Four pillars of the S-phase checkpoint

Impact of R-loops on oncogene-induced replication stress in cancer cells

Replication stress is an alteration in the progression of replication forks caused by a variety of events of endogenous or exogenous origin. In precancerous lesions, this stress is exacerbated by the deregulation of oncogenic pathways, which notably disrupts the coordination between replication and transcription, and leads to genetic instability and cancer development. It is now well established that transcription can interfere with genome replication in different ways, such as head-on collisions between polymerases, accumulation of positive DNA supercoils or formation of R-loops. These structures form during transcription when nascent RNA reanneals with DNA behind the RNA polymerase, forming a stable DNA:RNA hybrid. In this review, we discuss how these different cotranscriptional processes disrupt the progression of replication forks and how they contribute to genetic instability in cancer cells.

Mechanisms of loading and release of the 9-1-1 checkpoint clamp

Single-stranded or double-stranded DNA junctions with recessed 5' ends serve as loading sites for the checkpoint clamp, 9-1-1, which mediates activation of the apical checkpoint kinase, ATR^Mec1. However, the basis for 9-1-1's recruitment to 5' junctions is unclear. Here, we present structures of the yeast checkpoint clamp loader, Rad24-replication factor C (RFC), in complex with 9-1-1 and a 5' junction and in a post-ATP-hydrolysis state. Unexpectedly, 9-1-1 adopts both closed and planar open states in the presence of Rad24-RFC and DNA. Moreover, Rad24-RFC associates with the DNA junction in the opposite orientation of processivity clamp loaders with Rad24 exclusively coordinating the double-stranded region. ATP hydrolysis stimulates conformational changes in Rad24-RFC, leading to disengagement of DNA-loaded 9-1-1. Together, these structures explain 9-1-1's recruitment to 5' junctions and reveal new principles of sliding clamp loading.

Protein phosphatase 2A (PP2A) promotes anaphase entry after DNA replication stress in budding yeast

DNA replication stress activates the S-phase checkpoint that arrests the cell cycle, but it is poorly understood how cells recover from this arrest. Cyclin-dependent kinase (CDK) and protein phosphatase 2A (PP2A) are key cell cycle regulators, and Cdc55 is a regulatory subunit of PP2A in budding yeast. We found that yeast cells lacking functional PP2ACdc55 showed slow growth in the presence of hydroxyurea (HU), a DNA synthesis inhibitor, without obvious viability loss. Moreover, PP2A mutants exhibited delayed anaphase entry and sustained levels of anaphase inhibitor Pds1 after HU treatment. A DNA damage checkpoint Chk1 phosphorylates and stabilizes Pds1. We show that chk1Δ and mutation of the Chk1 phosphorylation sites in Pds1 largely restored efficient anaphase entry in PP2A mutants after HU treatment. In addition, deletion of SWE1, which encodes the inhibitory kinase for CDK or mutation of the Swe1 phosphorylation site in CDK (cdc28F19), also suppressed the anaphase entry delay in PP2A mutants after HU treatment. Our genetic data suggest that Swe1/CDK acts upstream of Pds1. Surprisingly, cdc55Δ showed significant suppression to the viability loss of S-phase checkpoint mutants during DNA synthesis block. Together, our results uncover a PP2A-Swe1-CDK-Chk1-Pds1 axis that promotes recovery from DNA replication stress.

DNA2 in Chromosome Stability and Cell Survival-Is It All about Replication Forks?

The conserved nuclease-helicase DNA2 has been linked to mitochondrial myopathy, Seckel syndrome, and cancer. Across species, the protein is indispensable for cell proliferation. On the molecular level, DNA2 has been implicated in DNA double-strand break (DSB) repair, checkpoint activation, Okazaki fragment processing (OFP), and telomere homeostasis. More recently, a critical contribution of DNA2 to the replication stress response and recovery of stalled DNA replication forks (RFs) has emerged. Here, we review the available functional and phenotypic data and propose that the major cellular defects associated with DNA2 dysfunction, and the links that exist with human disease, can be rationalized through the fundamental importance of DNA2-dependent RF recovery to genome duplication. Being a crucial player at stalled RFs, DNA2 is a promising target for anti-cancer therapy aimed at eliminating cancer cells by replication-stress overload.

