Dissecting regulatory pathways for transcription recovery following DNA damage reveals a non-canonical function of the histone chaperone HIRA

ATM and IRAK1 orchestrate two distinct mechanisms of NF-κB activation in response to DNA damage

DNA damage in cells induces the expression of inflammatory genes. However, the mechanism by which cells initiate an innate immune response in the presence of DNA lesions blocking transcription remains unknown. Here we find that genotoxic stresses lead to an acute activation of the transcription factor NF-κB through two distinct pathways, each triggered by different types of DNA lesions and coordinated by either ataxia-telangiectasia mutated (ATM) or IRAK1 kinases. ATM stimulates NF-κB in cells with DNA double-strand breaks. By contrast, IRAK1-induced NF-κB signaling occurs in neighboring cells through IL-1α secretion from transcriptionally stressed cells caused by DNA lesions blocking RNA polymerases. Subsequently, both pathways stimulate TRAF6 and the IKK complex to promote NF-κB-mediated inflammatory gene expression. These findings provide an alternative mechanism for damaged cells with impaired transcription to initiate an inflammatory response without relying on their own gene expression, a necessary step that injured cells depend on during canonical innate immune responses.

The Hira complex regulates Gli3R-dependent transcription in Hedgehog signaling and medulloblastoma cell growth and migration

Regulation of the Hedgehog pathway activity may be supported by coactivators and corepresors of its main effectors- Gli transcription factors. While activation processes are well studied, repression mechanisms remain elusive. We identified chromatin remodelling complex Hira to interact with Gli3R protein, showed that its loss-of-function changes Hh pathway activity, and examined possible mechanism behind the observed effect. We also established that Hira influences the viability and migratory abilities of Hh-dependent medulloblastoma Daoy cells. Our study paves the way for a better understanding of processes involved in Hh pathway regulation and Hh-dependent carcinogenesis.

Keep calm and reboot - how cells restart transcription after DNA damage and DNA repair

The effects of genotoxic agents on DNA and the processes involved in their removal have been thoroughly studied; however, very little is known about the mechanisms governing the reinstatement of cellular activities after DNA repair, despite restoration of the damage-induced block of transcription being essential for cell survival. In addition to impeding transcription, DNA lesions have the potential to disrupt the precise positioning of chromatin domains within the nucleus and alter the meticulously organized architecture of the nucleolus. Alongside the necessity of resuming transcription mediated by RNA polymerase 1 and 2 transcription, it is crucial to restore the structure of the nucleolus to facilitate optimal ribosome biogenesis and ensure efficient and error-free translation. Here, we examine the current understanding of how transcriptional activity from RNA polymerase 2 is reinstated following DNA repair completion and explore the mechanisms involved in reassembling the nucleolus to safeguard the correct progression of cellular functions. Given the lack of information on this vital function, this Review seeks to inspire researchers to explore deeper into this specific subject and offers essential suggestions on how to investigate this complex and nearly unexplored process further.

HIRA protects telomeres against R-loop-induced instability in ALT cancer cells

Inactivating mutations in chromatin modifiers, like the α-thalassemia/mental retardation, X-linked (ATRX)-death domain-associated protein (DAXX) chromatin remodeling/histone H3.3 deposition complex, drive the cancer-specific alternative lengthening of telomeres (ALT) pathway. Prior studies revealed that HIRA, another histone H3.3 chaperone, compensates for ATRX-DAXX loss at telomeres to sustain ALT cancer cell survival. How HIRA rescues telomeres from the consequences of ATRX-DAXX deficiency remains unclear. Here, using an assay for transposase-accessible chromatin using sequencing (ATAC-seq) and cleavage under targets and release using nuclease (CUT&RUN), we establish that HIRA-mediated deposition of new H3.3 maintains telomeric chromatin accessibility to prevent the detrimental accumulation of nucleosome-free single-stranded DNA (ssDNA) in ATRX-DAXX-deficient ALT cells. We show that the HIRA-UBN1/UBN2 complex deposits new H3.3 to prevent TERRA R-loop buildup and transcription-replication conflicts (TRCs) at telomeres. Furthermore, HIRA-mediated H3.3 incorporation into telomeric chromatin links productive ALT to the phosphorylation of serine 31, an H3.3-specific amino acid, by Chk1. Therefore, we identify a critical role for HIRA-mediated H3.3 deposition that ensures the survival of ATRX-DAXX-deficient ALT cancer cells.

