Explore the vast range of titles available.

[EN]Fidelity in chromosome duplication and segregation is indispensable for maintaining genomic stability and the perpetuation of life. Challenges to genome integrity jeopardize cell survival and are at the root of di erent types of pathologies, such as cancer. The following three main sources of genomic instability exist: DNA damage, replicative stress, and chromosome segregation defects. In response to these challenges, eukaryotic cells have evolved control mechanisms, also known as checkpoint systems, which sense under-replicated or damaged DNA and activate specialized DNA repair machineries. Cells make use of these checkpoints throughout interphase to shield genome integrity before mitosis. Later on, when the cells enter into mitosis, the spindle assembly checkpoint (SAC) is activated and remains active until the chromosomes are properly attached to the spindle apparatus to ensure an equal segregation among daughter cells. All of these processes are tightly interconnected and under strict regulation in the context of the cell division cycle. The chromosomal instability underlying cancer pathogenesis has recently emerged as a major source for understanding the mitotic processes that helps to safeguard genome integrity. Here, we review the special interconnection between the S-phase and mitosis in the presence of under-replicated DNA regions. Furthermore, we discuss what is known about the DNA damage response activated in mitosis that preserves chromosomal integrity.

Background The absence of the putative DNA/RNA helicase Schlafen11 (SLFN11) is thought to cause resistance to DNA-damaging agents (DDAs) and PARP inhibitors. Methods We developed and validated a clinically applicable SLFN11 immunohistochemistry assay and retrospectively correlated SLFN11 tumour levels to patient outcome to the standard of care therapies and olaparib maintenance. Results High SLFN11 associated with improved prognosis to the first-line treatment with DDAs platinum-plus-etoposide in SCLC patients, but was not strongly linked to paclitaxel–platinum response in ovarian cancer patients. Multivariate analysis of patients with relapsed platinum-sensitive ovarian cancer from the randomised, placebo-controlled Phase II olaparib maintenance Study19 showed SLFN11 tumour levels associated with sensitivity to olaparib. Study19 patients with high SLFN11 had a lower progression-free survival (PFS) hazard ratio compared to patients with low SLFN11, although both groups had the benefit of olaparib over placebo. Whilst caveated by small sample size, this trend was maintained for PFS, but not overall survival, when adjusting for BRCA status across the olaparib and placebo treatment groups, a key driver of PARP inhibitor sensitivity. Conclusion We provide clinical evidence supporting the role of SLFN11 as a DDA therapy selection biomarker in SCLC and highlight the need for further clinical investigation into SLFN11 as a PARP inhibitor predictive biomarker.

Repeat expansion in C9orf72 causes amyotrophic lateral sclerosis and frontotemporal lobar degeneration. Expanded sense and antisense repeat RNA transcripts in C9orf72 are translated into five dipeptide-repeat proteins (DPRs) in an AUG-independent manner. We previously identified the heterogeneous ribonucleoprotein (hnRNP) A3 as an interactor of the sense repeat RNA that reduces its translation into DPRs. Furthermore, we found that hnRNPA3 is depleted from the nucleus and partially mislocalized to cytoplasmic poly-GA inclusions in C9orf72 patients, suggesting that poly-GA sequesters hnRNPA3 within the cytoplasm. We now demonstrate that hnRNPA3 also binds to the antisense repeat RNA. Both DPR production and deposition from sense and antisense RNA repeats are increased upon hnRNPA3 reduction. All DPRs induced DNA double strand breaks (DSB), which was further enhanced upon reduction of hnRNPA3. Poly-glycine–arginine and poly-proline-arginine increased foci formed by phosphorylated Ataxia Telangiectasia Mutated (pATM), a major sensor of DSBs, whereas poly-glycine–alanine (poly-GA) evoked a reduction of pATM foci. In dentate gyri of C9orf72 patients, lower nuclear hnRNPA3 levels were associated with increased DNA damage. Moreover, enhanced poly-GA deposition correlated with reduced pATM foci. Since cytoplasmic pATM deposits partially colocalized with poly-GA deposits, these results suggest that poly-GA, the most frequent DPR observed in C9orf72 patients, differentially causes DNA damage and that poly-GA selectively sequesters pATM in the cytoplasm inhibiting its recruitment to sites of DNA damage. Thus, mislocalization of nuclear hnRNPA3 caused by poly-GA leads to increased poly-GA production, which partially depletes pATM, and consequently enhances DSB.

