced CGBE-initiated DSBs, providing an effective way to minimize DSB-triggered events without affecting substitutions. This work demonstrates that CGBEs can initiate deleterious intermediate DSBs and therefore require careful consideration for therapeutic applications, and that HMCES-aided CGBEs hold promise as safer tools.

RPA guides UNG to uracil in ssDNA to facilitate antibody class switching and repair of mutagenic uracil at the replication fork

Activation-induced cytidine deaminase (AID) interacts with replication protein A (RPA), the major ssDNA-binding protein, to promote deamination of cytosine to uracil in transcribed immunoglobulin (Ig) genes. Uracil-DNA glycosylase (UNG) acts in concert with AID during Ig diversification. In addition, UNG preserves genome integrity by base-excision repair (BER) in the overall genome. How UNG is regulated to support both mutagenic processing and error-free repair remains unknown. UNG is expressed as two isoforms, UNG1 and UNG2, which both contain an RPA-binding helix that facilitates uracil excision from RPA-coated ssDNA. However, the impact of this interaction in antibody diversification and genome maintenance has not been investigated. Here, we generated B-cell clones with targeted mutations in the UNG RPA-binding motif, and analysed class switch recombination (CSR), mutation frequency (5' Ig Sμ), and genomic uracil in clones representing seven Ung genotypes. We show that the UNG:RPA interaction plays a crucial role in both CSR and repair of AID-induced uracil at the Ig loci. By contrast, the interaction had no significant impact on total genomic uracil levels. Thus, RPA coordinates UNG during CSR and pre-replicative repair of mutagenic uracil in ssDNA but is not essential in post-replicative and canonical BER of uracil in dsDNA.

APOBEC3A induces DNA gaps through PRIMPOL and confers gap-associated therapeutic vulnerability

Mutation signatures associated with apolipoprotein B mRNA editing catalytic polypeptide-like 3A/B (APOBEC3A/B) cytidine deaminases are prevalent across cancers, implying their roles as mutagenic drivers during tumorigenesis and tumor evolution. APOBEC3A (A3A) expression induces DNA replication stress and increases the cellular dependency on the ataxia telangiectasia and Rad3-related (ATR) kinase for survival. Nonetheless, how A3A induces DNA replication stress remains unclear. We show that A3A induces replication stress without slowing replication forks. We find that A3A induces single-stranded DNA (ssDNA) gaps through PrimPol-mediated repriming. A3A-induced ssDNA gaps are repaired by multiple pathways involving ATR, RAD51, and translesion synthesis. Both ATR inhibition and trapping of poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) on DNA by PARP inhibitor impair the repair of A3A-induced gaps, preferentially killing A3A-expressing cells. When used in combination, PARP and ATR inhibitors selectively kill A3A-expressing cells synergistically in a manner dependent on PrimPol-generated gaps. Thus, A3A-induced replication stress arises from PrimPol-generated ssDNA gaps, which confer a therapeutic vulnerability to gap-targeted DNA repair inhibitors.

Self-reversal facilitates the resolution of HMCES DNA-protein crosslinks in cells

Abasic sites are common DNA lesions stalling polymerases and threatening genome stability. When located in single-stranded DNA (ssDNA), they are shielded from aberrant processing by 5-hydroxymethyl cytosine, embryonic stem cell (ESC)-specific (HMCES) via a DNA-protein crosslink (DPC) that prevents double-strand breaks. Nevertheless, HMCES-DPCs must be removed to complete DNA repair. Here, we find that DNA polymerase α inhibition generates ssDNA abasic sites and HMCES-DPCs. These DPCs are resolved with a half-life of approximately 1.5 h. HMCES can catalyze its own DPC self-reversal reaction, which is dependent on glutamate 127 and is favored when the ssDNA is converted to duplex DNA. When the self-reversal mechanism is inactivated in cells, HMCES-DPC removal is delayed, cell proliferation is slowed, and cells become hypersensitive to DNA damage agents that increase AP (apurinic/apyrimidinic) site formation. In these circumstances, proteolysis may become an important mechanism of HMCES-DPC resolution. Thus, HMCES-DPC formation followed by self-reversal is an important mechanism for ssDNA AP site management.

DNA Damage Responses, the Trump Card of Stem Cells in the Survival Game

Stem cells, as a group of undifferentiated cells, are enriched with self-renewal and high proliferative capacity, which have attracted the attention of many researchers as a promising approach in the treatment of many diseases over the past years. However, from the cellular and molecular point of view, the DNA repair system is one of the biggest challenges in achieving therapeutic goals through stem cell technology. DNA repair mechanisms are an advantage for stem cells that are constantly multiplying to deal with various types of DNA damage. However, this mechanism can be considered a trump card in the game of cell survival and treatment resistance in cancer stem cells, which can hinder the curability of various types of cancer. Therefore, getting a deep insight into the DNA repair system can bring researchers one step closer to achieving major therapeutic goals. The remarkable thing about the DNA repair system is that this system is not only under the control of genetic factors, but also under the control of epigenetic factors. Therefore, it is necessary to investigate the role of the DNA repair system in maintaining the survival of cancer stem cells from both aspects.

