Nucleosome remodelers in double-strand break repair

Dynamics of double strand breaks and chromosomal translocations

Chromosomal translocations are a major cause of cancer. At the same time, the mechanisms that lead to specific chromosomal translocations that associate different gene regions remain largely unknown. Translocations are induced by double strand breaks (DSBs) in DNA. Here we review recent data on the mechanisms of generation, mobility and repair of DSBs and stress the importance of the nuclear organization in this process.

Roles of chromatin remodellers in DNA double strand break repair

Now that we have a good understanding of the DNA double strand break (DSB) repair mechanisms and DSB-induced damage signalling, attention is focusing on the changes to the chromatin environment needed for efficient DSB repair. Mutations in chromatin remodelling complexes have been identified in cancers, making it important to evaluate how they impact upon genomic stability. Our current understanding of the DSB repair pathways suggests that each one has distinct requirements for chromatin remodelling. Moreover, restricting the extent of chromatin modifications could be a significant factor regulating the decision of pathway usage. In this review, we evaluate the distinct DSB repair pathways for their potential need for chromatin remodelling and review the roles of ATP-driven chromatin remodellers in the pathways.

Systematic characterization of deubiquitylating enzymes for roles in maintaining genome integrity

DNA double-strand breaks (DSBs) are perhaps the most toxic of all DNA lesions, with defects in the DNA-damage response to DSBs being associated with various human diseases. Although it is known that DSB repair pathways are tightly regulated by ubiquitylation, we do not yet have a comprehensive understanding of how deubiquitylating enzymes (DUBs) function in DSB responses. Here, by carrying out a multidimensional screening strategy for human DUBs, we identify several with hitherto unknown links to DSB repair, the G2/M DNA-damage checkpoint and genome-integrity maintenance. Phylogenetic analyses reveal functional clustering within certain DUB subgroups, suggesting evolutionally conserved functions and/or related modes of action. Furthermore, we establish that the DUB UCHL5 regulates DSB resection and repair by homologous recombination through protecting its interactor, NFRKB, from degradation. Collectively, our findings extend the list of DUBs promoting the maintenance of genome integrity, and highlight their potential as therapeutic targets for cancer.

NuA4 initiates dynamic histone H4 acetylation to promote high-fidelity sister chromatid recombination at postreplication gaps

CAG/CTG trinucleotide repeats are unstable, fragile sequences that strongly position nucleosomes, but little is known about chromatin modifications required to prevent genomic instability at these or other structure-forming sequences. We discovered that regulated histone H4 acetylation is required to maintain CAG repeat stability and promote gap-induced sister chromatid recombination. CAG expansions in the absence of H4 HATs NuA4 and Hat1 and HDACs Sir2, Hos2, and Hst1 depended on Rad52, Rad57, and Rad5 and were therefore arising through homology-mediated postreplication repair (PRR) events. H4K12 and H4K16 acetylation were required to prevent Rad5-dependent CAG repeat expansions, and H4K16 acetylation was enriched at CAG repeats during S phase. Genetic experiments placed the RSC chromatin remodeler in the same PRR pathway, and Rsc2 recruitment was coincident with H4K16 acetylation. Here we have utilized a repetitive DNA sequence that induces endogenous DNA damage to identify histone modifications that regulate recombination efficiency and fidelity during postreplication gap repair.

Chromatin modifications and DNA repair: beyond double-strand breaks

DNA repair must take place in the context of chromatin, and chromatin modifications and DNA repair are intimately linked. The study of double-strand break repair has revealed numerous histone modifications that occur after induction of a DSB, and modification of the repair factors themselves can also occur. In some cases the function of the modification is at least partially understood, but in many cases it is not yet clear. Although DSB repair is a crucial activity for cell survival, DSBs account for only a small percentage of the DNA lesions that occur over the lifetime of a cell. Repair of single-strand gaps, nicks, stalled forks, alternative DNA structures, and base lesions must also occur in a chromatin context. There is increasing evidence that these repair pathways are also regulated by histone modifications and chromatin remodeling. In this review, we will summarize the current state of knowledge of chromatin modifications that occur during non-DSB repair, highlighting similarities and differences to DSB repair as well as remaining questions.