The downstream functions of the DNA binding tumor suppressor p53 vary depending on the cellular context, and persistent p53 activation has recently been implicated in tumor suppression and senescence. However, genome-wide information about p53-target gene regulation has been derived mostly from acute genotoxic conditions. Using ChIP-seq and expression data, we have found distinct p53 binding profiles between acutely activated (through DNA damage) and chronically activated (in senescent or pro-apoptotic conditions) p53. Compared to the classical 'acute' p53 binding profile, 'chronic' p53 peaks were closely associated with CpG-islands. Furthermore, the chronic CpG-island binding of p53 conferred distinct expression patterns between senescent and pro-apoptotic conditions. Using the p53 targets seen in the chronic conditions together with external high-throughput datasets, we have built p53 networks that revealed extensive self-regulatory 'p53 hubs' where p53 and many p53 targets can physically interact with each other. Integrating these results with public clinical datasets identified the cancer-associated lipogenic enzyme, SCD, which we found to be directly repressed by p53 through the CpG-island promoter, providing a mechanistic link between p53 and the 'lipogenic phenotype', a hallmark of cancer. Our data reveal distinct phenotype associations of chronic p53 targets that underlie specific gene regulatory mechanisms.

It is assumed that intracellular pathogenic bacteria have to cope with DNA alkylating stress within host cells. Here we use single-cell reporter systems to show that the pathogen Brucella abortus does encounter alkylating stress during the first hours of macrophage infection. Genes encoding direct repair and base-excision repair pathways are required by B. abortus to face this stress in vitro and in a mouse infection model. Among these genes, ogt is found to be under the control of the conserved cell-cycle transcription factor GcrA. Our results highlight that the control of DNA repair in B. abortus displays distinct features that are not present in model organisms such as Escherichia coli . It is assumed that intracellular pathogenic bacteria must cope with DNA alkylating stress within host cells. Here, Poncin et al. show that the pathogen Brucella abortus does encounter alkylating stress within macrophages, and shed light into the pathways required for DNA repair in this organism.

R-loops are three-stranded structures that harbour an RNA–DNA hybrid and frequently form during transcription. R-loop misregulation is associated with DNA damage, transcription elongation defects, hyper-recombination and genome instability. In contrast to such ‘unscheduled’ R-loops, evidence is mounting that cells harness the presence of RNA–DNA hybrids in scheduled, ‘regulatory’ R-loops to promote DNA transactions, including transcription termination and other steps of gene regulation, telomere stability and DNA repair. R-loops formed by cellular RNAs can regulate histone post-translational modification and may be recognized by dedicated reader proteins. The two-faced nature of R-loops implies that their formation, location and timely removal must be tightly regulated. In this Perspective, we discuss the cellular processes that regulatory R-loops modulate, the regulation of R-loops and the potential differences that may exist between regulatory R-loops and unscheduled R-loops.R-loops (three-stranded RNA–DNA structures) are often associated with transcription defects, DNA damage and genome instability, but ‘regulatory’ R-loops can promote gene regulation, telomere stability and DNA repair. This dual functionality of R-loops requires tight control of their formation, location and timely removal.

Selenium (Se) compounds have demonstrated anticancer properties in both preclinical and clinical studies, with particular promise in combination therapy where the optimal form and dose of selenium has yet to be established. In a phase I randomised double-blinded study, the safety, tolerability and pharmacokinetic (PK) profiles of sodium selenite (SS), Se-methylselenocysteine (MSC) and seleno-l-methionine (SLM) were compared in patients with chronic lymphocytic leukaemia and a cohort of patients with solid malignancies. Twenty-four patients received 400 μg of elemental Se as either SS, MSC or SLM for 8 weeks. None of the Se compounds were associated with any significant toxicities, and the total plasma Se AUC of SLM was markedly raised in comparison to MSC and SS. DNA damage assessment revealed negligible genotoxicity, and some minor reductions in lymphocyte counts were observed. At the dose level used, all three Se compounds are well-tolerated and non-genotoxic. Further analyses of the pharmacodynamic effects of Se on healthy and malignant peripheral blood mononuclear cells will inform the future evaluation of higher doses of these Se compounds. The study is registered under the Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry No: ACTRN12613000118707.