A non-proteolytic release mechanism for HMCES-DNA-protein crosslinks

The conserved protein HMCES crosslinks to abasic (AP) sites in ssDNA to prevent strand scission and the formation of toxic dsDNA breaks during replication. Here, we report a non-proteolytic release mechanism for HMCES-DNA-protein crosslinks (DPCs), which is regulated by DNA context. In ssDNA and at ssDNA-dsDNA junctions, HMCES-DPCs are stable, which efficiently protects AP sites against spontaneous incisions or cleavage by APE1 endonuclease. In contrast, HMCES-DPCs are released in dsDNA, allowing APE1 to initiate downstream repair. Mechanistically, we show that release is governed by two components. First, a conserved glutamate residue, within HMCES' active site, catalyses reversal of the crosslink. Second, affinity to the underlying DNA structure determines whether HMCES re-crosslinks or dissociates. Our study reveals that the protective role of HMCES-DPCs involves their controlled release upon bypass by replication forks, which restricts DPC formation to a necessary minimum.

Genetic inhibitors of APOBEC3B-induced mutagenesis

The cytidine deaminases APOBEC3A (A3A) and APOBEC3B (A3B) are prominent mutators of human cancer genomes. However, tumor-specific genetic modulators of APOBEC-induced mutagenesis are poorly defined. Here, we used a screen to identify 61 gene deletions that increase A3B-induced mutations in yeast. We also determined whether each deletion was epistatic with Ung1 loss, which indicated whether the encoded factors participate in the homologous recombination (HR)-dependent bypass of A3B/Ung1-dependent abasic sites or suppress A3B-catalyzed deamination by protecting against aberrant formation of single-stranded DNA (ssDNA). We found that the mutation spectra of A3B-induced mutations revealed genotype-specific patterns of strand-specific ssDNA formation and nucleotide incorporation across APOBEC-induced lesions. Combining these three metrics, we were able to establish a multifactorial signature of APOBEC-induced mutations specific to (1) failure to remove H3K56 acetylation, (2) defective CTF18-RFC complex function, and (3) defective HR-mediated bypass of APOBEC-induced lesions. We extended these results by analyzing mutation data for human tumors and found BRCA1/2-deficient breast cancers display three- to fourfold more APOBEC-induced mutations. Mirroring our results in yeast, Rev1-mediated C-to-G substitutions are mainly responsible for increased APOBEC-signature mutations in BRCA1/2-deficient tumors, and these mutations associate with lagging strand synthesis during replication. These results identify important factors that influence DNA replication dynamics and likely the abundance of APOBEC-induced mutation during tumor progression. They also highlight a novel role for BRCA1/2 during HR-dependent lesion bypass of APOBEC-induced lesions during cancer cell replication.

Mechanistic insight into AP-endonuclease 1 cleavage of abasic sites at stalled replication fork mimics

Many types of damage, including abasic sites, block replicative DNA polymerases causing replication fork uncoupling and generating ssDNA. AP-Endonuclease 1 (APE1) has been shown to cleave abasic sites in ssDNA. Importantly, APE1 cleavage of ssDNA at a replication fork has significant biological implications by generating double strand breaks that could collapse the replication fork. Despite this, the molecular basis and efficiency of APE1 processing abasic sites at replication forks remain elusive. Here, we investigate APE1 cleavage of abasic substrates that mimic APE1 interactions at stalled replication forks or gaps. We determine that APE1 has robust activity on these substrates, like dsDNA, and report rates for cleavage and product release. X-ray structures visualize the APE1 active site, highlighting an analogous mechanism is used to process ssDNA substrates as canonical APE1 activity on dsDNA. However, mutational analysis reveals R177 to be uniquely critical for the APE1 ssDNA cleavage mechanism. Additionally, we investigate the interplay between APE1 and Replication Protein A (RPA), the major ssDNA-binding protein at replication forks, revealing that APE1 can cleave an abasic site while RPA is still bound to the DNA. Together, this work provides molecular level insights into abasic ssDNA processing by APE1, including the presence of RPA.

Self-reversal facilitates the resolution of HMCES-DNA protein crosslinks in cells

Abasic sites are common DNA lesions that stall polymerases and threaten genome stability. When located in single-stranded DNA (ssDNA), they are shielded from aberrant processing by HMCES via a DNA-protein crosslink (DPC) that prevents double-strand breaks. Nevertheless, the HMCES-DPC must be removed to complete DNA repair. Here, we found that DNA polymerase α inhibition generates ssDNA abasic sites and HMCES-DPCs. These DPCs are resolved with a half-life of approximately 1.5 hours. Resolution does not require the proteasome or SPRTN protease. Instead, HMCES-DPC self-reversal is important for resolution. Biochemically, self-reversal is favored when the ssDNA is converted to duplex DNA. When the self-reversal mechanism is inactivated, HMCES-DPC removal is delayed, cell proliferation is slowed, and cells become hypersensitive to DNA damage agents that increase AP site formation. Thus, HMCES-DPC formation followed by self-reversal is an important mechanism for ssDNA AP site management.

