Interplay between mismatch repair and chromatin assembly

Mismatch Repair Protein Msh2 Is Necessary for Macronuclear Stability and Micronuclear Division in Tetrahymena thermophila

Mismatch repair (MMR) is a conserved mechanism that is primarily responsible for the repair of DNA mismatches during DNA replication. Msh2 forms MutS heterodimer complexes that initiate the MMR in eukaryotes. The function of Msh2 is less clear under different chromatin structures. Tetrahymena thermophila contains a transcriptionally active macronucleus (MAC) and a transcriptionally silent micronucleus (MIC) in the same cytoplasm. Msh2 is localized in the MAC and MIC during vegetative growth. Msh2 is localized in the perinuclear region around the MIC and forms a spindle-like structure as the MIC divides. During the early conjugation stage, Msh2 is localized in the MIC and disappears from the parental MAC. Msh2 is localized in the new MAC and new MIC during the late conjugation stage. Msh2 also forms a spindle-like structure with a meiotic MIC and mitotic gametic nucleus. MSH2 knockdown inhibits the division of MAC and MIC during vegetative growth and affects cellular proliferation. MSH2 knockdown mutants are sensitive to cisplatin treatment. MSH2 knockdown also affects micronuclear meiosis and gametogenesis during sexual development. Furthermore, Msh2 interacts with MMR-dependent and MMR-independent factors. Therefore, Msh2 is necessary for macronuclear stability, as well as micronuclear mitosis and meiosis in Tetrahymena.

Orc6 is a component of the replication fork and enables efficient mismatch repair

Significance Origin recognition complex (ORC) is required for the initiation of DNA replication. Unlike other ORC components, the role of human Orc6 in replication remains to be resolved. We identified an unexpected role for hOrc6, which is to promote S-phase progression after prereplication complex assembly and DNA damage response. Orc6 localizes at the replication fork, is an accessory factor of the mismatch repair complex, and plays a fundamental role in genome surveillance during S phase.

Chaperoning histones at the DNA repair dance

Unlike all other biological molecules that are degraded and replaced if damaged, DNA must be repaired as chromosomes cannot be replaced. Indeed, DNA endures a wide variety of structural damage that need to be repaired accurately to maintain genomic stability and proper functioning of cells and to prevent mutation leading to disease. Given that the genome is packaged into chromatin within eukaryotic cells, it has become increasingly evident that the chromatin context of DNA both facilitates and regulates DNA repair processes. In this review, we discuss mechanisms involved in removal of histones (chromatin disassembly) from around DNA lesions, by histone chaperones and chromatin remodelers, that promotes accessibility of the DNA repair machinery. We also elaborate on how the deposition of core histones and specific histone variants onto DNA (chromatin assembly) during DNA repair promotes repair processes, the role of histone post translational modifications in these processes and how chromatin structure is reestablished after DNA repair is complete.

DNA Mismatch Repair and its Role in Huntington's Disease

DNA mismatch repair (MMR) is a highly conserved genome stabilizing pathway that corrects DNA replication errors, limits chromosomal rearrangements, and mediates the cellular response to many types of DNA damage. Counterintuitively, MMR is also involved in the generation of mutations, as evidenced by its role in causing somatic triplet repeat expansion in Huntington’s disease (HD) and other neurodegenerative disorders. In this review, we discuss the current state of mechanistic knowledge of MMR and review the roles of key enzymes in this pathway. We also present the evidence for mutagenic function of MMR in CAG repeat expansion and consider mechanistic hypotheses that have been proposed. Understanding the role of MMR in CAG expansion may shed light on potential avenues for therapeutic intervention in HD.

Dynamic human MutSα-MutLα complexes compact mismatched DNA

DNA mismatch repair (MMR) corrects errors that occur during DNA replication. In humans, mutations in the proteins MutSα and MutLα that initiate MMR cause Lynch syndrome, the most common hereditary cancer. MutSα surveilles the DNA, and upon recognition of a replication error it undergoes adenosine triphosphate-dependent conformational changes and recruits MutLα. Subsequently, proliferating cell nuclear antigen (PCNA) activates MutLα to nick the error-containing strand to allow excision and resynthesis. The structure-function properties of these obligate MutSα-MutLα complexes remain mostly unexplored in higher eukaryotes, and models are predominately based on studies of prokaryotic proteins. Here, we utilize atomic force microscopy (AFM) coupled with other methods to reveal time- and concentration-dependent stoichiometries and conformations of assembling human MutSα-MutLα-DNA complexes. We find that they assemble into multimeric complexes comprising three to eight proteins around a mismatch on DNA. On the timescale of a few minutes, these complexes rearrange, folding and compacting the DNA. These observations contrast with dominant models of MMR initiation that envision diffusive MutS-MutL complexes that move away from the mismatch. Our results suggest MutSα localizes MutLα near the mismatch and promotes DNA configurations that could enhance MMR efficiency by facilitating MutLα nicking the DNA at multiple sites around the mismatch. In addition, such complexes may also protect the mismatch region from nucleosome reassembly until repair occurs, and they could potentially remodel adjacent nucleosomes.

The unstructured linker arms of MutL enable GATC site incision beyond roadblocks during initiation of DNA mismatch repair

DNA mismatch repair (MMR) maintains genome stability through repair of DNA replication errors. In Escherichia coli, initiation of MMR involves recognition of the mismatch by MutS, recruitment of MutL, activation of endonuclease MutH and DNA strand incision at a hemimethylated GATC site. Here, we studied the mechanism of communication that couples mismatch recognition to daughter strand incision. We investigated the effect of catalytically-deficient Cas9 as well as stalled RNA polymerase as roadblocks placed on DNA in between the mismatch and GATC site in ensemble and single molecule nanomanipulation incision assays. The MMR proteins were observed to incise GATC sites beyond a roadblock, albeit with reduced efficiency. This residual incision is completely abolished upon shortening the disordered linker regions of MutL. These results indicate that roadblock bypass can be fully attributed to the long, disordered linker regions in MutL and establish that communication during MMR initiation occurs along the DNA backbone.