The histone chaperones ASF1 and HIRA are required for telomere length and 45S rDNA copy number homeostasis

Genome stability is significantly influenced by the precise coordination of chromatin complexes that facilitate the loading and eviction of histones from chromatin during replication, transcription, and DNA repair processes. In this study, we investigate the role of the Arabidopsis H3 histone chaperones ANTI-SILENCING FUNCTION 1 (ASF1) and HISTONE REGULATOR A (HIRA) in the maintenance of telomeres and 45S rDNA loci, genomic sites that are particularly susceptible to changes in the chromatin structure. We find that both ASF1 and HIRA are essential for telomere length regulation, as telomeres are significantly shorter in asf1a1b and hira mutants. However, these shorter telomeres remain localized around the nucleolus and exhibit a comparable relative H3 occupancy to the wild type. In addition to regulating telomere length, ASF1 and HIRA contribute to silencing 45S rRNA genes and affect their copy number. Besides, ASF1 supports global heterochromatin maintenance. Our findings also indicate that ASF1 transiently binds to the TELOMERE REPEAT BINDING 1 protein and the N terminus of telomerase in vivo, suggesting a physical link between the ASF1 histone chaperone and the telomere maintenance machinery.

Transcriptional inhibition after irradiation occurs preferentially at highly expressed genes in a manner dependent on cell cycle progression

In response to DNA double-strand damage, ongoing transcription is inhibited to facilitate accurate DNA repair while transcriptional recovery occurs after DNA repair is complete. However, the mechanisms at play and the identity of the transcripts being regulated in this manner are unclear. In contrast to the situation following UV damage, we found that transcriptional recovery after ionizing radiation (IR) occurs in a manner independent of the HIRA histone chaperone. Sequencing of the nascent transcripts identified a programmed transcriptional response, where certain transcripts and pathways are rapidly downregulated after IR, while other transcripts and pathways are upregulated. Specifically, most of the loss of nascent transcripts occurring after IR is due to inhibition of transcriptional initiation of the highly transcribed histone genes and the rDNA. To identify factors responsible for transcriptional inhibition after IR in an unbiased manner, we performed a whole genome gRNA library CRISPR/Cas9 screen. Many of the top hits on our screen were factors required for protein neddylation. However, at short times after inhibition of neddylation, transcriptional inhibition still occurred after IR, even though neddylation was effectively inhibited. Persistent inhibition of neddylation blocked transcriptional inhibition after IR, and it also leads to cell cycle arrest. Indeed, we uncovered that many inhibitors and conditions that lead to cell cycle arrest in G1 or G2 phase also prevent transcriptional inhibition after IR. As such, it appears that transcriptional inhibition after IR occurs preferentially at highly expressed genes in cycling cells.

Transcriptional inhibition after irradiation occurs preferentially at highly expressed genes in a manner dependent on cell cycle progression