Novel mechanisms for the removal of strong replication-blocking HMCES- and thiazolidine-DNA adducts in humans

Apurinic/apyrimidinic (AP) sites are DNA lesions created under normal growth conditions that result in cytotoxicity, replication-blocks, and mutations. AP sites are susceptible to β-elimination and are liable to be converted to DNA strand breaks. HMCES (5-hydroxymethylcytosine binding, ES cell specific) protein interacts with AP sites in single stranded (ss) DNA exposed at DNA replication forks to generate a stable thiazolidine protein-DNA crosslink and protect cells against AP site toxicity. The crosslinked HMCES is resolved by proteasome-mediated degradation; however, it is unclear how HMCES-crosslinked ssDNA and the resulting proteasome-degraded HMCES adducts are processed and repaired. Here, we describe methods for the preparation of thiazolidine adduct-containing oligonucleotides and determination of their structure. We demonstrate that the HMCES-crosslink is a strong replication blocking adduct and that protease-digested HMCES adducts block DNA replication to a similar extent as AP sites. Moreover, we show that the human AP endonuclease APE1 incises DNA 5' to the protease-digested HMCES adduct. Interestingly, while HMCES-ssDNA crosslinks are stable, the crosslink is reversed upon the formation of dsDNA, possibly due to a catalytic reverse reaction. Our results shed new light on damage tolerance and repair pathways for HMCES-DNA crosslinks in human cells.

Clinical Implications of APOBEC3-Mediated Mutagenesis in Breast Cancer

Over recent years, members of the APOBEC3 family of cytosine deaminases have been implicated in increased cancer genome mutagenesis, thereby contributing to intratumor and intertumor genomic heterogeneity and therapy resistance in, among others, breast cancer. Understanding the available methods for clinical detection of these enzymes, the conditions required for their (dysregulated) expression, the clinical impact they have, and the clinical implications they may offer is crucial in understanding the current impact of APOBEC3-mediated mutagenesis in breast cancer. Here, we provide a comprehensive review of recent developments in the detection of APOBEC3-mediated mutagenesis and responsible APOBEC3 enzymes, summarize the pathways that control their expression, and explore the clinical ramifications and opportunities they pose. We propose that APOBEC3-mediated mutagenesis can function as a helpful predictive biomarker in several standard-of-care breast cancer treatment plans and may be a novel target for treatment.

Genetic modifiers of APOBEC-induced mutagenesis

The cytidine deaminases APOBEC3A and APOBEC3B (A3B) are prominent mutators of human cancer genomes. However, tumor-specific genetic modulators of APOBEC-induced mutagenesis are poorly defined. Here, we utilized a screen to identify 61 gene deletions that increase A3B-induced mutations in yeast. Also, we determined whether each deletion was epistatic with UNG1 loss, which indicated whether the encoded factors participate in the error-free bypass of A3B/Ung1-dependent abasic sites or suppress A3B-catalyzed deamination by protecting against aberrant formation of single stranded DNA (ssDNA). Additionally, we determined that the mutation spectra of A3B-induced mutations revealed genotype-specific patterns of strand-specific ssDNA formation and nucleotide incorporation across APOBEC-induced lesions. Combining these three metrics we were able to establish a multifactorial signature of APOBEC-induced mutations specific to (1) failure to remove H3K56 acetylation, which results in extremely high A3B-induced mutagenesis, (2) defective CTF18-RFC complex function, which results in high levels of A3B induced mutations specifically on the leading strand template that synergistically increase with loss of UNG1, and (3) defective HR-mediated bypass of APOBEC-induced lesions, which were epistatic with Ung1 loss and result from increased Rev1-mediated C-to-G substitutions. We extended these results by analyzing mutation data for human tumors and found BRCA1/2-deficient breast cancer tumors display 3- to 4-fold more APOBEC-induced mutations. Mirroring our results in yeast, for BRCA1/2 deficient tumors Rev1-mediated C-to-G substitutions are solely responsible for increased APOBEC-signature mutations and these mutations occur on the lagging strand during DNA replication. Together these results identify important factors that influence the dynamics of DNA replication and likely the abundance of APOBEC-induced mutation during tumor progression as well as a novel mechanistic role for BRCA1/2 during HR-dependent lesion bypass of APOBEC-induced lesions during cancer cell replication.

DNA-protein cross-links between abasic DNA damage and mitochondrial transcription factor A (TFAM)

In higher eukaryotic cells, mitochondria are essential organelles for energy production, metabolism, and signaling. Mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) encodes 13 protein subunits for oxidative phosphorylation and a set of tRNAs and rRNAs. mtDNA damage, sourced from endogenous chemicals and environmental factors, contributes to mitochondrial genomic instability, which has been associated with various mitochondrial diseases. DNA-protein cross-links (DPCs) are deleterious DNA lesions that threaten genomic integrity. Although much has been learned about the formation and repair of DPCs in the nucleus, little is known about DPCs in mitochondria. Here, we present in vitro and in cellulo data to demonstrate the formation of DPCs between a prevalent abasic (AP) DNA lesion and a DNA-packaging protein, mitochondrial transcription factor A (TFAM). TFAM cleaves AP-DNA and forms DPCs and single-strand breaks (SSB). Lys residues of TFAM are critical for the formation of TFAM-DPC and a reactive 3'-phospho-α,β-unsaturated aldehyde (3'pUA) residue on SSB. The 3'pUA residue reacts with two Cys of TFAM and contributes to the stable TFAM-DPC formation. Glutathione reacts with 3'pUA and competes with TFAM-DPC formation, corroborating our cellular experiments showing the accumulation of TFAM-DPCs under limiting glutathione. Our data point to the involvement of TFAM in AP-DNA turnover and fill a knowledge gap regarding the protein factors in processing damaged mtDNA.