DNA damage kinase signaling: checkpoint and repair at 30 years

From bacteria to mammalian cells, damaged DNA is sensed and targeted by DNA repair pathways. In eukaryotes, kinases play a central role in coordinating the DNA damage response. DNA damage signaling kinases were identified over two decades ago and linked to the cell cycle checkpoint concept proposed by Weinert and Hartwell in 1988. Connections between the DNA damage signaling kinases and DNA repair were scant at first, and the initial perception was that the importance of these kinases for genome integrity was largely an indirect effect of their roles in checkpoints, DNA replication, and transcription. As more substrates of DNA damage signaling kinases were identified, it became clear that they directly regulate a wide range of DNA repair factors. Here, we review our current understanding of DNA damage signaling kinases, delineating the key substrates in budding yeast and humans. We trace the progress of the field in the last 30 years and discuss our current understanding of the major substrate regulatory mechanisms involved in checkpoint responses and DNA repair.

Replication protein A (RPA) sumoylation positively influences the DNA damage checkpoint response in yeast

The DNA damage response relies on protein modifications to elicit physiological changes required for coping with genotoxic conditions. Besides canonical DNA damage checkpoint-mediated phosphorylation, DNA damage-induced sumoylation has recently been shown to promote genotoxin survival. Cross-talk between these two pathways exists in both yeast and human cells. In particular, sumoylation is required for optimal checkpoint function, but the underlying mechanisms are not well-understood. To address this question, we examined the sumoylation of the first responder to DNA lesions, the ssDNA-binding protein complex replication protein A (RPA) in budding yeast (Saccharomyces cerevisiae). We delineated the sumoylation sites of the RPA large subunit, Rfa1 on the basis of previous and new mapping data. Findings using a sumoylation-defective Rfa1 mutant suggested that Rfa1 sumoylation acts in parallel with the 9-1-1 checkpoint complex to enhance the DNA damage checkpoint response. Mechanistically, sumoylated Rfa1 fostered an interaction with a checkpoint adaptor protein, Sgs1, and contributed to checkpoint kinase activation. Our results suggest that SUMO-based modulation of a DNA damage sensor positively influences the checkpoint response.

Chromosome Duplication in Saccharomyces cerevisiae

The accurate and complete replication of genomic DNA is essential for all life. In eukaryotic cells, the assembly of the multi-enzyme replisomes that perform replication is divided into stages that occur at distinct phases of the cell cycle. Replicative DNA helicases are loaded around origins of DNA replication exclusively during G₁ phase. The loaded helicases are then activated during S phase and associate with the replicative DNA polymerases and other accessory proteins. The function of the resulting replisomes is monitored by checkpoint proteins that protect arrested replisomes and inhibit new initiation when replication is inhibited. The replisome also coordinates nucleosome disassembly, assembly, and the establishment of sister chromatid cohesion. Finally, when two replisomes converge they are disassembled. Studies in Saccharomyces cerevisiae have led the way in our understanding of these processes. Here, we review our increasingly molecular understanding of these events and their regulation.

Structural studies of RFCCtf18 reveal a novel chromatin recruitment role for Dcc1

Replication factor C complexes load and unload processivity clamps from DNA and are involved in multiple DNA replication and repair pathways. The RFCCtf18 variant complex is required for activation of the intra-S-phase checkpoint at stalled replication forks and aids the establishment of sister chromatid cohesion. Unlike other RFC complexes, RFCCtf18 contains two non-Rfc subunits, Dcc1 and Ctf8. Here, we present the crystal structure of the Dcc1-Ctf8 heterodimer bound to the C-terminus of Ctf18. We find that the C-terminus of Dcc1 contains three-winged helix domains, which bind to both ssDNA and dsDNA We further show that these domains are required for full recruitment of the complex to chromatin, and correct activation of the replication checkpoint. These findings provide the first structural data on a eukaryotic seven-subunit clamp loader and define a new biochemical activity for Dcc1.