In response to DNA double strand damage, ongoing transcription is inhibited to facilitate accurate DNA repair while transcriptional recovery occurs after DNA repair is complete. However, the mechanisms at play and identity of the transcripts being regulated in this manner are unclear. In contrast to the situation following UV damage, we found that transcriptional recovery after ionizing radiation (IR) occurs in a manner independent of the HIRA histone chaperone. Sequencing of the nascent transcripts identified a programmed transcriptional response, where certain transcripts and pathways are rapidly downregulated after IR, while other transcripts and pathways are upregulated. Specifically, most of the loss of nascent transcripts occurring after IR is due to inhibition of transcriptional initiation of the highly transcribed histone genes and the rDNA. To identify factors responsible for transcriptional inhibition after IR in an unbiased manner, we performed a whole genome gRNA library CRISPR / Cas9 screen. Many of the top hits in our screen were factors required for protein neddylation. However, at short times after inhibition of neddylation, transcriptional inhibition still occurred after IR, even though neddylation was effectively inhibited. Persistent inhibition of neddylation blocked transcriptional inhibition after IR, and it also leads to cell cycle arrest. Indeed, we uncovered that many inhibitors and conditions that lead to cell cycle arrest in G1 or G2 phase also prevent transcriptional inhibition after IR. As such, it appears that transcriptional inhibition after IR occurs preferentially at highly expressed genes in cycling cells.

From silence to symphony: transcriptional repression and recovery in response to DNA damage

Genotoxic stress resulting from DNA damage is resolved through a signaling cascade known as the DNA Damage Response (DDR). The repair of damaged DNA is essential for cell survival, often requiring the DDR to attenuate other cellular processes such as the cell cycle, DNA replication, and transcription of genes not involved in DDR. The complex relationship between DDR and transcription has only recently been investigated. Transcription can facilitate the DDR in response to double-strand breaks (DSBs) and stimulate nucleotide excision repair (NER). However, transcription may need to be reduced to prevent potential interference with the repair machinery. In this review, we discuss various mechanisms that regulate transcription repression in response to different types of DNA damage, categorizing them by their range and duration of effect. Finally, we explore various models of transcription recovery following DNA damage-induced repression.

Gene architecture is a determinant of the transcriptional response to bulky DNA damages

Bulky DNA damages block transcription and compromise genome integrity and function. The cellular response to these damages includes global transcription shutdown. Still, active transcription is necessary for transcription-coupled repair and for induction of damage-response genes. To uncover common features of a general bulky DNA damage response, and to identify response-related transcripts that are expressed despite damage, we performed a systematic RNA-seq study comparing the transcriptional response to three independent damage-inducing agents: UV, the chemotherapy cisplatin, and benzo[a]pyrene, a component of cigarette smoke. Reduction in gene expression after damage was associated with higher damage rates, longer gene length, and low GC content. We identified genes with relatively higher expression after all three damage treatments, including NR4A2, a potential novel damage-response transcription factor. Up-regulated genes exhibit higher exon content that is associated with preferential repair, which could enable rapid damage removal and transcription restoration. The attenuated response to BPDE highlights that not all bulky damages elicit the same response. These findings frame gene architecture as a major determinant of the transcriptional response that is hardwired into the human genome.

Reprogramming transcription after DNA damage: recognition, response, repair, and restart

Genome integrity is constantly challenged by endogenous and exogenous insults that cause DNA damage. To cope with these threats, cells have a surveillance mechanism, known as the DNA damage response (DDR), to repair any lesions. Although transcription has long been implicated in DNA repair, how transcriptional reprogramming is coordinated with the DDR is just beginning to be understood. In this review, we highlight recent advances in elucidating the molecular mechanisms underlying major transcriptional events, including RNA polymerase (Pol) II stalling and transcriptional silencing and recovery, which occur in response to DNA damage. Furthermore, we discuss how such transcriptional adaptation contributes to sensing and eliminating damaged DNA and how it can jeopardize genome integrity when it goes awry.

DNA Damage-Induced RNAPII Degradation and Its Consequences in Gene Expression

RPB1, the major and catalytic subunit of human RNA Polymerase II (RNAPII), is specifically degraded by the ubiquitin-proteasome system upon induction of DNA damage by different agents, such as ultraviolet (UV) light. The "last resort" model of RNAPII degradation states that a persistently stalled RNAPII is degraded at the site of the DNA lesion in order to facilitate access to Nucleotide Excision Repair (NER) factors, thereby promoting repair in template strands of active genes. Recent identification and mutation of the lysine residue involved in RPB1 ubiquitylation and degradation unveiled the relevance of RNAPII levels in the control of gene expression. Inhibition of RNAPII degradation after UV light exposure enhanced RNAPII loading onto chromatin, demonstrating that the mere concentration of RNAPII shapes the gene expression response. In this review, we discuss the role of RNAPII ubiquitylation in NER-dependent repair, recent advances in RPB1 degradation mechanisms and its consequences in gene expression under stress, both in normal and repair deficient cells.