Addressing the benefits of inhibiting APOBEC3-dependent mutagenesis in cancer

Mutational signatures associated with apolipoprotein B mRNA-editing enzyme catalytic polypeptide-like (APOBEC)3 cytosine deaminase activity have been found in over half of cancer types, including some therapy-resistant and metastatic tumors. Driver mutations can occur in APOBEC3-favored sequence contexts, suggesting that mutagenesis by APOBEC3 enzymes may drive cancer evolution. The APOBEC3-mediated signatures are often detected in subclonal branches of tumor phylogenies and are acquired in cancer cell lines over long periods of time, indicating that APOBEC3 mutagenesis can be ongoing in cancer. Collectively, these and other observations have led to the proposal that APOBEC3 mutagenesis represents a disease-modifying process that could be inhibited to limit tumor heterogeneity, metastasis and drug resistance. However, critical aspects of APOBEC3 biology in cancer and in healthy tissues have not been clearly defined, limiting well-grounded predictions regarding the benefits of inhibiting APOBEC3 mutagenesis in different settings in cancer. We discuss the relevant mechanistic gaps and strategies to address them to investigate whether inhibiting APOBEC3 mutagenesis may confer clinical benefits in cancer.

The SOS response-associated peptidase (SRAP) domain of YedK catalyzes ring opening of abasic sites and reversal of its DNA-protein crosslink

Apurinic/apyrimidinic (AP, or abasic) sites in DNA are one of the most common forms of DNA damage. AP sites are reactive and form cross-links to both proteins and DNA, are prone to strand breakage, and inhibit DNA replication and transcription. The replication-associated AP site repair protein HMCES protects cells from strand breaks, inhibits mutagenic translesion synthesis, and participates in repair of interstrand DNA cross-links derived from AP sites by forming a stable thiazolidine DNA–protein cross-link (DPC) to AP sites in single-stranded DNA (ssDNA). Despite the importance of HMCES to genome maintenance and the evolutionary conservation of its catalytic SRAP (SOS Response Associated Peptidase) domain, the enzymatic mechanisms of DPC formation and resolution are unknown. Using the bacterial homolog YedK, we show that the SRAP domain catalyzes conversion of the AP site to its reactive, ring-opened aldehyde form, and we provide structural evidence for the Schiff base intermediate that forms prior to the more stable thiazolidine. We also report two new activities, whereby SRAP reacts with polyunsaturated aldehydes at DNA 3′-ends generated by bifunctional DNA glycosylases and catalyzes direct reversal of the DPC to regenerate the AP site, the latter of which we observe in both YedK and HMCES-SRAP proteins. Taken together, this work provides insights into possible mechanisms by which HMCES DPCs are resolved in cells.

HMCES modulates the transcriptional regulation of nodal/activin and BMP signaling in mESCs

Despite the fundamental roles of TGF-β family signaling in cell fate determination in all metazoans, the mechanism by which these signals are spatially and temporally interpreted remains elusive. The cell-context-dependent function of TGF-β signaling largely relies on transcriptional regulation by SMAD proteins. Here, we discover that the DNA repair-related protein, HMCES, contributes to early development by maintaining nodal/activin- or BMP-signaling-regulated transcriptional network. HMCES binds with R-SMAD proteins, co-localizing at active histone marks. However, HMCES chromatin occupancy is independent on nodal/activin or BMP signaling. Mechanistically, HMCES competitively binds chromatin to limit binding by R-SMAD proteins, thereby forcing their dissociation and resulting in repression of their regulatory effects. In Xenopus laevis embryo, hmces KD causes dramatic development defects with abnormal left-right axis asymmetry along with increasing expression of lefty1. These findings reveal HMCES transcriptional regulatory function in the context of TGF-β family signaling.

FANCD2 maintains replication fork stability during misincorporation of the DNA demethylation products 5-hydroxymethyl-2'-deoxycytidine and 5-hydroxymethyl-2'-deoxyuridine

Fanconi anemia (FA) is a rare hereditary disorder caused by mutations in any one of the FANC genes. FA cells are mainly characterized by extreme hypersensitivity to interstrand crosslink (ICL) agents. Additionally, the FA proteins play a crucial role in concert with homologous recombination (HR) factors to protect stalled replication forks. Here, we report that the 5-methyl-2'-deoxycytidine (5mdC) demethylation (pathway) intermediate 5-hydroxymethyl-2'-deoxycytidine (5hmdC) and its deamination product 5-hydroxymethyl-2'-deoxyuridine (5hmdU) elicit a DNA damage response, chromosome aberrations, replication fork impairment and cell viability loss in the absence of FANCD2. Interestingly, replication fork instability by 5hmdC or 5hmdU was associated to the presence of Poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase 1 (PARP1) on chromatin, being both phenotypes exacerbated by olaparib treatment. Remarkably, Parp1^-/- cells did not show any replication fork defects or sensitivity to 5hmdC or 5hmdU, suggesting that retained PARP1 at base excision repair (BER) intermediates accounts for the observed replication fork defects upon 5hmdC or 5hmdU incorporation in the absence of FANCD2. We therefore conclude that 5hmdC is deaminated in vivo to 5hmdU, whose fixation by PARP1 during BER, hinders replication fork progression and contributes to genomic instability in FA cells.

