Conserved interaction of Ctf18-RFC with DNA polymerase ε is critical for maintenance of genome stability in Saccharomyces cerevisiae

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.

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.

Integrating Sister Chromatid Cohesion Establishment to DNA Replication

The intersection through which two fundamental processes meet provides a unique vantage point from which to view cellular regulation. On the one hand, DNA replication is at the heart of cell division, generating duplicate chromosomes that allow each daughter cell to inherit a complete copy of the parental genome. Among other factors, the PCNA (proliferating cell nuclear antigen) sliding clamp ensures processive DNA replication during S phase and is essential for cell viability. On the other hand, the process of chromosome segregation during M phase—an act that occurs long after DNA replication—is equally fundamental to a successful cell division. Eco1/Ctf7 ensures that chromosomes faithfully segregate during mitosis, but functions during DNA replication to activate cohesins and thereby establish cohesion between sister chromatids. To achieve this, Eco1 binds PCNA and numerous other DNA replication fork factors that include MCM helicase, Chl1 helicase, and the Rtt101-Mms1-Mms22 E3 ubiquitin ligase. Here, we review the multi-faceted coordination between cohesion establishment and DNA replication. SUMMARY STATEMENT: New findings provide important insights into the mechanisms through which DNA replication and the establishment of sister chromatid cohesion are coupled.

Multiple roles of Pol epsilon in eukaryotic chromosome replication

Pol epsilon is a tetrameric assembly that plays distinct roles during eukaryotic chromosome replication. It catalyses leading strand DNA synthesis; yet this function is dispensable for viability. Its non-catalytic domains instead play an essential role in the assembly of the active replicative helicase and origin activation, while non-essential histone-fold subunits serve a critical function in parental histone redeposition onto newly synthesised DNA. Furthermore, Pol epsilon plays a structural role in linking the RFC–Ctf18 clamp loader to the replisome, supporting processive DNA synthesis, DNA damage response signalling as well as sister chromatid cohesion. In this minireview, we discuss recent biochemical and structural work that begins to explain various aspects of eukaryotic chromosome replication, with a focus on the multiple roles of Pol epsilon in this process.

Ctf18-RFC and DNA Pol ϵ form a stable leading strand polymerase/clamp loader complex required for normal and perturbed DNA replication

The eukaryotic replisome must faithfully replicate DNA and cope with replication fork blocks and stalling, while simultaneously promoting sister chromatid cohesion. Ctf18-RFC is an alternative PCNA loader that links all these processes together by an unknown mechanism. Here, we use integrative structural biology combined with yeast genetics and biochemistry to highlight the specific functions that Ctf18-RFC plays within the leading strand machinery via an interaction with the catalytic domain of DNA Pol ϵ. We show that a large and unusually flexible interface enables this interaction to occur constitutively throughout the cell cycle and regardless of whether forks are replicating or stalled. We reveal that, by being anchored to the leading strand polymerase, Ctf18-RFC can rapidly signal fork stalling to activate the S phase checkpoint. Moreover, we demonstrate that, independently of checkpoint signaling or chromosome cohesion, Ctf18-RFC functions in parallel to Chl1 and Mrc1 to protect replication forks and cell viability.

Molecular mechanisms of eukaryotic origin initiation, replication fork progression, and chromatin maintenance

Eukaryotic DNA replication is a highly dynamic and tightly regulated process. Replication involves several dozens of replication proteins, including the initiators ORC and Cdc6, replicative CMG helicase, DNA polymerase α-primase, leading-strand DNA polymerase ε, and lagging-strand DNA polymerase δ. These proteins work together in a spatially and temporally controlled manner to synthesize new DNA from the parental DNA templates. During DNA replication, epigenetic information imprinted on DNA and histone proteins is also copied to the daughter DNA to maintain the chromatin status. DNA methyltransferase 1 is primarily responsible for copying the parental DNA methylation pattern into the nascent DNA. Epigenetic information encoded in histones is transferred via a more complex and less well-understood process termed replication-couple nucleosome assembly. Here, we summarize the most recent structural and biochemical insights into DNA replication initiation, replication fork elongation, chromatin assembly and maintenance, and related regulatory mechanisms.

Division of Labor between PCNA Loaders in DNA Replication and Sister Chromatid Cohesion Establishment

Concomitant with DNA replication, the chromosomal cohesin complex establishes cohesion between newly replicated sister chromatids. Several replication-fork-associated "cohesion establishment factors," including the multifunctional Ctf18-RFC complex, aid this process in as yet unknown ways. Here, we show that Ctf18-RFC's role in sister chromatid cohesion correlates with PCNA loading but is separable from its role in the replication checkpoint. Ctf18-RFC loads PCNA with a slight preference for the leading strand, which is dispensable for DNA replication. Conversely, the canonical Rfc1-RFC complex preferentially loads PCNA onto the lagging strand, which is crucial for DNA replication but dispensable for sister chromatid cohesion. The downstream effector of Ctf18-RFC is cohesin acetylation, which we place toward a late step during replication maturation. Our results suggest that Ctf18-RFC enriches and balances PCNA levels at the replication fork, beyond the needs of DNA replication, to promote establishment of sister chromatid cohesion and possibly other post-replicative processes.