SWR1 and INO80 chromatin remodelers contribute to DNA double-strand break perinuclear anchorage site choice

Persistent DNA double-strand breaks (DSBs) are recruited to the nuclear periphery in budding yeast. Both the Nup84 pore subcomplex and Mps3, an inner nuclear membrane (INM) SUN domain protein, have been implicated in DSB binding. It was unclear what, if anything, distinguishes the two potential sites of repair. Here, we characterize and distinguish the two binding sites. First, DSB-pore interaction occurs independently of cell-cycle phase and requires neither the chromatin remodeler INO80 nor recombinase Rad51 activity. In contrast, Mps3 binding is S and G2 phase specific and requires both factors. SWR1-dependent incorporation of Htz1 (H2A.Z) is necessary for break relocation to either site in both G1- and S-phase cells. Importantly, functional assays indicate that mutations in the two sites have additive repair defects, arguing that the two perinuclear anchorage sites define distinct survival pathways.

SWI/SNF factors required for cellular resistance to DNA damage include ARID1A and ARID1B and show interdependent protein stability

The SWI/SNF chromatin-remodeling family contains various protein complexes, which regulate gene expression during cellular development and influence DNA damage response in an ATP- and complex-dependent manner, of which details remain elusive. Recent human genome sequencing of various cancer cells revealed frequent mutations in SWI/SNF factors, especially ARID1A, a variant subunit in the BRG1-associated factor (BAF) complex of the SWI/SNF family. We combined live-cell analysis and gene-suppression experiments to show that suppression of either ARID1A or its paralog ARID1B led to reduced nonhomologous end joining activity of DNA double-strand breaks (DSB), decreased accumulation of KU70/KU80 proteins at DSB, and sensitivity to ionizing radiation, as well as to cisplatin and UV. Thus, in contrast to transcriptional regulation, both ARID1 proteins are required for cellular resistance to various types of DNA damage, including DSB. The suppression of other SWI/SNF factors, namely SNF5, BAF60a, BAF60c, BAF155, or BAF170, exhibits a similar phenotype. Of these factors, ARID1A, ARID1B, SNF5, and BAF60c are necessary for the immediate recruitment of the ATPase subunit of the SWI/SNF complex to DSB, arguing that both ARID1 proteins facilitate the damage response of the complex. Finally, we found interdependent protein stability among the SWI/SNF factors, suggesting their direct interaction within the complex and the reason why multiple factors are frequently lost in parallel in cancer cells. Taken together, we show that cancer cells lacking in the expression of certain SWI/SNF factors, including ARID1A, are deficient in DNA repair and potentially vulnerable to DNA damage.

Physiology of the read-write genome

Discoveries in cytogenetics, molecular biology, and genomics have revealed that genome change is an active cell-mediated physiological process. This is distinctly at variance with the pre-DNA assumption that genetic changes arise accidentally and sporadically. The discovery that DNA changes arise as the result of regulated cell biochemistry means that the genome is best modelled as a read-write (RW) data storage system rather than a read-only memory (ROM). The evidence behind this change in thinking and a consideration of some of its implications are the subjects of this article. Specific points include the following: cells protect themselves from accidental genome change with proofreading and DNA damage repair systems; localized point mutations result from the action of specialized trans-lesion mutator DNA polymerases; cells can join broken chromosomes and generate genome rearrangements by non-homologous end-joining (NHEJ) processes in specialized subnuclear repair centres; cells have a broad variety of natural genetic engineering (NGE) functions for transporting, diversifying and reorganizing DNA sequences in ways that generate many classes of genomic novelties; natural genetic engineering functions are regulated and subject to activation by a range of challenging life history events; cells can target the action of natural genetic engineering functions to particular genome locations by a range of well-established molecular interactions, including protein binding with regulatory factors and linkage to transcription; and genome changes in cancer can usefully be considered as consequences of the loss of homeostatic control over natural genetic engineering functions.

Nap1 stimulates homologous recombination by RAD51 and RAD54 in higher-ordered chromatin containing histone H1

Homologous recombination plays essential roles in mitotic DNA double strand break (DSB) repair and meiotic genetic recombination. In eukaryotes, RAD51 promotes the central homologous-pairing step during homologous recombination, but is not sufficient to overcome the reaction barrier imposed by nucleosomes. RAD54, a member of the ATP-dependent nucleosome remodeling factor family, is required to promote the RAD51-mediated homologous pairing in nucleosomal DNA. In higher eukaryotes, most nucleosomes form higher-ordered chromatin containing the linker histone H1. However, the mechanism by which RAD51/RAD54-mediated homologous pairing occurs in higher-ordered chromatin has not been elucidated. In this study, we found that a histone chaperone, Nap1, accumulates on DSB sites in human cells, and DSB repair is substantially decreased in Nap1-knockdown cells. We determined that Nap1 binds to RAD54, enhances the RAD54-mediated nucleosome remodeling by evicting histone H1, and eventually stimulates the RAD51-mediated homologous pairing in higher-ordered chromatin containing histone H1.