RPA-Binding Protein ETAA1 Is an ATR Activator Involved in DNA Replication Stress Response

ETAA1 (Ewing tumor-associated antigen 1), also known as ETAA16, was identified as a tumor-specific antigen in the Ewing family of tumors. However, the biological function of this protein remains unknown. Here, we report the identification of ETAA1 as a DNA replication stress response protein. ETAA1 specifically interacts with RPA (Replication protein A) via two conserved RPA-binding domains and is therefore recruited to stalled replication forks. Interestingly, further analysis of ETAA1 function revealed that ETAA1 participates in the activation of ATR signaling pathway via a conserved ATR-activating domain (AAD) located near its N terminus. Importantly, we demonstrate that both RPA binding and ATR activation are required for ETAA1 function at stalled replication forks to maintain genome stability. Therefore, our data suggest that ETAA1 is a new ATR activator involved in replication checkpoint control.

A conserved Polϵ binding module in Ctf18-RFC is required for S-phase checkpoint activation downstream of Mec1

Defects during chromosome replication in eukaryotes activate a signaling pathway called the S-phase checkpoint, which produces a multifaceted response that preserves genome integrity at stalled DNA replication forks. Work with budding yeast showed that the 'alternative clamp loader' known as Ctf18-RFC acts by an unknown mechanism to activate the checkpoint kinase Rad53, which then mediates much of the checkpoint response. Here we show that budding yeast Ctf18-RFC associates with DNA polymerase epsilon, via an evolutionarily conserved 'Pol ϵ binding module' in Ctf18-RFC that is produced by interaction of the carboxyl terminus of Ctf18 with the Ctf8 and Dcc1 subunits. Mutations at the end of Ctf18 disrupt the integrity of the Pol ϵ binding module and block the S-phase checkpoint pathway, downstream of the Mec1 kinase that is the budding yeast orthologue of mammalian ATR. Similar defects in checkpoint activation are produced by mutations that displace Pol ϵ from the replisome. These findings indicate that the association of Ctf18-RFC with Pol ϵ at defective replication forks is a key step in activation of the S-phase checkpoint.

Regulation of Mec1 kinase activity by the SWI/SNF chromatin remodeling complex

Kapoor et al. found that the SWI/SNF chromatin remodeling complex is capable of regulating the activity of S. cerevisiae checkpoint kinase Mec1. SWI/SNF can activate Mec1 kinase activity in the absence of chromatin or known activators such as Dbp11. The subunit requirement of SWI/SNF-mediated Mec1 regulation differs from that of SWI/SNF-mediated chromatin remodeling. These findings suggest that ATP-dependent chromatin remodeling complexes can regulate non-chromatin substrates such as a checkpoint kinase.

ATP-dependent chromatin remodeling complexes alter chromatin structure through interactions with chromatin substrates such as DNA, histones, and nucleosomes. However, whether chromatin remodeling complexes have the ability to regulate nonchromatin substrates remains unclear. Saccharomyces cerevisiae checkpoint kinase Mec1 (ATR in mammals) is an essential master regulator of genomic integrity. Here we found that the SWI/SNF chromatin remodeling complex is capable of regulating Mec1 kinase activity. In vivo, Mec1 activity is reduced by the deletion of Snf2, the core ATPase subunit of the SWI/SNF complex. SWI/SNF interacts with Mec1, and cross-linking studies revealed that the Snf2 ATPase is the main interaction partner for Mec1. In vitro, SWI/SNF can activate Mec1 kinase activity in the absence of chromatin or known activators such as Dpb11. The subunit requirement of SWI/SNF-mediated Mec1 regulation differs from that of SWI/SNF-mediated chromatin remodeling. Functionally, SWI/SNF-mediated Mec1 regulation specifically occurs in S phase of the cell cycle. Together, these findings identify a novel regulator of Mec1 kinase activity and suggest that ATP-dependent chromatin remodeling complexes can regulate nonchromatin substrates such as a checkpoint kinase.

Chromatin remodeling factors Isw2 and Ino80 regulate checkpoint activity and chromatin structure in S phase

When cells undergo replication stress, proper checkpoint activation and deactivation are critical for genomic stability and cell survival and therefore must be highly regulated. Although mechanisms of checkpoint activation are well studied, mechanisms of checkpoint deactivation are far less understood. Previously, we reported that chromatin remodeling factors Isw2 and Ino80 attenuate the S-phase checkpoint activity in Saccharomyces cerevisiae, especially during recovery from hydroxyurea. In this study, we found that Isw2 and Ino80 have a more pronounced role in attenuating checkpoint activity during late S phase in the presence of methyl methanesulfonate (MMS). We therefore screened for checkpoint factors required for Isw2 and Ino80 checkpoint attenuation in the presence of MMS. Here we demonstrate that Isw2 and Ino80 antagonize checkpoint activators and attenuate checkpoint activity in S phase in MMS either through a currently unknown pathway or through RPA. Unexpectedly, we found that Isw2 and Ino80 increase chromatin accessibility around replicating regions in the presence of MMS through a novel mechanism. Furthermore, through growth assays, we provide additional evidence that Isw2 and Ino80 partially counteract checkpoint activators specifically in the presence of MMS. Based on these results, we propose that Isw2 and Ino80 attenuate S-phase checkpoint activity through a novel mechanism.