DNA mismatch repair in the context of chromatin

DNA mismatch repair (MMR) maintains replication fidelity by correcting mispaired nucleotides incorporated by DNA polymerases. Defects in MMR lead to cancers characterized by microsatellite instability. Recently, chromatin mechanisms that regulate MMR have been discovered, which sheds new light on MMR deficiency and its role in tumorigenesis. This review summarizes these chromatin-level mechanisms that regulate MMR and their implications for tumor development.

Chromatin remodeling and mismatch repair: Access and excision

DNA mismatch repair (MMR) increases replication fidelity and genome stability by correcting DNA polymerase errors that remain after replication. Defects in MMR result in the accumulation of mutations and lead to human tumor development. Germline mutations in MMR cause the hereditary cancer syndrome, Lynch syndrome. After replication, DNA is reorganized into its chromatin structure and wrapped around histone octamers. DNA MMR is thought to be less efficient in recognizing and repairing mispairs packaged in chromatin, in which case MMR must either compete for access to naked DNA before histone deposition or actively move nucleosomes to access the mispair. This article reviews studies into the mechanistic and physical interactions between MMR and various chromatin-associated factors, including the histone deposition complex CAF1. Recent Xenopus and Saccharomyces cerevisiae studies describe a physical interaction between Msh2 and chromatin-remodeling ATPase Fun30/SMARCAD1, with potential mechanistic roles for SMARCAD1 in moving histones for both mispair access and excision tract elongation. The RSC complex, another histone remodeling complex, also potentially influences excision tract length. Deletion mutations of RSC2 point to mechanistic interactions with the MMR pathways. Together, these studies paint a picture of complex interactions between MMR and the chromatin environment that will require numerous additional genetic, biochemical, and cell biology experiments to fully understand. Understanding how these pathways interconnect is essential in fully understanding eukaryotic MMR and has numerous implications in human tumor formation and treatment.

Chromatin Remodeling and Epigenetic Regulation in Plant DNA Damage Repair

DNA damage response (DDR) in eukaryotic cells is initiated in the chromatin context. DNA damage and repair depend on or have influence on the chromatin dynamics associated with genome stability. Epigenetic modifiers, such as chromatin remodelers, histone modifiers, DNA (de-)methylation enzymes, and noncoding RNAs regulate DDR signaling and DNA repair by affecting chromatin dynamics. In recent years, significant progress has been made in the understanding of plant DDR and DNA repair. SUPPRESSOR OF GAMMA RESPONSE1, RETINOBLASTOMA RELATED1 (RBR1)/E2FA, and NAC103 have been proven to be key players in the mediation of DDR signaling in plants, while plant-specific chromatin remodelers, such as DECREASED DNA METHYLATION1, contribute to chromatin dynamics for DNA repair. There is accumulating evidence that plant epigenetic modifiers are involved in DDR and DNA repair. In this review, I examine how DDR and DNA repair machineries are concertedly regulated in Arabidopsis thaliana by a variety of epigenetic modifiers directing chromatin remodeling and epigenetic modification. This review will aid in updating our knowledge on DDR and DNA repair in plants.

Chromatin Modifiers Alter Recombination Between Divergent DNA Sequences

Recombination between divergent DNA sequences is actively prevented by heteroduplex rejection mechanisms. In baker's yeast, such antirecombination mechanisms can be initiated by the recognition of DNA mismatches in heteroduplex DNA by MSH proteins, followed by recruitment of the Sgs1-Top3-Rmi1 helicase-topoisomerase complex to unwind the recombination intermediate. We previously showed that the repair/rejection decision during single-strand annealing recombination is temporally regulated by MSH (MutShomolog) protein levels and by factors that excise nonhomologous single-stranded tails. These observations, coupled with recent studies indicating that mismatch repair (MMR) factors interact with components of the histone chaperone machinery, encouraged us to explore roles for epigenetic factors and chromatin conformation in regulating the decision to reject vs. repair recombination between divergent DNA substrates. This work involved the use of an inverted repeat recombination assay thought to measure sister chromatid repair during DNA replication. Our observations are consistent with the histone chaperones CAF-1 and Rtt106, and the histone deacetylase Sir2, acting to suppress heteroduplex rejection and the Rpd3, Hst3, and Hst4 deacetylases acting to promote heteroduplex rejection. These observations, and double-mutant analysis, have led to a model in which nucleosomes located at DNA lesions stabilize recombination intermediates and compete with MMR factors that mediate heteroduplex rejection.

DNA mismatch repair preferentially safeguards actively transcribed genes

DNA mismatch repair (MMR) is an evolutionally conserved genome maintenance pathway and is well known for its role in maintaining replication fidelity by correcting biosynthetic errors generated during DNA replication. However, recent studies have shown that MMR preferentially protects actively transcribed genes from mutation during both DNA replication and transcription. This review describes the recent discoveries in this area. Potential mechanisms by which MMR safeguards actively transcribed genes are also discussed.

Nucleosomes around a mismatched base pair are excluded via an Msh2-dependent reaction with the aid of SNF2 family ATPase Smarcad1

Here, Terui et al. studied the mechanisms underlying chromatin remodeling that occurs during MMR. They show that the eukaryotic MMR system has an ability to exclude local nucleosomes and identify Smarcad1/Fun30 as an accessory factor for the MMR reaction.