Epigenetic control of mobile DNA as an interface between experience and genome change

Mobile DNA in the genome is subject to RNA-targeted epigenetic control. This control regulates the activity of transposons, retrotransposons and genomic proviruses. Many different life history experiences alter the activities of mobile DNA and the expression of genetic loci regulated by nearby insertions. The same experiences induce alterations in epigenetic formatting and lead to trans-generational modifications of genome expression and stability. These observations lead to the hypothesis that epigenetic formatting directed by non-coding RNA provides a molecular interface between life history events and genome alteration.

NuMA promotes homologous recombination repair by regulating the accumulation of the ISWI ATPase SNF2h at DNA breaks

Chromatin remodeling factors play an active role in the DNA damage response by shaping chromatin to facilitate the repair process. The spatiotemporal regulation of these factors is key to their function, yet poorly understood. We report that the structural nuclear protein NuMA accumulates at sites of DNA damage in a poly[ADP-ribose]ylation-dependent manner and functionally interacts with the ISWI ATPase SNF2h/SMARCA5, a chromatin remodeler that facilitates DNA repair. NuMA coimmunoprecipitates with SNF2h, regulates its diffusion in the nucleoplasm and controls its accumulation at DNA breaks. Consistent with NuMA enabling SNF2h function, cells with silenced NuMA exhibit reduced chromatin decompaction after DNA cleavage, lesser focal recruitment of homologous recombination repair factors, impaired DNA double-strand break repair in chromosomal (but not in episomal) contexts and increased sensitivity to DNA cross-linking agents. These findings reveal a structural basis for the orchestration of chromatin remodeling whereby a scaffold protein promotes genome maintenance by directing a remodeler to DNA breaks.

Suppression of intragenic transcription requires the MOT1 and NC2 regulators of TATA-binding protein

Chromatin structure in transcribed regions poses a barrier for intragenic transcription. In a comprehensive study of the yeast chromatin remodelers and the Mot1p-NC2 regulators of TATA-binding protein (TBP), we detected synthetic genetic interactions indicative of suppression of intragenic transcription. Conditional depletion of Mot1p or NC2 in absence of the ISW1 remodeler, but not in the absence of other chromatin remodelers, activated the cryptic FLO8 promoter. Likewise, conditional depletion of Mot1p or NC2 in deletion backgrounds of the H3K36 methyltransferase Set2p or the Asf1p-Rtt106p histone H3-H4 chaperones, important factors involved in maintaining a repressive chromatin environment, resulted in increased intragenic FLO8 transcripts. Activity of the cryptic FLO8 promoter is associated with reduced H3 levels, increased TBP binding and tri-methylation of H3K4 and is independent of Spt-Ada-Gcn5-acetyltransferase function. These data reveal cooperation of negative regulation of TBP with specific chromatin regulators to inhibit intragenic transcription.

Structure and subunit topology of the INO80 chromatin remodeler and its nucleosome complex

INO80/SWR1 family chromatin remodelers are complexes composed of >15 subunits and molecular masses exceeding 1 MDa. Their important role in transcription and genome maintenance is exchanging the histone variants H2A and H2A.Z. We report the architecture of S. cerevisiae INO80 using an integrative approach of electron microscopy, crosslinking and mass spectrometry. INO80 has an embryo-shaped head-neck-body-foot architecture and shows dynamic open and closed conformations. We can assign an Rvb1/Rvb2 heterododecamer to the head in close contact with the Ino80 Snf2 domain, Ies2, and the Arp5 module at the neck. The high-affinity nucleosome-binding Nhp10 module localizes to the body, whereas the module that contains actin, Arp4, and Arp8 maps to the foot. Structural and biochemical analyses indicate that the nucleosome is bound at the concave surface near the neck, flanked by the Rvb1/2 and Arp8 modules. Our analysis establishes a structural and functional framework for this family of large remodelers.