Strand-specific analysis shows protein binding at replication forks and PCNA unloading from lagging strands when forks stall

In eukaryotic cells, DNA replication proceeds with continuous synthesis of leading-strand DNA and discontinuous synthesis of lagging-strand DNA. Here we describe a method, eSPAN (enrichment and sequencing of protein-associated nascent DNA), which reveals the genome-wide association of proteins with leading and lagging strands of DNA replication forks. Using this approach in budding yeast, we confirm the strand specificities of DNA polymerases delta and epsilon and show that the PCNA clamp is enriched at lagging strands compared with leading-strand replication. Surprisingly, at stalled forks, PCNA is unloaded specifically from lagging strands. PCNA unloading depends on the Elg1-containing alternative RFC complex, ubiquitination of PCNA, and the checkpoint kinases Mec1 and Rad53. Cells deficient in PCNA unloading exhibit increased chromosome breaks. Our studies provide a tool for studying replication-related processes and reveal a mechanism whereby checkpoint kinases regulate strand-specific unloading of PCNA from stalled replication forks to maintain genome stability.

Genetic instability is prevented by Mrc1-dependent spatio-temporal separation of replicative and repair activities of homologous recombination: homologous recombination tolerates replicative stress by Mrc1-regulated replication and repair activities operating at S and G2 in distinct subnuclear compartments

Homologous recombination (HR) is required to protect and restart stressed replication forks. Paradoxically, the Mrc1 branch of the S phase checkpoints, which is activated by replicative stress, prevents HR repair at breaks and arrested forks. Indeed, the mechanisms underlying HR can threaten genome integrity if not properly regulated. Thus, understanding how cells avoid genetic instability associated with replicative stress, a hallmark of cancer, is still a challenge. Here I discuss recent results that support a model by which HR responds to replication stress through replicative and repair activities that operate at different stages of the cell cycle (S and G2, respectively) and in distinct subnuclear structures. Remarkably, the replication checkpoint appears to control this scenario by inhibiting the assembly of HR repair centers at stressed forks during S phase, thereby avoiding genetic instability.

Genotoxic stress prevents Ndd1-dependent transcriptional activation of G2/M-specific genes in Saccharomyces cerevisiae

Downregulation of specific transcripts is one of the mechanisms utilized by eukaryotic checkpoint systems to prevent cell cycle progression. Here we identified and explored such a mechanism in the yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae. It involves the Mec1-Rad53 kinase cascade, which attenuates G(2)/M-specific gene transcription upon genotoxic stress. This inhibition is achieved via multiple Rad53-dependent inhibitory phosphorylations on the transcriptional activator Ndd1 that prevent its chromatin recruitment via interactions with the forkhead factor Fkh2. Relevant modification sites on Ndd1 were identified by mass spectrometry, and corresponding alanine substitutions were able to suppress a methyl methanesulfonate-induced block in Ndd1 chromatin recruitment. Whereas effective suppression by these Ndd1 mutants is achieved for DNA damage, this is not the case under replication stress conditions, suggesting that additional mechanisms must operate under such conditions. We propose that budding yeast cells prevent the normal transcription of G(2)/M-specific genes upon genotoxic stress to precisely coordinate the timing of mitotic and postmitotic events with respect to S phase.

