Is it a wrap? Nucleosome interactions of the BRCA1-binding partner, BARD1, steal the scene

Mechanisms of synthetic lethality between BRCA1/2 and 53BP1 deficiencies and DNA polymerase theta targeting

A synthetic lethal relationship exists between disruption of polymerase theta (Polθ), and loss of either 53BP1 or homologous recombination (HR) proteins, including BRCA1; however, the mechanistic basis of these observations are unclear. Here we reveal two distinct mechanisms of Polθ synthetic lethality, identifying dual influences of 1) whether Polθ is lost or inhibited, and 2) the underlying susceptible genotype. Firstly, we find that the sensitivity of BRCA1/2- and 53BP1-deficient cells to Polθ loss, and 53BP1-deficient cells to Polθ inhibition (ART558) requires RAD52, and appropriate reduction of RAD52 can ameliorate these phenotypes. We show that in the absence of Polθ, RAD52 accumulations suppress ssDNA gap-filling in G2/M and encourage MRE11 nuclease accumulation. In contrast, the survival of BRCA1-deficient cells treated with Polθ inhibitor are not restored by RAD52 suppression, and ssDNA gap-filling is prevented by the chemically inhibited polymerase itself. These data define an additional role for Polθ, reveal the mechanism underlying synthetic lethality between 53BP1, BRCA1/2 and Polθ loss, and indicate genotype-dependent Polθ inhibitor mechanisms.

BRCA1-BARD1 combines multiple chromatin recognition modules to bridge nascent nucleosomes

Chromatin association of the BRCA1-BARD1 heterodimer is critical to promote homologous recombination repair of DNA double-strand breaks (DSBs) in S/G2. How the BRCA1-BARD1 complex interacts with chromatin that contains both damage induced histone H2A ubiquitin and inhibitory H4K20 methylation is not fully understood. We characterised BRCA1-BARD1 binding and enzymatic activity to an array of mono- and di-nucleosome substrates using biochemical, structural and single molecule imaging approaches. We found that the BRCA1-BARD1 complex preferentially interacts and modifies di-nucleosomes over mono-nucleosomes, allowing integration of H2A Lys-15 ubiquitylation signals with other chromatin modifications and features. Using high speed- atomic force microscopy (HS-AFM) to monitor how the BRCA1-BARD1 complex recognises chromatin in real time, we saw a highly dynamic complex that bridges two nucleosomes and associates with the DNA linker region. Bridging is aided by multivalent cross-nucleosome interactions that enhance BRCA1-BARD1 E3 ubiquitin ligase catalytic activity. Multivalent interactions across nucleosomes explain how BRCA1-BARD1 can recognise chromatin that retains partial di-methylation at H4 Lys-20 (H4K20me2), a parental histone mark that blocks BRCA1-BARD1 interaction with nucleosomes, to promote its enzymatic and DNA repair activities.

Comprehensive evaluation and efficient classification of BRCA1 RING domain missense substitutions

BRCA1 is a high-risk susceptibility gene for breast and ovarian cancer. Pathogenic protein-truncating variants are scattered across the open reading frame, but all known missense substitutions that are pathogenic because of missense dysfunction are located in either the amino-terminal RING domain or the carboxy-terminal BRCT domain. Heterodimerization of the BRCA1 and BARD1 RING domains is a molecularly defined obligate activity. Hence, we tested every BRCA1 RING domain missense substitution that can be created by a single nucleotide change for heterodimerization with BARD1 in a mammalian two-hybrid assay. Downstream of the laboratory assay, we addressed three additional challenges: assay calibration, validation thereof, and integration of the calibrated results with other available data, such as computational evidence and patient/population observational data to achieve clinically applicable classification. Overall, we found that 15%-20% of BRCA1 RING domain missense substitutions are pathogenic. Using a Bayesian point system for data integration and variant classification, we achieved clinical classification of 89% of observed missense substitutions. Moreover, among missense substitutions not present in the human observational data used here, we find an additional 45 with concordant computational and functional assay evidence in favor of pathogenicity plus 223 with concordant evidence in favor of benignity; these are particularly likely to be classified as likely pathogenic and likely benign, respectively, once human observational data become available.

Immediate-Early, Early, and Late Responses to DNA Double Stranded Breaks

Loss or rearrangement of genetic information can result from incorrect responses to DNA double strand breaks (DSBs). The cellular responses to DSBs encompass a range of highly coordinated events designed to detect and respond appropriately to the damage, thereby preserving genomic integrity. In analogy with events occurring during viral infection, we appropriate the terms Immediate-Early, Early, and Late to describe the pre-repair responses to DSBs. A distinguishing feature of the Immediate-Early response is that the large protein condensates that form during the Early and Late response and are resolved upon repair, termed foci, are not visible. The Immediate-Early response encompasses initial lesion sensing, involving poly (ADP-ribose) polymerases (PARPs), KU70/80, and MRN, as well as rapid repair by so-called ‘fast-kinetic’ canonical non-homologous end joining (cNHEJ). Initial binding of PARPs and the KU70/80 complex to breaks appears to be mutually exclusive at easily ligatable DSBs that are repaired efficiently by fast-kinetic cNHEJ; a process that is PARP-, ATM-, 53BP1-, Artemis-, and resection-independent. However, at more complex breaks requiring processing, the Immediate-Early response involving PARPs and the ensuing highly dynamic PARylation (polyADP ribosylation) of many substrates may aid recruitment of both KU70/80 and MRN to DSBs. Complex DSBs rely upon the Early response, largely defined by ATM-dependent focal recruitment of many signalling molecules into large condensates, and regulated by complex chromatin dynamics. Finally, the Late response integrates information from cell cycle phase, chromatin context, and type of DSB to determine appropriate pathway choice. Critical to pathway choice is the recruitment of p53 binding protein 1 (53BP1) and breast cancer associated 1 (BRCA1). However, additional factors recruited throughout the DSB response also impact upon pathway choice, although these remain to be fully characterised. The Late response somehow channels DSBs into the appropriate high-fidelity repair pathway, typically either ‘slow-kinetic’ cNHEJ or homologous recombination (HR). Loss of specific components of the DSB repair machinery results in cells utilising remaining factors to effect repair, but often at the cost of increased mutagenesis. Here we discuss the complex regulation of the Immediate-Early, Early, and Late responses to DSBs proceeding repair itself.