Contribution of DNA unwrapping from histone octamers to the repair of oxidatively damaged DNA in nucleosomes

Reactive oxygen species generate ~20,000 oxidative lesions in the DNA of every cell, every day. Most of these lesions are located within nucleosomes, which package DNA in chromatin and impede base excision repair (BER). We demonstrated previously that periodic, spontaneous partial unwrapping of DNA from the underlying histone octamer enables BER enzymes to bind to oxidative lesions that would otherwise be sterically inaccessible. In the present study, we asked if these periodic DNA unwrapping events are frequent enough to account for the estimated rates of BER in vivo. We measured rates of excision of oxidative lesions from sites in nucleosomes that are accessible only during unwrapping episodes. Using reaction conditions appropriate for presteady-state kinetic analyses, we derived lesion exposure rates for both 601 and 5S rDNA-based nucleosomes. Although DNA unwrapping-mediated exposure of a lesion ~16NT from the nucleosome edge occurred ~7-8 times per minute, exposure rates fell dramatically for lesions located 10 or more NT further in from the nucleosome edge. The rates likely are too low to account for observed rates of BER in cells. Thus, chromatin remodeling, either BER-specific or that associated with transcription, replication, or other DNA repair processes, probably contributes to efficient BER in vivo.

Checkpoint kinases and the INO80 nucleosome remodeling complex enhance global chromatin mobility in response to DNA damage

Double-strand break repair by recombination requires a homology search, and its efficiency is affected by the mobility of both the break site and the homologous template. In yeast, induced breaks move significantly more than undamaged loci. Seeber et al. find that the yeast checkpoint factors Mec1, Rad9, and Rad53 are required for genome-wide increases in chromatin mobility. Mec1 activation enhances chromatin mobility even in the absence of damage. The INO80 chromatin remodeler acts downstream from Mec1 to increase chromatin mobility.

Double-strand break repair by recombination requires a homology search. In yeast, induced breaks move significantly more than undamaged loci. To examine whether DNA damage provokes an increase in chromatin mobility generally, we tracked undamaged loci under DNA-damaging conditions. We found that the yeast checkpoint factors Mec1, Rad9, and Rad53 are required for genome-wide increases in chromatin mobility, but not the repair protein Rad51. Mec1 activation by targeted Ddc1/Ddc2 enhances chromatin mobility even in the absence of damage. Finally, the INO80 chromatin remodeler is shown to act downstream from Mec1 to increase chromatin mobility, highlighting an additional damage-related role of this nucleosome remodeling complex.

The mINO80 chromatin remodeling complex is required for efficient telomere replication and maintenance of genome stability

The INO80 (inositol requiring mutant 80) chromatin remodeling complex plays important roles in transcriptional regulation and DNA replication and repair, and consists of several functional protein subunits, including the critical Ino80 ATPase catalytic subunit. While the function of INO80 has been studied in yeast and mammalian cell lines, we do not know how mIno80 contributes to the maintenance of genome stability to prevent cancer development in mice. Here, we use a conditional knockout approach to explore the cellular and organismal functions of mIno80. Deletion of mIno80 results in profound cellular proliferative defects and activation of p21-dependent cellular senescence. While mIno80 is required for efficient repair of DNA double strand breaks, its depletion did not impact upon the formation of γ-H2AX and 53BP1 DNA damage foci, or the activation of the ATM-CHK2-dependent DNA damage response. mIno80 deletion inhibited the generation of single-strand DNA, resulting in defects in homology-directed DNA repair (HDR) at telomeres. Fragile telomeres were prominent in mIno80(Δ/Δ) MEFs, suggesting that chromatin remodeling is required for efficient telomere replication. mIno80(-/-) mouse embryos die early during embryogenesis, while conditional deletion of mIno80 in adult mice results in weight loss and premature death. In a p53(-/-) tumor-prone background, mIno80 haploinsufficiency favored the development of sarcomas. Our studies suggest that the mIno80 chromatin remodeling complex plays important roles in telomere replication, HDR-mediated repair of dysfunctional telomeres, and maintenance of genome stability.

Interplays between ATM/Tel1 and ATR/Mec1 in sensing and signaling DNA double-strand breaks

DNA double-strand breaks (DSBs) are highly hazardous for genome integrity because they have the potential to cause mutations, chromosomal rearrangements and genomic instability. The cellular response to DSBs is orchestrated by signal transduction pathways, known as DNA damage checkpoints, which are conserved from yeasts to humans. These pathways can sense DNA damage and transduce this information to specific cellular targets, which in turn regulate cell cycle transitions and DNA repair. The mammalian protein kinases ATM and ATR, as well as their budding yeast corresponding orthologs Tel1 and Mec1, act as master regulators of the checkpoint response to DSBs. Here, we review the early steps of DSB processing and the role of DNA-end structures in activating ATM/Tel1 and ATR/Mec1 in an orderly and reciprocal manner.