Post-replicative correction of replication errors by the mismatch repair (MMR) system is critical for suppression of mutations. Although the MMR system may need to handle nucleosomes at the site of chromatin replication, how MMR occurs in the chromatin environment remains unclear. Here, we show that nucleosomes are excluded from a >1-kb region surrounding a mismatched base pair in Xenopus egg extracts. The exclusion was dependent on the Msh2–Msh6 mismatch recognition complex but not the Mlh1-containing MutL homologs and counteracts both the HIRA- and CAF-1 (chromatin assembly factor 1)-mediated chromatin assembly pathways. We further found that the Smarcad1 chromatin remodeling ATPase is recruited to mismatch-carrying DNA in an Msh2-dependent but Mlh1-independent manner to assist nucleosome exclusion and that Smarcad1 facilitates the repair of mismatches when nucleosomes are preassembled on DNA. In budding yeast, deletion of FUN30, the homolog of Smarcad1, showed a synergistic increase of spontaneous mutations in combination with MSH6 or MSH3 deletion but no significant increase with MSH2 deletion. Genetic analyses also suggested that the function of Fun30 in MMR is to counteract CAF-1. Our study uncovers that the eukaryotic MMR system has an ability to exclude local nucleosomes and identifies Smarcad1/Fun30 as an accessory factor for the MMR reaction.

Crystal structures of PCNA mutant proteins defective in gene silencing suggest a novel interaction site on the front face of the PCNA ring

Proliferating cell nuclear antigen (PCNA), a homotrimeric protein, is the eukaryotic sliding clamp that functions as a processivity factor for polymerases during DNA replication. Chromatin association factor 1 (CAF-1) is a heterotrimeric histone chaperone protein that is required for coupling chromatin assembly with DNA replication in eukaryotes. CAF-1 association with replicating DNA, and the targeting of newly synthesized histones to sites of DNA replication and repair requires its interaction with PCNA. Genetic studies have identified three mutant forms of PCNA in yeast that cause defects in gene silencing and exhibit altered association of CAF-1 to chromatin in vivo, as well as inhibit binding to CAF-1 in vitro. Three of these mutant forms of PCNA, encoded by the pol30-6, pol30-8, and the pol30-79 alleles, direct the synthesis of PCNA proteins with the amino acid substitutions D41A/D42A, R61A/D63A, and L126A/I128A, respectively. Interestingly, these double alanine substitutions are located far away from each other within the PCNA protein. To understand the structural basis of the interaction between PCNA and CAF-1 and how disruption of this interaction leads to reduced gene silencing, we determined the X-ray crystal structures of each of these mutant PCNA proteins. All three of the substitutions caused disruptions of a surface cavity on the front face of the PCNA ring, which is formed in part by three loops comprised of residues 21–24, 41–44, and 118–134. We suggest that this cavity is a novel binding pocket required for the interaction between PCNA and CAF-1, and that this region in PCNA also represents a potential binding site for other PCNA-binding proteins.

Epigenomic Modifications Mediating Antibody Maturation

Epigenetic modifications, such as histone modifications, DNA methylation status, and non-coding RNAs (ncRNA), all contribute to antibody maturation during somatic hypermutation (SHM) and class-switch recombination (CSR). Histone modifications alter the chromatin landscape and, together with DNA primary and tertiary structures, they help recruit Activation-Induced Cytidine Deaminase (AID) to the immunoglobulin (Ig) locus. AID is a potent DNA mutator, which catalyzes cytosine-to-uracil deamination on single-stranded DNA to create U:G mismatches. It has been shown that alternate chromatin modifications, in concert with ncRNAs and potentially DNA methylation, regulate AID recruitment and stabilize DNA repair factors. We, hereby, assess the combination of these distinct modifications and discuss how they contribute to initiating differential DNA repair pathways at the Ig locus, which ultimately leads to enhanced antibody–antigen binding affinity (SHM) or antibody isotype switching (CSR). We will also highlight how misregulation of epigenomic regulation during DNA repair can compromise antibody development and lead to a number of immunological syndromes and cancer.

Regulation of Chromatin Assembly and Cell Transformation by Formaldehyde Exposure in Human Cells

BACKGROUND

Formaldehyde (FA) is an environmental and occupational chemical carcinogen. Recent studies have shown that exogenous FA causes only a modest increase in DNA adduct formation compared with the amount of adducts formed by endogenous FA, raising the possibility that epigenetic mechanisms may contribute to FA-mediated carcinogenicity.

OBJECTIVES

We investigated the effects of FA exposure on histone modifications and chromatin assembly. We also examined the role of defective chromatin assembly in FA-mediated transcription and cell transformation.

METHODS

Cellular fractionation and Western blot analysis were used to measure the levels of histone modifications in human bronchial epithelial BEAS-2B cells and human nasal RPMI2650 cells in the presence of FA. Chromatin immunoprecipitation (ChIP) and micrococcal nuclease (MNase) digest assays were performed to examine the changes in chromatin assembly and accessibility after FA exposure. RNA sequencing (RNA-seq) and real-time polymerase chain reaction (PCR) were used to examine transcriptional dysregulation. Finally, anchorage-independent cell growth ability was tested by soft agar assay following FA exposure.

RESULTS

Exposure to FA dramatically decreased the acetylation of the N-terminal tails of cytosolic histones. These modifications are important for histone nuclear import and subsequent chromatin assembly. Histone proteins were depleted in both the chromatin fraction and at most of the genomic loci tested following FA exposure, suggesting that FA compromises chromatin assembly. Moreover, FA increased chromatin accessibility and altered the expression of hundreds of cancer-related genes. Knockdown of the histone H3.3 gene (an H3 variant), which mimics inhibition of chromatin assembly, facilitated FA-mediated anchorage-independent cell growth.

CONCLUSIONS

We propose that the inhibition of chromatin assembly represents a novel mechanism of cell transformation induced by the environmental and occupational chemical carcinogen FA. https://doi.org/10.1289/EHP1275.

