The boundaries of the distribution of somatic hypermutation of rearranged immunoglobulin variable genes

A proposed reverse transcription mechanism for (CAG)n and similar expandable repeats that cause neurological and other diseases

The mechanism of (CAG)n repeat generation, and related expandable repeat diseases in non-dividing cells, is currently understood in terms of a DNA template-based DNA repair synthesis process involving hairpin stabilized slippage, local error-prone repair via MutSβ (MSH2-MSH3) hairpin protective stabilization, then nascent strand extension by DNA polymerases-β and -δ. We advance a very similar slipped hairpin-stabilized model involving MSH2-MSH3 with two key differences: the copying template may also be the nascent pre-mRNA with the repair pathway being mediated by the Y-family error-prone enzymes DNA polymerase-η and DNA polymerase-κ acting as reverse transcriptases. We argue that both DNA-based and RNA-based mechanisms could well be activated in affected non-dividing brain cells in vivo. Here, we compare the advantages of the RNA/RT-based model proposed by us as an adjunct to previously proposed models. In brief, our model depends upon dysregulated innate and adaptive immunity cascades involving AID/APOBEC and ADAR deaminases that are known to be involved in normal locus-specific immunoglobulin somatic hypermutation, cancer progression and somatic mutations at many off-target non-immunoglobulin sites across the genome: we explain how these processes could also play an active role in repeat expansion diseases at RNA polymerase II-transcribed genes.

Mechanism of somatic hypermutation: critical analysis of strand biased mutation signatures at A:T and G:C base pairs

The DNA sequence data of the somatic hypermutation (SHM) field published since 1984 has been critically reviewed. The analysis has revealed three strand biased mutation signatures. The first concerns the mutations generated at G:C base pairs in mice genetically deficient in uracil-DNA glycosylase and MSH2-MSH6-mediated mismatch repair. Such mice display the AID deaminase footprint and here C mutations exceed G mutations at least 1.5-fold. This supports earlier and more recent studies claiming that dC-to-dU deaminations occur preferentially in the single stranded DNA regions of the displaced nontranscribed strand (NTS) during transcription. The second concerns the signature generated in immunised mice where G mutations exceed C mutations by at least 1.7-fold. This is a newly identified strand bias which has previously gone undetected. It is consistent with the polynucleotide polymerisation signature of RNA polymerase II copying the template DNA strand carrying AID-mediated lesions generated at C bases, viz. uracils and abasic sites. A reverse transcription step would then need to intervene to fix the mutation pattern in DNA. The third concerns the long recognised strand biased signature generated in normal aged or actively immunised mice whereby A mutations exceed T mutations by two- to three-fold. It is argued that this pattern is best understood as a combination of adenosine-to-inosine (A-to-I) RNA editing followed by a reverse transcription step fixing the A-to-G, as well as A-to-T and A-to-C, as strand biased mutation signatures in DNA. The reasons why the AID-linked RNA polymerase II mutation signature had previously gone undetected are discussed with regard to limitations of standard PCR-based SHM assay techniques. It is concluded that the most economical SHM mechanism involves both DNA and RNA deaminations coupled to a reverse transcription process, most likely involving DNA polymerase eta acting in its reverse transcriptase mode. Experimental approaches to differentiate this RNA-based model from the standard DNA deamination model are discussed.

Computational analyses show A-to-G mutations correlate with nascent mRNA hairpins at somatic hypermutation hotspots

Activation-induced cytidine deaminase (AID) initiates Phase I somatic hypermutation (SHM) of antibody genes by deaminating deoxy-cytosine to deoxy-uracil (C-to-U). These lesions trigger Phase II, a poorly understood process of error-prone repair targeting A-T pairs by DNA polymerase eta (Pol eta). Since Pol eta is also a reverse transcriptase, Phase II could involve copying off RNA as well as DNA templates. We explore this idea further since in an RNA-based pathway it is conceivable that adenosine-to-inosine (A-to-I) RNA editing causes A-to-G transitions since I like G pairs with C. Adenosine deaminases (ADARs) are known to preferentially edit A nucleotides that are preceded by an A or U (W) in double-stranded RNA substrates. On this assumption and using a theoretical bioinformatics approach we show that a significant and specific correlation (P<0.002) exists between the frequency of WA-to-WG mutations and the number of mRNA hairpins that could potentially form at the mutation site. This implies roles for both RNA editing and reverse transcription during SHM in vivo and suggests definitive genetic experiments targeting the appropriate ADAR1 isoform (gammaINF-ADAR1) and/or Ig pre-mRNA templates.

Hypothesis: biological role for J-C intronic matrix attachment regions in the molecular mechanism of antigen-driven somatic hypermutation

A major function of J-C intronic matrix attachment regions (MAR) during immune diversification via somatic hypermutation (SHM) at immunoglobulin loci may be to manipulate the topology of DNA within the upstream target domain. The suggestion that SHM induction requires MAR-induced torsional strain, in conjunction with DNA remodelling at the J-C intron, completes the definition of a cogent paradigm within which all extant molecular data on the issue may be interpreted. Moreover, the suggestion that a mutagenic mechanism relieves MAR-generated superhelicity could provide an indication as to the evolutionary basis of SHM.

On the molecular mechanism of somatic hypermutation of rearranged immunoglobulin genes

Somatic hypermutation (SHM) diversifies the genes that encode immunoglobulin variable regions in antigen-activated germinal centre B lymphocytes. Available evidence strongly suggests that DNA deamination potentiates phase I SHM and subsequently triggers phase II SHM. A concise review of this evidence is followed by a detailed critique of two possible models which suggest that polymerase-eta potentiates phase II SHM via either its DNA-dependent or its RNA-dependent DNA synthetic activity. Quantitative analysis, in the context of extant data that define the features of SHM, favours the RNA-dependent mechanism.

Genesis of the strand‐biased signature in somatic hypermutation of rearranged immunoglobulin variable genes

The history and current development of the reverse transcriptase model of somatic hypermutation (RT-model) is reviewed with particular reference to the genesis of strand-biased mutation signatures in rearranged immunoglobulin variable genes (V(D)J). The recent disagreement in the field as to whether strand bias really exists or not has been critically analysed and the confusion traced to the putative presence, in some mutated V(D)J sequence collections, of polymerase chain reaction (PCR)-recombinant artefacts. Recent analysis of somatic hypermutation in xeroderma pigmentosum variant patients, by the group of PJ Gearhart and others, has established that the Y-family translesion DNA repair enzyme, DNA polymerase eta (eta), is responsible for the striking A-T targeted strand-bias mutation signature seen in all mouse and human collections of somatically mutated V(D)J sequences. This evidence, together with our own recent demonstration that human DNA polymerase eta is a reverse transcriptase, leads to the conclusion that the strand-biased A-T mutation signature is caused either by: (i) error-prone DNA-dependent DNA repair synthesis by pol-eta of single-strand nicks preferentially in the non-transcribed strand; and/or (ii) by error-prone cDNA synthesis of the transcribed strand by pol-eta using the pre-mRNA as the copying template, primed by the nicked transcribed DNA strand, followed by replacement of the original transcribed strand by cDNA. Analysis of the total mutation pattern also suggests that the major transitions observed in SHM (A-->G, C-->T and G-->A) can be explained by known RNA editing mechanisms active on pre-mRNA which are then written into cDNA during synthesis of the transcribed strand by error-prone cellular reverse transcriptases such as pol-eta.