Direct comparative analysis of conventional and directional freezing for the cryopreservation of whole ovaries

OBJECTIVE

To compare conventional slow equilibrium cooling and directional freezing for cryopreservation of whole ovaries.

DESIGN

Experimental animal study.

SETTING

Academic research environment.

ANIMAL(S)

Adult ewes.

INTERVENTION(S)

Eighty-one ovaries were randomly assigned to fresh control, conventional freezing (CF), and directional freezing (DF) group. Ovaries of CF and DF groups were perfused via the ovarian artery with Leibovitz L-15 medium, 10% fetal bovine serum, and 1.5 M dimethyl sulfoxide for 5 minutes. Each ovary was inserted into a glass test tube containing 10 mL of the same solution and cooled to -100°C or -70°C, respectively. Ovaries were stored in liquid nitrogen for a minimum of 2 weeks.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)

Structural integrity of cortical and medulla regions, vascular integrity, follicle in vitro development, cell proliferation, and DNA damage and repair.

RESULT(S)

All examined parameters indicate that the structure of DF ovaries remains largely intact and comparable to fresh controls, whereas significant damages were observed in CF ovaries.

CONCLUSION(S)

Directional freezing allows good preservation of whole ovaries, with most of the parameters taken into consideration almost identical to those recorded in fresh control samples. This encourages a reconsideration of the possible use of whole-ovary cryopreservation as a viable alternative to cortical fragments.

The ATP-dependent chromatin remodeling enzyme Fun30 represses transcription by sliding promoter-proximal nucleosomes

The evolutionarily conserved ATP-dependent chromatin remodeling enzyme Fun30 has recently been shown to play important roles in heterochromatin silencing and DNA repair. However, how Fun30 remodels nucleosomes is not clear. Here we report a nucleosome sliding activity of Fun30 and its role in transcriptional repression. We observed that Fun30 repressed the expression of genes involved in amino acid and carbohydrate metabolism, the stress response, and meiosis. In addition, Fun30 was localized at the 5' and 3' ends of genes and within the open reading frames of its targets. Consistent with its role in gene repression, we observed that Fun30 target genes lacked histone modifications often associated with gene activation and showed an increased level of ubiquitinated histone H2B. Furthermore, a genome-wide nucleosome mapping analysis revealed that the length of the nucleosome-free region at the 5' end of a subset of genes was changed in Fun30-depleted cells. In addition, the positions of the -1, +2, and +3 nucleosomes at the 5' end of target genes were shifted significantly, whereas the position of the +1 nucleosome remained largely unchanged in the fun30Δ mutant. Finally, we demonstrated that affinity-purified, single-component Fun30 exhibited a nucleosome sliding activity in an ATP-dependent manner. These results define a role for Fun30 in the regulation of transcription and indicate that Fun30 remodels chromatin at the 5' end of genes by sliding promoter-proximal nucleosomes.

To trim or not to trim: progression and control of DSB end resection

DNA double-strand breaks (DSBs) are the most cytotoxic form of DNA damage, since they can lead to genome instability and chromosome rearrangements, which are hallmarks of cancer cells. To face this kind of lesion, eukaryotic cells developed two alternative repair pathways, homologous recombination (HR) and non-homologous end joining (NHEJ). Repair pathway choice is influenced by the cell cycle phase and depends upon the 5'-3' nucleolytic processing of the break ends, since the generation of ssDNA tails strongly stimulates HR and inhibits NHEJ. A large amount of work has elucidated the key components of the DSBs repair machinery and how this crucial process is finely regulated. The emerging view suggests that besides endo/exonucleases and helicases activities required for end resection, molecular barrier factors are specifically loaded in the proximity of the break, where they physically or functionally limit DNA degradation, preventing excessive accumulation of ssDNA, which could be threatening for cell survival.

p53 and the PWWP domain containing effector proteins in chromatin damage repair

In eukaryotic cells, DNA damage repair occurs on a template DNA that is organized with histones to form nucleosomes and chromatin structures. As such, chromatin plays an important role in DNA damage repair. In this review, we will use "chromatin damage repair" as a framework and highlight recent progress in understanding the role of chromatin, chromatin modifiers, chromatin binding effectors (e.g., the PWWP domain proteins), and the p53 tumor suppressor. We view chromatin as an active participant during DNA damage repair.