DNA mismatch repair and its many roles in eukaryotic cells

DNA mismatch repair (MMR) is an important DNA repair pathway that plays critical roles in DNA replication fidelity, mutation avoidance and genome stability, all of which contribute significantly to the viability of cells and organisms. MMR is widely-used as a diagnostic biomarker for human cancers in the clinic, and as a biomarker of cancer susceptibility in animal model systems. Prokaryotic MMR is well-characterized at the molecular and mechanistic level; however, MMR is considerably more complex in eukaryotic cells than in prokaryotic cells, and in recent years, it has become evident that MMR plays novel roles in eukaryotic cells, several of which are not yet well-defined or understood. Many MMR-deficient human cancer cells lack mutations in known human MMR genes, which strongly suggests that essential eukaryotic MMR components/cofactors remain unidentified and uncharacterized. Furthermore, the mechanism by which the eukaryotic MMR machinery discriminates between the parental (template) and the daughter (nascent) DNA strand is incompletely understood and how cells choose between the EXO1-dependent and the EXO1-independent subpathways of MMR is not known. This review summarizes recent literature on eukaryotic MMR, with emphasis on the diverse cellular roles of eukaryotic MMR proteins, the mechanism of strand discrimination and cross-talk/interactions between and co-regulation of MMR and other DNA repair pathways in eukaryotic cells. The main conclusion of the review is that MMR proteins contribute to genome stability through their ability to recognize and promote an appropriate cellular response to aberrant DNA structures, especially when they arise during DNA replication. Although the molecular mechanism of MMR in the eukaryotic cell is still not completely understood, increased used of single-molecule analyses in the future may yield new insight into these unsolved questions.

Epigenetic Enhancement of the Post-replicative DNA Mismatch Repair of Mammalian Genomes by a Hemi-mCpG-Np95-Dnmt1 Axis

DNA methylation at C of CpG dyads (^mCpG) in vertebrate genomes is essential for gene regulation, genome stability and development. We show in this study that proper functioning of post-replicative DNA mismatch repair (MMR) in mammalian cells relies on the presence of genomic ^mCpG, as well as on the maintenance DNA methyltransferase Dnmt1 independently of its catalytic activity. More importantly, high efficiency of mammalian MMR surveillance is achieved through a hemi-^mCpG-Np95(Uhrf1)-Dnmt1 axis, in which the MMR surveillance complex(es) is recruited to post-replicative DNA by Dnmt1, requiring its interactions with MutSα, as well as with Np95 bound at the hemi-methylated CpG sites. Thus, efficiency of MMR surveillance over the mammalian genome in vivo is enhanced at the epigenetic level. This synergy endows vertebrate CpG methylation with a new biological significance and, consequently, an additional mechanism for the maintenance of vertebrate genome stability.

The Major Replicative Histone Chaperone CAF-1 Suppresses the Activity of the DNA Mismatch Repair System in the Cytotoxic Response to a DNA-methylating Agent

The DNA mismatch repair (MMR) system corrects DNA mismatches in the genome. It is also required for the cytotoxic response of O⁶-methylguanine-DNA methyltransferase (MGMT)-deficient mammalian cells and yeast mgt1Δ rad52Δ cells to treatment with S_n1-type methylating agents, which produce cytotoxic O⁶-methylguanine (O⁶-mG) DNA lesions. Specifically, an activity of the MMR system causes degradation of irreparable O⁶-mG-T mispair-containing DNA, triggering cell death; this process forms the basis of treatments of MGMT-deficient cancers with S_n1-type methylating drugs. Recent research supports the view that degradation of irreparable O⁶-mG-T mispair-containing DNA by the MMR system and CAF-1-dependent packaging of the newly replicated DNA into nucleosomes are two concomitant processes that interact with each other. Here, we studied whether CAF-1 modulates the activity of the MMR system in the cytotoxic response to S_n1-type methylating agents. We found that CAF-1 suppresses the activity of the MMR system in the cytotoxic response of yeast mgt1Δ rad52Δ cells to the prototypic S_n1-type methylating agent N-methyl-N'-nitro-N-nitrosoguanidine. We also report evidence that in human MGMT-deficient cell-free extracts, CAF-1-dependent packaging of irreparable O⁶-mG-T mispair-containing DNA into nucleosomes suppresses its degradation by the MMR system. Taken together, these findings suggest that CAF-1-dependent incorporation of irreparable O⁶-mG-T mispair-containing DNA into nucleosomes suppresses its degradation by the MMR system, thereby defending the cell against killing by the S_n1-type methylating agent.

Regulation of oxidized base damage repair by chromatin assembly factor 1 subunit A

Reactive oxygen species (ROS), generated both endogenously and in response to exogenous stress, induce point mutations by mis-replication of oxidized bases and other lesions in the genome. Repair of these lesions via base excision repair (BER) pathway maintains genomic fidelity. Regulation of the BER pathway for mutagenic oxidized bases, initiated by NEIL1 and other DNA glycosylases at the chromatin level remains unexplored. Whether single nucleotide (SN)-BER of a damaged base requires histone deposition or nucleosome remodeling is unknown, unlike nucleosome reassembly which is shown to be required for other DNA repair processes. Here we show that chromatin assembly factor (CAF)-1 subunit A (CHAF1A), the p150 subunit of the histone H3/H4 chaperone, and its partner anti-silencing function protein 1A (ASF1A), which we identified in human NEIL1 immunoprecipitation complex, transiently dissociate from chromatin bound NEIL1 complex in G1 cells after induction of oxidative base damage. CHAF1A inhibits NEIL1 initiated repair in vitro. Subsequent restoration of the chaperone-BER complex in cell, presumably after completion of repair, suggests that histone chaperones sequester the repair complex for oxidized bases in non-replicating chromatin, and allow repair when oxidized bases are induced in the genome.

Understanding how mismatch repair proteins participate in the repair/anti-recombination decision

Mismatch repair (MMR) systems correct DNA mismatches that result from DNA polymerase misincorporation errors. Mismatches also appear in heteroduplex DNA intermediates formed during recombination between nearly identical sequences, and can be corrected by MMR or removed through an unwinding mechanism, known as anti-recombination or heteroduplex rejection. We review studies, primarily in baker's yeast, which support how specific factors can regulate the MMR/anti-recombination decision. Based on recent advances, we present models for how DNA structure, relative amounts of key repair proteins, the timely localization of repair proteins to DNA substrates and epigenetic marks can modulate this critical decision.