Topoisomerase II poisons inhibit vertebrate DNA replication through distinct mechanisms

Topoisomerase II (TOP2) unlinks chromosomes during vertebrate DNA replication. TOP2 "poisons" are widely used chemotherapeutics that stabilize TOP2 complexes on DNA, leading to cytotoxic DNA breaks. However, it is unclear how these drugs affect DNA replication, which is a major target of TOP2 poisons. Using Xenopus egg extracts, we show that the TOP2 poisons etoposide and doxorubicin both inhibit DNA replication through different mechanisms. Etoposide induces TOP2-dependent DNA breaks and TOP2-dependent fork stalling by trapping TOP2 behind replication forks. In contrast, doxorubicin does not lead to appreciable break formation and instead intercalates into parental DNA to stall replication forks independently of TOP2. In human cells, etoposide stalls forks in a TOP2-dependent manner, while doxorubicin stalls forks independently of TOP2. However, both drugs exhibit TOP2-dependent cytotoxicity. Thus, etoposide and doxorubicin inhibit DNA replication through distinct mechanisms despite shared genetic requirements for cytotoxicity.

The HMCES DNA-protein cross-link functions as an intermediate in DNA interstrand cross-link repair

The 5-hydroxymethylcytosine binding, embryonic stem-cell-specific (HMCES) protein forms a covalent DNA-protein cross-link (DPC) with abasic (AP) sites in single-stranded DNA, and the resulting HMCES-DPC is thought to suppress double-strand break formation in S phase. However, the dynamics of HMCES cross-linking and whether any DNA repair pathways normally include an HMCES-DPC intermediate remain unknown. Here, we use Xenopus egg extracts to show that an HMCES-DPC forms on the AP site generated during replication-coupled DNA interstrand cross-link repair. We show that HMCES cross-links form on DNA after the replicative CDC45-MCM2-7-GINS (CMG) helicase has passed over the AP site, and that HMCES is subsequently removed by the SPRTN protease. The HMCES-DPC suppresses double-strand break formation, slows translesion synthesis past the AP site and introduces a bias for insertion of deoxyguanosine opposite the AP site. These data demonstrate that HMCES-DPCs form as intermediates in replication-coupled repair, and they suggest a general model of how HMCES protects AP sites during DNA replication.

Role of the nucleotide excision repair pathway proteins (UvrB and UvrD2) in recycling UdgB, a base excision repair enzyme in Mycobacterium smegmatis

Cross-talks between DNA repair pathways are emerging as a crucial strategy in the maintenance of the genomic integrity. A double-stranded (ds) DNA specific DNA glycosylase, UdgB is known to excise uracil, hypoxanthine and ethenocytosine. We earlier showed that Mycobacterium smegmatis (Msm) UdgB stays back on the AP-sites it generates in the DNA upon excision of the damaged bases. Here, we show that in an Msm strain deleted for a nucleotide excision repair (NER) protein, UvrB (uvrB-), UdgB expression is toxic, and its deletion from the genome (udgB-) rescues the strain from the genotoxic stress. However, UdgB bound AP-site is not a direct substrate for NER in vitro. We show that UvrD2 and UvrB, known helicases with single-stranded (ss) DNA translocase activity, facilitate recycling of UdgB from AP-DNA. Our studies reveal that the helicases play an important role in exposing the AP-sites in DNA and make them available for further repair.

Nucleophilic Thiol Proteins Bind Covalently to Abasic Sites in DNA

In the course of studies on the enhancement of 1,2-dibromoethane-induced DNA base pair mutations by O⁶-alkylguanine-DNA alkyltransferase (AGT, MGMT), we discovered the facile reaction of AGT with an abasic site in DNA, leading to covalent cross-linking. The binding of AGT differs from the mechanism reported for the protein HMCES; instead it appears to involve formation of a stable thioglycoside. Facile cross-linking was also observed with the protease papain, which like AGT has a low pK_a cysteine, and the tripeptide glutathione.

HMCES protects immunoglobulin genes specifically from deletions during somatic hypermutation

Somatic hypermutation (SHM) produces point mutations in immunoglobulin (Ig) genes in B cells when uracils created by the activation-induced deaminase are processed in a mutagenic manner by enzymes of the base excision repair (BER) and mismatch repair (MMR) pathways. Such uracil processing creates DNA strand breaks and is susceptible to the generation of deleterious deletions. Here, we demonstrate that the DNA repair factor HMCES strongly suppresses deletions without significantly affecting other parameters of SHM in mouse and human B cells, thereby facilitating the production of antigen-specific antibodies. The deletion-prone repair pathway suppressed by HMCES operates downstream from the uracil glycosylase UNG and is mediated by the combined action of BER factor APE2 and MMR factors MSH2, MSH6, and EXO1. HMCES's ability to shield against deletions during SHM requires its capacity to form covalent cross-links with abasic sites, in sharp contrast to its DNA end-joining role in class switch recombination but analogous to its genome-stabilizing role during DNA replication. Our findings lead to a novel model for the protection of Ig gene integrity during SHM in which abasic site cross-linking by HMCES intercedes at a critical juncture during processing of vulnerable gapped DNA intermediates by BER and MMR enzymes.