Clamping down on mammalian meiosis

The RAD9A-RAD1-HUS1 (9-1-1) complex is a PCNA-like heterotrimeric clamp that binds damaged DNA to promote cell cycle checkpoint signaling and DNA repair. While various 9-1-1 functions in mammalian somatic cells have been established, mounting evidence from lower eukaryotes predicts critical roles in meiotic germ cells as well. This was investigated in 2 recent studies in which the 9-1-1 complex was disrupted specifically in the mouse male germline through conditional deletion of Rad9a or Hus1. Loss of these clamp subunits led to severely impaired fertility and meiotic defects, including faulty DNA double-strand break repair. While 9-1-1 is critical for ATR kinase activation in somatic cells, these studies did not reveal major defects in ATR checkpoint pathway signaling in meiotic cells. Intriguingly, this new work identified separable roles for 9-1-1 subunits, namely RAD9A- and HUS1-independent roles for RAD1. Based on these studies and the high-level expression of the paralogous proteins RAD9B and HUS1B in testis, we propose a model in which multiple alternative 9-1-1 clamps function during mammalian meiosis to ensure genome maintenance in the germline.

Dna2 is involved in CA strand resection and nascent lagging strand completion at native yeast telomeres

Post-replicational telomere end processing involves both extension by telomerase and resection to produce 3'-GT-overhangs that extend beyond the complementary 5'-CA-rich strand. Resection must be carefully controlled to maintain telomere length. At short de novo telomeres generated artificially by HO endonuclease in the G2 phase, we show that dna2-defective strains are impaired in both telomere elongation and sequential 5'-CA resection. At native telomeres in dna2 mutants, GT-overhangs do clearly elongate during late S phase but are shorter than in wild type, suggesting a role for Dna2 in 5'-CA resection but also indicating significant redundancy with other nucleases. Surprisingly, elimination of Mre11 nuclease or Exo1, which are complementary to Dna2 in resection of internal double strand breaks, does not lead to further shortening of GT-overhangs in dna2 mutants. A second step in end processing involves filling in of the CA-strand to maintain appropriate telomere length. We show that Dna2 is required for normal telomeric CA-strand fill-in. Yeast dna2 mutants, like mutants in DNA ligase 1 (cdc9), accumulate low molecular weight, nascent lagging strand DNA replication intermediates at telomeres. Based on this and other results, we propose that FEN1 is not sufficient and that either Dna2 or Exo1 is required to supplement FEN1 in maturing lagging strands at telomeres. Telomeres may be among the subset of genomic locations where Dna2 helicase/nuclease is essential for the two-nuclease pathway of primer processing on lagging strands.

An essential function for the ATR-activation-domain (AAD) of TopBP1 in mouse development and cellular senescence

ATR activation is dependent on temporal and spatial interactions with partner proteins. In the budding yeast model, three proteins – Dpb11^TopBP1, Ddc1^Rad9 and Dna2 - all interact with and activate Mec1^ATR. Each contains an ATR activation domain (ADD) that interacts directly with the Mec1^ATR:Ddc2^ATRIP complex. Any of the Dpb11^TopBP1, Ddc1^Rad9 or Dna2 ADDs is sufficient to activate Mec1^ATRin vitro. All three can also independently activate Mec1^ATRin vivo: the checkpoint is lost only when all three AADs are absent. In metazoans, only TopBP1 has been identified as a direct ATR activator. Depletion-replacement approaches suggest the TopBP1-AAD is both sufficient and necessary for ATR activation. The physiological function of the TopBP1 AAD is, however, unknown. We created a knock-in point mutation (W1147R) that ablates mouse TopBP1-AAD function. TopBP1-W1147R is early embryonic lethal. To analyse TopBP1-W1147R cellular function in vivo, we silenced the wild type TopBP1 allele in heterozygous MEFs. AAD inactivation impaired cell proliferation, promoted premature senescence and compromised Chk1 signalling following UV irradiation. We also show enforced TopBP1 dimerization promotes ATR-dependent Chk1 phosphorylation. Our data suggest that, unlike the yeast models, the TopBP1-AAD is the major activator of ATR, sustaining cell proliferation and embryonic development.

DNA damage checkpoint signalling is an essential component of the DNA damage response. Many of the key proteins initiating the checkpoint signal have been identified and characterised in yeast. Here we explore the role of the ATR activating domain (AAD) of TopBP1 in embryonic development, cell growth and checkpoint activation using a mouse model. In contrast to yeasts, where the TopBP1 AAD plays a redundant, and thus phenotypically minor, role in ATR activation, our data demonstrate that the mouse TopBP1 AAD is essential for cellular proliferation. Interestingly, this suggests evolution has provided a simpler ATR activation mechanism in metazoans than it has in yeasts.