MutSα maintains the mismatch repair capability by inhibiting PCNA unloading

Eukaryotic mismatch repair (MMR) utilizes single-strand breaks as signals to target the strand to be repaired. DNA-bound PCNA is also presumed to direct MMR. The MMR capability must be limited to a post-replicative temporal window during which the signals are available. However, both identity of the signal(s) involved in the retention of this temporal window and the mechanism that maintains the MMR capability after DNA synthesis remain unclear. Using Xenopus egg extracts, we discovered a mechanism that ensures long-term retention of the MMR capability. We show that DNA-bound PCNA induces strand-specific MMR in the absence of strand discontinuities. Strikingly, MutSα inhibited PCNA unloading through its PCNA-interacting motif, thereby extending significantly the temporal window permissive to strand-specific MMR. Our data identify DNA-bound PCNA as the signal that enables strand discrimination after the disappearance of strand discontinuities, and uncover a novel role of MutSα in the retention of the post-replicative MMR capability.

DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.7554/eLife.15155.001

To pass on genetic information from one generation to the next, the DNA in a cell must be precisely copied. DNA is made of two strands and genetic information is encoded by sequences of molecules called bases in the strands. The bases from one strand form pairs with complementary bases on the other strand. However, errors in the copying process result in unmatched pairs of bases. Such errors are corrected by a repair system called mismatch repair.

When DNA is copied, the two strands are separated and used as templates to make new complementary strands. This means that errors only arise on the new strands. Mismatch repair must therefore target the new strands to maintain the original information encoded by the template DNA. The repair needs to happen before the copying process is complete because the template strands and the new strands become indistinguishable afterwards. However, it is not clear how the two processes communicate with each other.

Previous studies have identified a ring-shaped molecule called the replication clamp – which is essential for the copying process – as a prime candidate for the molecule responsible for this communication. This molecule binds to the DNA to promote the copying process, and afterwards it is removed from the DNA by other molecules. Furthermore, a group of proteins called the MutSα complex, which recognizes unmatched bases in DNA molecules, physically interacts with the replication clamp.

Kawasoe et al. used eggs from African clawed frogs to study how the replication clamp connects the copying process and mismatch repair in more detail. The experiments show that when the replication clamp is bound to the DNA, it is able to direct mismatch repair to a specific DNA strand. When MutSα recognizes unmatched bases, it prevents the replication clamp from being removed from the DNA. By doing so, MutSα prevents the information about the new DNA strand from being lost until mismatch repair has taken place.

These findings reveal new interactions between DNA copying and the correction of errors by mismatch repair. The next steps will be to understand how MutSα is able to keep the replication clamp on the DNA and to clarify its role in protecting DNA from gaining mutations.

DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.7554/eLife.15155.002

Epigenome Maintenance in Response to DNA Damage

Organism viability relies on the stable maintenance of specific chromatin landscapes, established during development, that shape cell functions and identities by driving distinct gene expression programs. Yet epigenome maintenance is challenged during transcription, replication, and repair of DNA damage, all of which elicit dynamic changes in chromatin organization. Here, we review recent advances that have shed light on the specialized mechanisms contributing to the restoration of epigenome structure and function after DNA damage in the mammalian cell nucleus. By drawing a parallel with epigenome maintenance during replication, we explore emerging concepts and highlight open issues in this rapidly growing field. In particular, we present our current knowledge of molecular players that support the coordinated maintenance of genome and epigenome integrity in response to DNA damage, and we highlight how nuclear organization impacts genome stability. Finally, we discuss possible functional implications of epigenome plasticity in response to genotoxic stress.

The topography of mutational processes in breast cancer genomes

Somatic mutations in human cancers show unevenness in genomic distribution that correlate with aspects of genome structure and function. These mutations are, however, generated by multiple mutational processes operating through the cellular lineage between the fertilized egg and the cancer cell, each composed of specific DNA damage and repair components and leaving its own characteristic mutational signature on the genome. Using somatic mutation catalogues from 560 breast cancer whole-genome sequences, here we show that each of 12 base substitution, 2 insertion/deletion (indel) and 6 rearrangement mutational signatures present in breast tissue, exhibit distinct relationships with genomic features relating to transcription, DNA replication and chromatin organization. This signature-based approach permits visualization of the genomic distribution of mutational processes associated with APOBEC enzymes, mismatch repair deficiency and homologous recombinational repair deficiency, as well as mutational processes of unknown aetiology. Furthermore, it highlights mechanistic insights including a putative replication-dependent mechanism of APOBEC-related mutagenesis.

DNA Mismatch Repair Interacts with CAF-1- and ASF1A-H3-H4-dependent Histone (H3-H4)2 Tetramer Deposition

DNA mismatch repair (MMR) is required for the maintenance of genome stability and protection of humans from several types of cancer. Human MMR occurs in the chromatin environment, but little is known about the interactions between MMR and the chromatin environment. Previous research has suggested that MMR coincides with replication-coupled assembly of the newly synthesized DNA into nucleosomes. The first step in replication-coupled nucleosome assembly is CAF-1-dependent histone (H3-H4)2 tetramer deposition, a process that involves ASF1A-H3-H4 complex. In this work we used reconstituted human systems to investigate interactions between MMR and CAF-1- and ASF1A-H3-H4-dependent histone (H3-H4)2 tetramer deposition. We have found that MutSα inhibits CAF-1- and ASF1A-H3-H4-dependent packaging of a DNA mismatch into a tetrasome. This finding supports the idea that MMR occurs before the DNA mismatch is packaged into the tetrasome. Our experiments have also revealed that CAF-1- and ASF1A-H3-H4-dependent deposition of the histone (H3-H4)2 tetramers does not interfere with MMR reactions. In addition, we have established that unnecessary degradation of the discontinuous strand that takes place in both DNA polymerase δ (Pol δ)- and DNA polymerase ϵ (Pol ϵ)-dependent MMR reactions is suppressed by CAF-1- and ASF1A-H3-H4-dependent deposition of the histone (H3-H4)2 tetramers. These data suggest that CAF-1- and ASF1A-H3-H4-dependent deposition of the histone (H3-H4)2 tetramers is compatible with MMR and protects the discontinuous daughter strand from unnecessary degradation by MMR machinery.