DNA Replication and Sister Chromatid Cohesion 1 (DSCC1) of the Replication Factor Complex CTF18-RFC is Critical for Colon Cancer Cell Growth

DNA replication and sister chromatid cohesion 1 (DSCC1) combines with chromosome transmission-fidelity protein 18 (CTF18) to form a CTF18-DSCC1-CTF8 (CTF18-1-8) module, which in combination with CTF18-replication factor C (RFC) acts as a proliferating cell nuclear antigen (PCNA) loader during DNA replication-associated processes. It was found that DSCC1 was overexpressed in tumor tissues from patients with colon cancer and that the survival probability of patients with colon cancer was lower when the expression of cytosolic DSCC1 was higher in tumor regions (P=0.047). By using DSCC1- or CTF18-knockdown cell lines (HCT116-shDSCC1 or HCT116-shCTF18, respectively), it was confirmed that DSCC1-knockdown inhibits cell proliferation and invasion, but that CTF18-knockdown does not. Tumors in mice xenografted with shDSCC1 cells were significantly smaller compared with those in mice in the mock group or those xenografted with shCTF18 cells. The shDSCC1 cells were highly sensitive to γ-irradiation and other DNA replication inhibitory treatments, resulting in low cell viability. The present results suggested that DSCC1 is the most important component in the CTF18-1-8 module for CTF18-RFC and is highly relevant to the growth and metastasis of colon cancer cells, and, therefore, it may be a potential therapeutic target for colon cancer treatment.

The S phase checkpoint promotes the Smc5/6 complex dependent SUMOylation of Pol2, the catalytic subunit of DNA polymerase ε

Replication fork stalling and accumulation of single-stranded DNA trigger the S phase checkpoint, a signalling cascade that, in budding yeast, leads to the activation of the Rad53 kinase. Rad53 is essential in maintaining cell viability, but its targets of regulation are still partially unknown. Here we show that Rad53 drives the hyper-SUMOylation of Pol2, the catalytic subunit of DNA polymerase ε, principally following replication forks stalling induced by nucleotide depletion. Pol2 is the main target of SUMOylation within the replisome and its modification requires the SUMO-ligase Mms21, a subunit of the Smc5/6 complex. Moreover, the Smc5/6 complex co-purifies with Pol ε, independently of other replisome components. Finally, we map Pol2 SUMOylation to a single site within the N-terminal catalytic domain and identify a SUMO-interacting motif at the C-terminus of Pol2. These data suggest that the S phase checkpoint regulate Pol ε during replication stress through Pol2 SUMOylation and SUMO-binding ability.

Effect of Upregulated DNA Replication and Sister Chromatid Cohesion 1 Expression on Proliferation and Prognosis in Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Background:

DNA replication and sister chromatid cohesion 1 (DSCC1) (also called DCC1) is a component of an alternative replication factor C complex that loads proliferating cell nuclear antigen onto DNA during S phase of the cell cycle. It is located at 8q24 and frequently amplified in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, the role of DSCC1 in the carcinogenesis and progress of HCC has not been fully investigated. Here, we aimed to assert the importance of DSCC1 in the HCC.

Methods:

In this study, copy number variation data and RNA sequencing data were used to calculate the DNA copy number and mRNA expression of DSCC1 in HCC. Quantitative polymerase chain reaction, Western blotting, and immunohistochemistry analysis were used to determine the mRNA and protein level of DSCC1 in HCC. The Kaplan–Meier analysis and univariate and multivariate Cox regression analysis were used to assess the association of DSCC1 with the overall survival (OS) of HCC patients. Moreover, lentiviral shRNA was used to knockdown DSCC1, and then, colony-forming assay, cell cycle assay, and cell proliferation assay were performed to evaluate the impact of DSCC1 silencing on HCC cell lines.

Results:

We found that DSCC1 was amplified and highly expressed in HCC tumor tissues than in nontumor tissues. We then found that the overexpression of both mRNA and protein of DSCC1 was linked to the bad prognosis of HCC patients. Astonishingly, the protein level of DSCC1 was an independent prognostic factor for OS (hazard ratio, 1.79; 95% confidence interval, 1.17–2.74; P = 0.007). Furthermore, the clonogenic capacity of DSCC1-amplified HCC cell lines (MHCC-97H, MHCC-97L, and Hep3B) was significantly inhibited by transduction of a lentiviral shRNA that targets DSCC1. We also showed that knockdown of DSCC1 induced G0–G1 cell cycle arrest (increased from 60% to more than 80%) and greatly inhibited the proliferation of HCC cell lines.