HIRA loss transforms FH-deficient cells

Fumarate hydratase (FH) is a mitochondrial enzyme that catalyzes the reversible hydration of fumarate to malate in the tricarboxylic acid (TCA) cycle. Germline mutations of FH lead to hereditary leiomyomatosis and renal cell carcinoma (HLRCC), a cancer syndrome characterized by a highly aggressive form of renal cancer. Although HLRCC tumors metastasize rapidly, FH-deficient mice develop premalignant cysts in the kidneys, rather than carcinomas. How Fh1-deficient cells overcome these tumor-suppressive events during transformation is unknown. Here, we perform a genome-wide CRISPR-Cas9 screen to identify genes that, when ablated, enhance the proliferation of Fh1-deficient cells. We found that the depletion of the histone cell cycle regulator (HIRA) enhances proliferation and invasion of Fh1-deficient cells in vitro and in vivo. Mechanistically, Hira loss activates MYC and its target genes, increasing nucleotide metabolism specifically in Fh1-deficient cells, independent of its histone chaperone activity. These results are instrumental for understanding mechanisms of tumorigenesis in HLRCC and the development of targeted treatments for patients.

Transcription and genome integrity

Transcription can cause genome instability by promoting R-loop formation but also act as a mutation-suppressing machinery by sensing of DNA lesions leading to the activation of DNA damage signaling and transcription-coupled repair. Recovery of RNA synthesis following the resolution of repair of transcription-blocking lesions is critical to avoid apoptosis and several new factors involved in this process have recently been identified. Some DNA repair proteins are recruited to initiating RNA polymerases and this may expediate the recruitment of other factors that participate in the repair of transcription-blocking DNA lesions. Recent studies have shown that transcription of protein-coding genes does not always give rise to spliced transcripts, opening the possibility that cells may use the transcription machinery in a splicing-uncoupled manner for other purposes including surveillance of the transcribed genome.

Epigenetic Regulation of Nucleotide Excision Repair

Genomic DNA is constantly attacked by a plethora of DNA damaging agents both from endogenous and exogenous sources. Nucleotide excision repair (NER) is the most versatile repair pathway that recognizes and removes a wide range of bulky and/or helix-distorting DNA lesions. Even though the molecular mechanism of NER is well studied through in vitro system, the NER process inside the cell is more complicated because the genomic DNA in eukaryotes is tightly packaged into chromosomes and compacted into a nucleus. Epigenetic modifications regulate gene activity and expression without changing the DNA sequence. The dynamics of epigenetic regulation play a crucial role during the in vivo NER process. In this review, we summarize recent advances in our understanding of the epigenetic regulation of NER.

Histone chaperone HIRA complex regulates retrotransposons in embryonic stem cells

BACKGROUND

Histone cell cycle regulator (HIRA) complex is an important histone chaperone that mediates the deposition of the H3.3 histone variant onto chromatin independently from DNA synthesis. However, it is still unknown whether it participates in the expression control of retrotransposons and cell fate determination.

METHODS

We screened the role of HIRA complex members in repressing the expression of retrotransposons by shRNA depletion in embryonic stem cells (ESCs) followed by RT-qPCR. RNA-seq was used to study the expression profiles after depletion of individual HIRA member. RT-qPCR and western blot were used to determine overexpression of HIRA complex members. Chromatin immunoprecipitation (ChIP)-qPCR was used to find the binding of H3.3, HIRA members to chromatin. Co-immunoprecipitation was used to identify the interaction between Hira mutant and Ubn2. ChIP-qPCR was used to identify H3.3 deposition change and western blot of chromatin extract was used to validate the epigenetic change. Bioinformatics analysis was applied for the analysis of available ChIP-seq data.