Dynamic DNA binding licenses a repair factor to bypass roadblocks in search of DNA lesions

DNA-binding proteins search for specific targets via facilitated diffusion along a crowded genome. However, little is known about how crowded DNA modulates facilitated diffusion and target recognition. Here we use DNA curtains and single-molecule fluorescence imaging to investigate how Msh2-Msh3, a eukaryotic mismatch repair complex, navigates on crowded DNA. Msh2-Msh3 hops over nucleosomes and other protein roadblocks, but maintains sufficient contact with DNA to recognize a single lesion. In contrast, Msh2-Msh6 slides without hopping and is largely blocked by protein roadblocks. Remarkably, the Msh3-specific mispair-binding domain (MBD) licences a chimeric Msh2-Msh6(3MBD) to bypass nucleosomes. Our studies contrast how Msh2-Msh3 and Msh2-Msh6 navigate on a crowded genome and suggest how Msh2-Msh3 locates DNA lesions outside of replication-coupled repair. These results also provide insights into how DNA repair factors search for DNA lesions in the context of chromatin.

Endonuclease activities of MutLα and its homologs in DNA mismatch repair

MutLα is a key component of the DNA mismatch repair system in eukaryotes. The DNA mismatch repair system has several genetic stabilization functions. Of these functions, DNA mismatch repair is the major one. The loss of MutLα abolishes DNA mismatch repair, thereby predisposing humans to cancer. MutLα has an endonuclease activity that is required for DNA mismatch repair. The endonuclease activity of MutLα depends on the DQHA(X)2E(X)4E motif which is a part of the active site of the nuclease. This motif is also present in many bacterial MutL and eukaryotic MutLγ proteins, DNA mismatch repair system factors that are homologous to MutLα. Recent studies have shown that yeast MutLγ and several MutL proteins containing the DQHA(X)2E(X)4E motif possess endonuclease activities. Here, we review the endonuclease activities of MutLα and its homologs in the context of DNA mismatch repair.

DNA mismatch repair and the DNA damage response

This review discusses the role of DNA mismatch repair (MMR) in the DNA damage response (DDR) that triggers cell cycle arrest and, in some cases, apoptosis. Although the focus is on findings from mammalian cells, much has been learned from studies in other organisms including bacteria and yeast [1,2]. MMR promotes a DDR mediated by a key signaling kinase, ATM and Rad3-related (ATR), in response to various types of DNA damage including some encountered in widely used chemotherapy regimes. An introduction to the DDR mediated by ATR reveals its immense complexity and highlights the many biological and mechanistic questions that remain. Recent findings and future directions are highlighted.

Protein-protein interactions in DNA mismatch repair

The principal DNA mismatch repair proteins MutS and MutL are versatile enzymes that couple DNA mismatch or damage recognition to other cellular processes. Besides interaction with their DNA substrates this involves transient interactions with other proteins which is triggered by the DNA mismatch or damage and controlled by conformational changes. Both MutS and MutL proteins have ATPase activity, which adds another level to control their activity and interactions with DNA substrates and other proteins. Here we focus on the protein-protein interactions, protein interaction sites and the different levels of structural knowledge about the protein complexes formed with MutS and MutL during the mismatch repair reaction.

Regulation of mismatch repair by histone code and posttranslational modifications in eukaryotic cells

DNA mismatch repair (MMR) protects genome integrity by correcting DNA replication-associated mispairs, modulating DNA damage-induced cell cycle checkpoints and regulating homeologous recombination. Loss of MMR function leads to cancer development. This review describes progress in understanding how MMR is carried out in the context of chromatin and how chromatin organization/compaction, epigenetic mechanisms and posttranslational modifications of MMR proteins influence and regulate MMR in eukaryotic cells.

Approaches to diagnose DNA mismatch repair gene defects in cancer

The DNA repair pathway mismatch repair (MMR) is responsible for the recognition and correction of DNA biosynthetic errors caused by inaccurate nucleotide incorporation during replication. Faulty MMR leads to failure to address the mispairs or insertion deletion loops (IDLs) left behind by the replicative polymerases and results in increased mutation load at the genome. The realization that defective MMR leads to a hypermutation phenotype and increased risk of tumorigenesis highlights the relevance of this pathway for human disease. The association of MMR defects with increased risk of cancer development was first observed in colorectal cancer patients that carried inactivating germline mutations in MMR genes and the disease was named as hereditary non-polyposis colorectal cancer (HNPCC). Currently, a growing list of cancers is found to be MMR defective and HNPCC has been renamed Lynch syndrome (LS) partly to include the associated risk of developing extra-colonic cancers. In addition, a number of non-hereditary, mostly epigenetic, alterations of MMR genes have been described in sporadic tumors. Besides conferring a strong cancer predisposition, genetic or epigenetic inactivation of MMR genes also renders cells resistant to some chemotherapeutic agents. Therefore, diagnosis of MMR deficiency has important implications for the management of the patients, the surveillance of their relatives in the case of LS and for the choice of treatment. Some of the alterations found in MMR genes have already been well defined and their pathogenicity assessed. Despite this substantial wealth of knowledge, the effects of a large number of alterations remain uncharacterized (variants of uncertain significance, VUSs). The advent of personalized genomics is likely to increase the list of VUSs found in MMR genes and anticipates the need of diagnostic tools for rapid assessment of their pathogenicity. This review describes current tools and future strategies for addressing the relevance of MMR gene alterations in human disease.

Evidence that the DNA mismatch repair system removes 1-nucleotide Okazaki fragment flaps

The DNA mismatch repair (MMR) system plays a major role in promoting genome stability and suppressing carcinogenesis. In this work, we investigated whether the MMR system is involved in Okazaki fragment maturation. We found that in the yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae, the MMR system and the flap endonuclease Rad27 act in overlapping pathways that protect the nuclear genome from 1-bp insertions. In addition, we determined that purified yeast and human MutSα proteins recognize 1-nucleotide DNA and RNA flaps. In reconstituted human systems, MutSα, proliferating cell nuclear antigen, and replication factor C activate MutLα endonuclease to remove the flaps. ATPase and endonuclease mutants of MutLα are defective in the flap removal. These results suggest that the MMR system contributes to the removal of 1-nucleotide Okazaki fragment flaps.