Conclusion:

These results suggest that DSCC1 is a putative HCC driver gene that promotes proliferation and is associated with poor prognosis in HCC.

Structural Basis for the Recruitment of Ctf18-RFC to the Replisome

Ctf18-RFC is an alternative PCNA loader which plays important but poorly understood roles in multiple DNA replication-associated processes. To fulfill its specialist roles, the Ctf18-RFC clamp loader contains a unique module in which the Dcc1-Ctf8 complex is bound to the C terminus of Ctf18 (the Ctf18-1-8 module). Here, we report the structural and functional characterization of the heterotetrameric complex formed between Ctf18-1-8 and a 63 kDa fragment of DNA polymerase ɛ. Our data reveal that Ctf18-1-8 binds stably to the polymerase and far from its other functional sites, suggesting that Ctf18-RFC could be associated with Pol ɛ throughout normal replication as the leading strand clamp loader. We also show that Pol ɛ and double-stranded DNA compete to bind the same winged-helix domain on Dcc1, with Pol ɛ being the preferred binding partner, thus suggesting that there are two alternative pathways to recruit Ctf18-RFC to sites of replication.

Human CTF18-RFC clamp-loader complexed with non-synthesising DNA polymerase ε efficiently loads the PCNA sliding clamp

The alternative proliferating-cell nuclear antigen (PCNA)-loader CTF18-RFC forms a stable complex with DNA polymerase ε (Polε). We observed that, under near-physiological conditions, CTF18-RFC alone loaded PCNA inefficiently, but loaded it efficiently when complexed with Polε. During efficient PCNA loading, CTF18-RFC and Polε assembled at a 3΄ primer–template junction cooperatively, and directed PCNA to the loading site. Site-specific photo-crosslinking of directly interacting proteins at the primer–template junction showed similar cooperative binding, in which the catalytic N-terminal portion of Polε acted as the major docking protein. In the PCNA-loading intermediate with ATPγS, binding of CTF18 to the DNA structures increased, suggesting transient access of CTF18-RFC to the primer terminus. Polε placed in DNA synthesis mode using a substrate DNA with a deoxidised 3΄ primer end did not stimulate PCNA loading, suggesting that DNA synthesis and PCNA loading are mutually exclusive at the 3΄ primer–template junction. Furthermore, PCNA and CTF18-RFC–Polε complex engaged in stable trimeric assembly on the template DNA and synthesised DNA efficiently. Thus, CTF18-RFC appears to be involved in leading-strand DNA synthesis through its interaction with Polε, and can load PCNA onto DNA when Polε is not in DNA synthesis mode to restore DNA synthesis.

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.

Control of Genome Integrity by RFC Complexes; Conductors of PCNA Loading onto and Unloading from Chromatin during DNA Replication

During cell division, genome integrity is maintained by faithful DNA replication during S phase, followed by accurate segregation in mitosis. Many DNA metabolic events linked with DNA replication are also regulated throughout the cell cycle. In eukaryotes, the DNA sliding clamp, proliferating cell nuclear antigen (PCNA), acts on chromatin as a processivity factor for DNA polymerases. Since its discovery, many other PCNA binding partners have been identified that function during DNA replication, repair, recombination, chromatin remodeling, cohesion, and proteolysis in cell-cycle progression. PCNA not only recruits the proteins involved in such events, but it also actively controls their function as chromatin assembles. Therefore, control of PCNA-loading onto chromatin is fundamental for various replication-coupled reactions. PCNA is loaded onto chromatin by PCNA-loading replication factor C (RFC) complexes. Both RFC1-RFC and Ctf18-RFC fundamentally function as PCNA loaders. On the other hand, after DNA synthesis, PCNA must be removed from chromatin by Elg1-RFC. Functional defects in RFC complexes lead to chromosomal abnormalities. In this review, we summarize the structural and functional relationships among RFC complexes, and describe how the regulation of PCNA loading/unloading by RFC complexes contributes to maintaining genome integrity.

Alternative clamp loaders/unloaders

Each time a cell duplicates, the whole genome must be accurately copied and distributed. The enormous amount of DNA in eukaryotic cells requires a high level of coordination between polymerases and other DNA and chromatin-interacting proteins to ensure timely and accurate DNA replication and chromatin formation. PCNA forms a ring that encircles the DNA. It serves as a processivity factor for DNA polymerases and as a landing platform for different proteins that interact with DNA and chromatin. It thus serves as a signaling hub and influences the rate and accuracy of DNA replication, the r-formation of chromatin in the wake of the moving fork and the proper segregation of the sister chromatids. Four different, conserved, protein complexes are in charge of loading/unloading PCNA and similar molecules onto DNA. Replication factor C (RFC) is the canonical complex in charge of loading PCNA, the replication clamp, during S-phase. The Rad24, Ctf18 and Elg1 proteins form complexes similar to RFC, with particular functions in the cell's nucleus. Here we summarize our current knowledge about the roles of these important factors in yeast.