DNA repair defects in cancer and therapeutic opportunities

DNA repair and DNA damage signaling pathways are critical for the maintenance of genomic stability. Defects of DNA repair and damage signaling contribute to tumorigenesis, but also render cancer cells vulnerable to DNA damage and reliant on remaining repair and signaling activities. Here, we review the major classes of DNA repair and damage signaling defects in cancer, the genomic instability that they give rise to, and therapeutic strategies to exploit the resulting vulnerabilities. Furthermore, we discuss the impacts of DNA repair defects on both targeted therapy and immunotherapy, and highlight emerging principles for targeting DNA repair defects in cancer therapy.

DNA-Protein Crosslinks and Their Resolution

Covalent DNA-protein crosslinks (DPCs) are pervasive DNA lesions that interfere with essential chromatin processes such as transcription or replication. This review strives to provide an overview of the sources and principles of cellular DPC formation. DPCs are caused by endogenous reactive metabolites and various chemotherapeutic agents. However, in certain conditions DPCs also arise physiologically in cells. We discuss the cellular mechanisms resolving these threats to genomic integrity. Detection and repair of DPCs require not only the action of canonical DNA repair pathways but also the activity of specialized proteolytic enzymes-including proteases of the SPRTN/Wss1 family-to degrade the crosslinked protein. Loss of DPC repair capacity has dramatic consequences, ranging from genome instability in yeast and worms to cancer predisposition and premature aging in mice and humans. Expected final online publication date for the Annual Review of Biochemistry, Volume 91 is June 2022. Please see http://www.annualreviews.org/page/journal/pubdates for revised estimates.

APOBEC3 as a driver of genetic intratumor heterogeneity

Our recent study revealed that APOBEC3B is upregulated during the preinvasive stages of non-small cell lung cancer and breast cancer. In addition to its role in mediating single nucleotide variants, we propose that APOBEC3 promotes copy number intratumor heterogeneity prior to invasion, providing a substrate for cancer evolution.

REV1-Polζ maintains the viability of homologous recombination-deficient cancer cells through mutagenic repair of PRIMPOL-dependent ssDNA gaps

BRCA1/2 mutant tumor cells display an elevated mutation burden, the etiology of which remains unclear. Here, we report that these cells accumulate ssDNA gaps and spontaneous mutations during unperturbed DNA replication due to repriming by the DNA primase-polymerase PRIMPOL. Gap accumulation requires the DNA glycosylase SMUG1 and is exacerbated by depletion of the translesion synthesis (TLS) factor RAD18 or inhibition of the error-prone TLS polymerase complex REV1-Polζ by the small molecule JH-RE-06. JH-RE-06 treatment of BRCA1/2-deficient cells results in reduced mutation rates and PRIMPOL- and SMUG1-dependent loss of viability. Through cellular and animal studies, we demonstrate that JH-RE-06 is preferentially toxic toward HR-deficient cancer cells. Furthermore, JH-RE-06 remains effective toward PARP inhibitor (PARPi)-resistant BRCA1 mutant cells and displays additive toxicity with crosslinking agents or PARPi. Collectively, these studies identify a protective and mutagenic role for REV1-Polζ in BRCA1/2 mutant cells and provide the rationale for using REV1-Polζ inhibitors to treat BRCA1/2 mutant tumors.

Induction of APOBEC3 Exacerbates DNA Replication Stress and Chromosomal Instability in Early Breast and Lung Cancer Evolution

APOBEC3 enzymes are cytosine deaminases implicated in cancer. Precisely when APOBEC3 expression is induced during cancer development remains to be defined. Here we show that specific APOBEC3 genes are upregulated in breast ductal carcinoma in situ, and in preinvasive lung cancer lesions coincident with cellular proliferation. We observe evidence of APOBEC3-mediated subclonal mutagenesis propagated from TRACERx preinvasive to invasive non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) lesions. We find that APOBEC3B exacerbates DNA replication stress and chromosomal instability through incomplete replication of genomic DNA, manifested by accumulation of mitotic ultrafine bridges and 53BP1 nuclear bodies in the G1 phase of the cell cycle. Analysis of TRACERx NSCLC clinical samples and mouse lung cancer models revealed APOBEC3B expression driving replication stress and chromosome missegregation. We propose that APOBEC3 is functionally implicated in the onset of chromosomal instability and somatic mutational heterogeneity in preinvasive disease, providing fuel for selection early in cancer evolution. SIGNIFICANCE: This study reveals the dynamics and drivers of APOBEC3 gene expression in preinvasive disease and the exacerbation of cellular diversity by APOBEC3B through DNA replication stress to promote chromosomal instability early in cancer evolution.This article is highlighted in the In This Issue feature, p. 2355.

Bacterial YedK represses plasmid DNA replication and transformation through its DNA single-strand binding activity

The SOS response-associated peptidase (SRAP) is an ancient protein superfamily in all domains of life. The mammalian SRAP was recently reported to covalently bind to the abasic sites (AP) in single stranded (ss) DNA to shield the chromosome integrity. YedK, the Escherichia coli SRAP, is not functionally characterized. Here we report the fortuitous pull-down of YedK from bacterial cell lysates by short (<20 bp) double stranded (ds) DNAs, further enrichment of YedK was observed when single stranded (ss) DNA was added. YedK can bind multiple DNA substrates, particularly with a high affinity to DNA duplex with single strand segment. As a SRAP protein, the involvement of YedK in SOS response was extensively examined, however yedK mutant of Escherichia coli showed no difference from the wild type strain upon the treatments with UV and various DNA damaging reagents, indicating its non-essentiality or redundancy in E. coli. Surprisingly, yedK mutants derived from Escherichia coli and Samonella enterica both showed an increased plasmid DNA transformation efficiency compared to the wild types. In accordance with this, induction of YedK effectively decreased the copy number of plasmid DNA. Site-directed mutagenesis of YedK demonstrated that residues involved in single strand DNA binding and cysteine residue at position 2 from N-terminus can discharge the repression of the plasmid transformation efficiency.