Cell cycle regulation of human DNA repair and chromatin remodeling genes

Maintenance of a genome requires DNA repair integrated with chromatin remodeling. We have analyzed six transcriptome data sets and one data set on translational regulation of known DNA repair and remodeling genes in synchronized human cells. These data are available through our new database: www.dnarepairgenes.com. Genes that have similar transcription profiles in at least two of our data sets generally agree well with known protein profiles. In brief, long patch base excision repair (BER) is enriched for S phase genes, whereas short patch BER uses genes essentially equally expressed in all cell cycle phases. Furthermore, most genes related to DNA mismatch repair, Fanconi anemia and homologous recombination have their highest expression in the S phase. In contrast, genes specific for direct repair, nucleotide excision repair, as well as non-homologous end joining do not show cell cycle-related expression. Cell cycle regulated chromatin remodeling genes were most frequently confined to G1/S and S. These include e.g. genes for chromatin assembly factor 1 (CAF-1) major subunits CHAF1A and CHAF1B; the putative helicases HELLS and ATAD2 that both co-activate E2F transcription factors central in G1/S-transition and recruit DNA repair and chromatin-modifying proteins and DNA double strand break repair proteins; and RAD54L and RAD54B involved in double strand break repair. TOP2A was consistently most highly expressed in G2, but also expressed in late S phase, supporting a role in regulating entry into mitosis. Translational regulation complements transcriptional regulation and appears to be a relatively common cell cycle regulatory mechanism for DNA repair genes. Our results identify cell cycle phases in which different pathways have highest activity, and demonstrate that periodically expressed genes in a pathway are frequently co-expressed. Furthermore, the data suggest that S phase expression and over-expression of some multifunctional chromatin remodeling proteins may set up feedback loops driving cancer cell proliferation.

DNA triplet repeat expansion and mismatch repair

DNA mismatch repair is a conserved antimutagenic pathway that maintains genomic stability through rectification of DNA replication errors and attenuation of chromosomal rearrangements. Paradoxically, mutagenic action of mismatch repair has been implicated as a cause of triplet repeat expansions that cause neurological diseases such as Huntington disease and myotonic dystrophy. This mutagenic process requires the mismatch recognition factor MutSβ and the MutLα (and/or possibly MutLγ) endonuclease, and is thought to be triggered by the transient formation of unusual DNA structures within the expanded triplet repeat element. This review summarizes the current knowledge of DNA mismatch repair involvement in triplet repeat expansion, which encompasses in vitro biochemical findings, cellular studies, and various in vivo transgenic animal model experiments. We present current mechanistic hypotheses regarding mismatch repair protein function in mediating triplet repeat expansions and discuss potential therapeutic approaches targeting the mismatch repair pathway.

Deposition of histone H2A.Z by the SWR-C remodeling enzyme prevents genome instability

The yeast SWR-C chromatin remodeling enzyme catalyzes chromatin incorporation of the histone variant H2A.Z which plays roles in transcription, DNA repair, and chromosome segregation. Dynamic incorporation of H2A.Z by SWR-C also enhances the ability of exonuclease I (Exo1) to process DNA ends during repair of double strand breaks. Given that Exo1 also participates in DNA replication and mismatch repair, here we test whether SWR-C influences DNA replication fidelity. We find that inactivation of SWR-C elevates the spontaneous mutation rate of a strain encoding a L612M variant of DNA polymerase (Pol) δ, with a single base mutation signature characteristic of lagging strand replication errors. However, this genomic instability does not solely result from reduced Exo1 function, because single base mutator effects are seen in both Exo1-proficient and Exo1-deficient pol3-L612M swr1Δ strains. The data are consistent with the possibility that incorporation of the H2A.Z variant by SWR-C may stimulate Exo1 activity, as well as enhance the fidelity of replication by Pol δ, the repair of mismatches generated by Pol δ, or both.

Histone supply regulates S phase timing and cell cycle progression

Eukaryotes package DNA into nucleosomes that contain a core of histone proteins. During DNA replication, nucleosomes are disrupted and re-assembled with newly synthesized histones and DNA. Despite much progress, it is still unclear why higher eukaryotes contain multiple core histone genes, how chromatin assembly is controlled, and how these processes are coordinated with cell cycle progression. We used a histone null mutation of Drosophila melanogaster to show that histone supply levels, provided by a defined number of transgenic histone genes, regulate the length of S phase during the cell cycle. Lack of de novo histone supply not only extends S phase, but also causes a cell cycle arrest during G2 phase, and thus prevents cells from entering mitosis. Our results suggest a novel cell cycle surveillance mechanism that monitors nucleosome assembly without involving the DNA repair pathways and exerts its effect via suppression of CDC25 phosphatase String expression.

DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.7554/eLife.02443.001

As a cell prepares to divide, it goes through four distinct stages. First, it grows in size (G1 phase); next it copies its entire DNA content (S phase); then it grows some more (G2 phase); and, last, it splits into two new cells (M phase).

During S phase, groups of histone proteins that normally stick together to tightly package the DNA are pulled apart in order to make the DNA accessible for copying. After the DNA has been duplicated, both copies of the DNA strand need to be repackaged. Therefore, after copying the DNA the cell rapidly reassembles the DNA–histone complexes (called nucleosomes), using a combination of old and newly synthesized histones to do so. A cell can adjust how quickly it copies DNA according to the availability of these histone proteins, which is important because copying DNA without the resources to package it could expose the DNA to damage.

Here, Günesdogan et al. investigate how a cell controls these processes using a mutant of the fruit fly Drosophila melanogaster that completely lacks the genes required to make histones. Cells that lack histones copy their DNA very slowly but adding copies of histone genes back into these flies speeds up the rate at which DNA is copied.