Cells deficient in the Brca1 and Brca2 genes have reduced capacity to repair DNA double-strand breaks by homologous recombination and consequently are hypersensitive to DNA-damaging agents, including cisplatin and poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors. Here we show that loss of the MLL3/4 complex protein, PTIP, protects Brca1/2 -deficient cells from DNA damage and rescues the lethality of Brca2 -deficient embryonic stem cells. However, PTIP deficiency does not restore homologous recombination activity at double-strand breaks. Instead, its absence inhibits the recruitment of the MRE11 nuclease to stalled replication forks, which in turn protects nascent DNA strands from extensive degradation. More generally, acquisition of PARP inhibitors and cisplatin resistance is associated with replication fork protection in Brca2 -deficient tumour cells that do not develop Brca2 reversion mutations. Disruption of multiple proteins, including PARP1 and CHD4, leads to the same end point of replication fork protection, highlighting the complexities by which tumour cells evade chemotherapeutic interventions and acquire drug resistance. Protection of nascent DNA from degradation provides a mechanism that can promote synthetic viability and drug resistance in Brca -deficient cells without restoring homologous recombination at double-strand breaks. Chemoresistance in BRCA cancers The breast cancer susceptibility genes BRCA1 and BRCA2 function to protect the genome from DNA damage. For this reason, DNA-damaging agents are used clinically to treat BRCA -deficient cancers. However, these treatments may have a short window of effectiveness; many cancers develop resistance. André Nussenzweig and colleagues show that cells become drug resistant due to loss of the PTIP protein. In its absence, forks that stall during DNA replication are protected from degradation, and this allows the cells to survive. This work highlights a previously unknown mechanism by which resistance to cancer therapy can arise.

The tumour suppressor p53 has a central role in the response to cellular stress. Activated p53 transcriptionally regulates hundreds of genes that are involved in multiple biological processes, including in DNA damage repair, cell cycle arrest, apoptosis and senescence. In the context of DNA damage, p53 is thought to be a decision-making transcription factor that selectively activates genes as part of specific gene expression programmes to determine cellular outcomes. In this Review, we discuss the multiple molecular mechanisms of p53 regulation and how they modulate the induction of apoptosis or cell cycle arrest following DNA damage. Specifically, we discuss how the interaction of p53 with DNA and chromatin affects gene expression, and how p53 post-translational modifications, its temporal expression dynamics and its interactions with chromatin regulators and transcription factors influence cell fate. These multiple layers of regulation enable p53 to execute cellular responses that are appropriate for specific cellular states and environmental conditions.Following DNA damage, the transcription factor p53 determines whether cells undergo apoptosis or cell cycle arrest and DNA repair. To enable different cellular outcomes, p53 is regulated through its temporal expression dynamics and post-translational modification, and by interactions with chromatin, chromatin regulators and transcription factors.

Human topoisomerases comprise a family of six enzymes: two type IB (TOP1 and mitochondrial TOP1 (TOP1MT), two type IIA (TOP2A and TOP2B) and two type IA (TOP3A and TOP3B) topoisomerases. In this Review, we discuss their biochemistry and their roles in transcription, DNA replication and chromatin remodelling, and highlight the recent progress made in understanding TOP3A and TOP3B. Because of recent advances in elucidating the high-order organization of the genome through chromatin loops and topologically associating domains (TADs), we integrate the functions of topoisomerases with genome organization. We also discuss the physiological and pathological formation of irreversible topoisomerase cleavage complexes (TOPccs) as they generate topoisomerase DNA–protein crosslinks (TOP-DPCs) coupled with DNA breaks. We discuss the expanding number of redundant pathways that repair TOP-DPCs, and the defects in those pathways, which are increasingly recognized as source of genomic damage leading to neurological diseases and cancer.Topoisomerases have essential roles in transcription, DNA replication, chromatin remodelling and, as recently revealed, 3D genome organization. However, topoisomerases also generate DNA–protein crosslinks coupled with DNA breaks, which are increasingly recognized as a source of disease-causing genomic damage.