RPA2 winged-helix domain facilitates UNG-mediated removal of uracil from ssDNA; implications for repair of mutagenic uracil at the replication fork

Uracil occurs at replication forks via misincorporation of deoxyuridine monophosphate (dUMP) or via deamination of existing cytosines, which occurs 2-3 orders of magnitude faster in ssDNA than in dsDNA and is 100% miscoding. Tethering of UNG2 to proliferating cell nuclear antigen (PCNA) allows rapid post-replicative removal of misincorporated uracil, but potential 'pre-replicative' removal of deaminated cytosines in ssDNA has been questioned since this could mediate mutagenic translesion synthesis and induction of double-strand breaks. Here, we demonstrate that uracil-DNA glycosylase (UNG), but not SMUG1 efficiently excises uracil from replication protein A (RPA)-coated ssDNA and that this depends on functional interaction between the flexible winged-helix (WH) domain of RPA2 and the N-terminal RPA-binding helix in UNG. This functional interaction is promoted by mono-ubiquitination and diminished by cell-cycle regulated phosphorylations on UNG. Six other human proteins bind the RPA2-WH domain, all of which are involved in DNA repair and replication fork remodelling. Based on this and the recent discovery of the AP site crosslinking protein HMCES, we propose an integrated model in which templated repair of uracil and potentially other mutagenic base lesions in ssDNA at the replication fork, is orchestrated by RPA. The UNG:RPA2-WH interaction may also play a role in adaptive immunity by promoting efficient excision of AID-induced uracils in transcribed immunoglobulin loci.

Loss of the abasic site sensor HMCES is synthetic lethal with the activity of the APOBEC3A cytosine deaminase in cancer cells

Analysis of cancer mutagenic signatures provides information about the origin of mutations and can inform the use of clinical therapies, including immunotherapy. In particular, APOBEC3A (A3A) has emerged as a major driver of mutagenesis in cancer cells, and its expression results in DNA damage and susceptibility to treatment with inhibitors of the ATR and CHK1 checkpoint kinases. Here, we report the implementation of CRISPR/Cas-9 genetic screening to identify susceptibilities of multiple A3A-expressing lung adenocarcinoma (LUAD) cell lines. We identify HMCES, a protein recently linked to the protection of abasic sites, as a central protein for the tolerance of A3A expression. HMCES depletion results in synthetic lethality with A3A expression preferentially in a TP53-mutant background. Analysis of previous screening data reveals a strong association between A3A mutational signatures and sensitivity to HMCES loss and indicates that HMCES is specialized in protecting against a narrow spectrum of DNA damaging agents in addition to A3A. We experimentally show that both HMCES disruption and A3A expression increase susceptibility of cancer cells to ionizing radiation (IR), oxidative stress, and ATR inhibition, strategies that are often applied in tumor therapies. Overall, our results suggest that HMCES is an attractive target for selective treatment of A3A-expressing tumors.

To skip or not to skip: choosing repriming to tolerate DNA damage

Accurate DNA replication is constantly threatened by DNA lesions arising from endogenous and exogenous sources. Specialized DNA replication stress response pathways ensure replication fork progression in the presence of DNA lesions with minimal delay in fork elongation. These pathways broadly include translesion DNA synthesis, template switching, and replication fork repriming. Here, we discuss recent advances toward our understanding of the mechanisms that regulate the fine-tuned balance between these different replication stress response pathways. We also discuss the molecular pathways required to fill single-stranded DNA gaps that accumulate throughout the genome after repriming and the biological consequences of using repriming instead of other DNA damage tolerance pathways on genome integrity and cell fitness.

DNA alkylation lesion repair: outcomes and implications in cancer chemotherapy

Alkylated DNA lesions, induced by both exogenous chemical agents and endogenous metabolites, represent a major form of DNA damage in cells. The repair of alkylation damage is critical in all cells because such damage is cytotoxic and potentially mutagenic. Alkylation chemotherapy is a major therapeutic modality for many tumors, underscoring the importance of the repair pathways in cancer cells. Several different pathways exist for alkylation repair, including base excision and nucleotide excision repair, direct reversal by methyl-guanine methyltransferase (MGMT), and dealkylation by the AlkB homolog (ALKBH) protein family. However, maintaining a proper balance between these pathways is crucial for the favorable response of an organism to alkylating agents. Here, we summarize the progress in the field of DNA alkylation lesion repair and describe the implications for cancer chemotherapy.

The complexity and regulation of repair of alkylation damage to nucleic acids

DNA damaging agents have been a cornerstone of cancer therapy for nearly a century. The discovery of many of these chemicals, particularly the alkylating agents, are deeply entwined with the development of poisonous materials originally intended for use in warfare. Over the last decades, their anti-proliferative effects have focused on the specific mechanisms by which they damage DNA, and the factors involved in the repair of such damage. Due to the variety of aberrant adducts created even for the simplest alkylating agents, numerous pathways of repair are engaged as a defense against this damage. More recent work has underscored the role of RNA damage in the cellular response to these agents, although the understanding of their role in relation to established DNA repair pathways is still in its infancy. In this review, we discuss the chemistry of alkylating agents, the numerous ways in which they damage nucleic acids, as well as the specific DNA and RNA repair pathways which are engaged to counter their effects.