RESULTS

We revealed that Hira, Ubn2, and Ubn1 were the main repressors of 2-cell marker retrotransposon MERVL among HIRA complex members. Surprisingly, Ubn2 and Hira targeted different groups of retrotransposons and retrotransposon-derived long noncoding RNAs (lncRNAs), despite that they partially shared target genes. Furthermore, Ubn2 prevented ESCs to gain a 2-cell like state or activate trophectodermal genes upon differentiation. Mechanistically, Ubn2 and Hira suppressed retrotransposons by regulating the deposition of histone H3.3. Decreased H3.3 deposition, that was associated with the loss of Ubn2 or Hira, caused the reduction of H3K9me2 and H3K9me3, which are known repressive marks of retrotransposons.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, our findings shed light on the distinct roles of HIRA complex members in controlling retrotransposons and cell fate conversion in ESCs.

Histone and Chromatin Dynamics Facilitating DNA repair

Our nuclear genomes are complexed with histone proteins to form nucleosomes, the repeating units of chromatin which function to package and limit unscheduled access to the genome. In response to helix-distorting DNA lesions and DNA double-strand breaks, chromatin is disassembled around the DNA lesion to facilitate DNA repair and it is reassembled after repair is complete to reestablish the epigenetic landscape and regulating access to the genome. DNA damage also triggers decondensation of the local chromatin structure, incorporation of histone variants and dramatic transient increases in chromatin mobility to facilitate the homology search during homologous recombination. Here we review the current state of knowledge of these changes in histone and chromatin dynamics in response to DNA damage, the molecular mechanisms mediating these dynamics, as well as their functional contributions to the maintenance of genome integrity to prevent human diseases including cancer.

Chaperoning histones at the DNA repair dance

Unlike all other biological molecules that are degraded and replaced if damaged, DNA must be repaired as chromosomes cannot be replaced. Indeed, DNA endures a wide variety of structural damage that need to be repaired accurately to maintain genomic stability and proper functioning of cells and to prevent mutation leading to disease. Given that the genome is packaged into chromatin within eukaryotic cells, it has become increasingly evident that the chromatin context of DNA both facilitates and regulates DNA repair processes. In this review, we discuss mechanisms involved in removal of histones (chromatin disassembly) from around DNA lesions, by histone chaperones and chromatin remodelers, that promotes accessibility of the DNA repair machinery. We also elaborate on how the deposition of core histones and specific histone variants onto DNA (chromatin assembly) during DNA repair promotes repair processes, the role of histone post translational modifications in these processes and how chromatin structure is reestablished after DNA repair is complete.

Dealing with transcription-blocking DNA damage: Repair mechanisms, RNA polymerase II processing and human disorders

Transcription-blocking DNA lesions (TBLs) in genomic DNA are triggered by a wide variety of DNA-damaging agents. Such lesions cause stalling of elongating RNA polymerase II (RNA Pol II) enzymes and fully block transcription when unresolved. The toxic impact of DNA damage on transcription progression is commonly referred to as transcription stress. In response to RNA Pol II stalling, cells activate and employ transcription-coupled repair (TCR) machineries to repair cytotoxic TBLs and resume transcription. Increasing evidence indicates that the modification and processing of stalled RNA Pol II is an integral component of the cellular response to and the repair of TBLs. If TCR pathways fail, the prolonged stalling of RNA Pol II will impede global replication and transcription as well as block the access of other DNA repair pathways that may act upon the TBL. Consequently, such prolonged stalling will trigger profound genome instability and devastating clinical features. In this review, we will discuss the mechanisms by which various types of TBLs are repaired by distinct TCR pathways and how RNA Pol II processing is regulated during these processes. We will also discuss the clinical consequences of transcription stress and genotype-phenotype correlations of related TCR-deficiency disorders.