Prognostic Implications of Novel Ten-Gene Signature in Uveal Melanoma

Background: Uveal melanoma (UM) is the most common primary intraocular cancer in adults. Genomic studies have provided insights into molecular subgroups and oncogenic drivers of UM that may lead to novel therapeutic strategies. Methods: Dataset TCGA-UVM, download from TCGA portal, were taken as the training cohort, and dataset GSE22138, obtained from GEO database, was set as the validation cohort. In training cohort, Kaplan-Meier analysis and univariate Cox regression model were applied to preliminary screen prognostic genes. Besides, the Cox regression model with LASSO was implemented to build a multi-gene signature, which was then validated in the validation cohorts through Kaplan-Meier, Cox, and ROC analyses. In addition, the correlation between copy number aberrations and risk score was evaluated by Spearman test. GSEA and immune infiltrating analyses were conducted for understanding function annotation and the role of the signature in the tumor microenvironment. Results: A ten-gene signature was built, and it was examined by Kaplan-Meier analysis revealing that significantly overall survival, progression-free survival, and metastasis-free survival difference was seen. The ten-gene signature was further proven to be an independent risk factor compared to other clinic-pathological parameters via the Cox regression analysis. Moreover, the receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC) analysis results demonstrated a better predictive power of the UM prognosis that our signature owned. The ten-gene signature was significantly correlated with copy numbers of chromosome 3, 8q, 6q, and 6p. Furthermore, GSEA and immune infiltrating analyses showed that the signature had close interactions with immune-related pathways and the tumor environment. Conclusions: Identifying the ten-gene signature (SIRT3, HMCES, SLC44A3, TCTN1, STPG1, POMGNT2, RNF208, ANXA2P2, ULBP1, and CA12) could accurately identify patients' prognosis and had close interactions with the immunodominant tumor environment, which may provide UM patients with personalized prognosis prediction and new treatment insights.

How to fix DNA-protein crosslinks

Proteins that act on DNA, or are in close proximity to it, can become inadvertently crosslinked to DNA and form highly toxic lesions, known as DNA-protein crosslinks (DPCs). DPCs are generated by different chemotherapeutics, environmental or endogenous sources of crosslinking agents, or by lesions on DNA that stall the catalytic cycle of certain DNA processing enzymes. These bulky adducts impair processes on DNA such as DNA replication or transcription, and therefore pose a serious threat to genome integrity. The large diversity of DPCs suggests that there is more than one canonical mechanism to repair them. Indeed, many different enzymes have been shown to act on DPCs by either processing the protein, the DNA or the crosslink itself. In addition, the cell cycle stage or cell type are likely to dictate pathway choice. In recent years, a detailed understanding of DPC repair during S phase has started to emerge. Here, we review the current knowledge on the mechanisms of replication-coupled DPC repair, and describe and also speculate on possible pathways that remove DPCs outside of S phase. Moreover, we highlight a recent paradigm shifting finding that indicates that DPCs are not always detrimental, but can also play a protective role, preserving the genome from more deleterious forms of DNA damage.

Structural biology of DNA abasic site protection by SRAP proteins

Abasic (AP) sites are one of the most frequently occurring types of DNA damage. They lead to DNA strand breaks, interstrand DNA crosslinks, and block transcription and replication. Mutagenicity of AP sites arises from translesion synthesis (TLS) by error-prone bypass polymerases. Recently, a new cellular response to AP sites was discovered, in which the protein HMCES (5-hydroxymethlycytosine (5hmC) binding, embryonic stem cell-specific) forms a stable, covalent DNA-protein crosslink (DPC) to AP sites at stalled replication forks. The stability of the HMCES-DPC prevents strand cleavage by endonucleases and mutagenic bypass by TLS polymerases. Crosslinking is carried out by a unique SRAP (SOS Response Associated Peptidase) domain conserved across all domains of life. Here, we review the collection of recently reported SRAP crystal structures from human HMCES and E. coli YedK, which provide a unified basis for SRAP specificity and a putative chemical mechanism of AP site crosslinking. We discuss the structural and chemical basis for the stability of the SRAP DPC and how it differs from covalent protein-DNA intermediates in DNA lyase catalysis of strand scission.

New insights into abasic site repair and tolerance

Thousands of apurinic/apyrimidinic (AP or abasic) sites form in each cell, each day. This simple DNA lesion can have profound consequences to cellular function, genome stability, and disease. As potent blocks to polymerases, they interfere with the reading and copying of the genome. Since they provide no coding information, they are potent sources of mutation. Due to their reactive chemistry, they are intermediates in the formation of lesions that are more challenging to repair including double-strand breaks, interstrand crosslinks, and DNA protein crosslinks. Given their prevalence and deleterious consequences, cells have multiple mechanisms of repairing and tolerating these lesions. While base excision repair of abasic sites in double-strand DNA has been studied for decades, new interest in abasic site processing has come from more recent insights into how they are processed in single-strand DNA. In this review, we discuss the source of abasic sites, their biological consequences, tolerance mechanisms, and how they are repaired in double and single-stranded DNA.