Günesdogan et al. ask whether the slower speed of DNA replication in cells without new histones is connected to preventing DNA damage. However, these cells can still copy all their DNA, despite being unable to package it, so the higher risk of making mistakes is not enough to stop S phase. In fact, indications suggest that DNA damage detection methods continue to work as normal in cells without histones: these cells can get all the way to the end of G2 phase without any problems.

To go one step further and start splitting in two, a cell needs to switch on another gene, called string in the fruit fly and CDC25 in vertebrates, which makes an enzyme required for the cell division process. Normal cells switch on string during G2 phase, but cells that lack histones do not—and therefore do not enter M phase. Günesdogan et al. show that turning on string by a genetic trick is sufficient to overcome this cell cycle arrest and drive the cells into M phase. String could therefore form part of a surveillance mechanism that blocks cell division if DNA–histone complexes are not assembled correctly.

DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.7554/eLife.02443.002

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.

The dual nature of mismatch repair as antimutator and mutator: for better or for worse

DNA is constantly under attack by a number of both exogenous and endogenous agents that challenge its integrity. Among the mechanisms that have evolved to counteract this deleterious action, mismatch repair (MMR) has specialized in removing DNA biosynthetic errors that occur when replicating the genome. Malfunction or inactivation of this system results in an increase in spontaneous mutability and a strong predisposition to tumor development. Besides this key corrective role, MMR proteins are involved in other pathways of DNA metabolism such as mitotic and meiotic recombination and processing of oxidative damage. Surprisingly, MMR is also required for certain mutagenic processes. The mutagenic MMR has beneficial consequences contributing to the generation of a vast repertoire of antibodies through class switch recombination and somatic hypermutation processes. However, this non-canonical mutagenic MMR also has detrimental effects; it promotes repeat expansions associated with neuromuscular and neurodegenerative diseases and may contribute to cancer/disease-related aberrant mutations and translocations. The reaction responsible for replication error correction has been the most thoroughly studied and it is the subject to numerous reviews. This review describes briefly the biochemistry of MMR and focuses primarily on the non-canonical MMR activities described in mammals as well as emerging research implicating interplay of MMR and chromatin.

Nucleosomes shape DNA polymorphism and divergence

An estimated 80% of genomic DNA in eukaryotes is packaged as nucleosomes, which, together with the remaining interstitial linker regions, generate higher order chromatin structures [1]. Nucleosome sequences isolated from diverse organisms exhibit ∼10 bp periodic variations in AA, TT and GC dinucleotide frequencies. These sequence elements generate intrinsically curved DNA and help establish the histone-DNA interface. We investigated an important unanswered question concerning the interplay between chromatin organization and genome evolution: do the DNA sequence preferences inherent to the highly conserved histone core exert detectable natural selection on genomic divergence and polymorphism? To address this hypothesis, we isolated nucleosomal DNA sequences from Drosophila melanogaster embryos and examined the underlying genomic variation within and between species. We found that divergence along the D. melanogaster lineage is periodic across nucleosome regions with base changes following preferred nucleotides, providing new evidence for systematic evolutionary forces in the generation and maintenance of nucleosome-associated dinucleotide periodicities. Further, Single Nucleotide Polymorphism (SNP) frequency spectra show striking periodicities across nucleosomal regions, paralleling divergence patterns. Preferred alleles occur at higher frequencies in natural populations, consistent with a central role for natural selection. These patterns are stronger for nucleosomes in introns than in intergenic regions, suggesting selection is stronger in transcribed regions where nucleosomes undergo more displacement, remodeling and functional modification. In addition, we observe a large-scale (∼180 bp) periodic enrichment of AA/TT dinucleotides associated with nucleosome occupancy, while GC dinucleotide frequency peaks in linker regions. Divergence and polymorphism data also support a role for natural selection in the generation and maintenance of these super-nucleosomal patterns. Our results demonstrate that nucleosome-associated sequence periodicities are under selective pressure, implying that structural interactions between nucleosomes and DNA sequence shape sequence evolution, particularly in introns.

In eukaryotic cells, the majority of DNA is packaged in nucleosomes comprised of ∼147 bp of DNA wound tightly around the highly conserved histone octamer. Nucleosomal DNA from diverse organisms shows an anti-correlated ∼10 bp periodicity of AT-rich and GC-rich dinucleotides. These sequence features influence DNA bending and shape, facilitating structural interactions. We asked whether natural selection mediated through the periodic sequence preferences of nucleosomes shapes the evolution of non-protein-coding regions of D. melanogaster by examining the inter- and intra-species genomic variation relative to these fundamental chromatin building blocks. The sequence changes across nucleosome-bound regions on the melanogaster lineage mirror the observed nucleosome dinucleotide periodicities. Importantly, we show that the frequencies of polymorphisms in natural populations vary across these regions, paralleling divergence, with higher frequencies of preferred alleles. These patterns are most evident for intronic regions and indicate that non-protein coding regions are evolving toward sequences that facilitate the canonical association with the histone core. This result is consistent with the hypothesis that interactions between DNA and the core have systematic impacts on function that are subject to natural selection and are not solely due to mutational bias. These ubiquitous interactions with the histone core partially account for the evolutionary constraint observed in unannotated genomic regions, and may drive broad changes in base composition.

New insights and challenges in mismatch repair: getting over the chromatin hurdle

DNA mismatch repair (MMR) maintains genome stability primarily by repairing DNA replication-associated mispairs. Because loss of MMR function increases the mutation frequency genome-wide, defects in this pathway predispose affected individuals to cancer. The genes encoding essential eukaryotic MMR activities have been identified, as the recombinant proteins repair 'naked' heteroduplex DNA in vitro. However, the reconstituted system is inactive on nucleosome-containing heteroduplex DNA, and it is not understood how MMR occurs in vivo. Recent studies suggest that chromatin organization, nucleosome assembly/disassembly factors and histone modifications regulate MMR in eukaryotic cells, but the complexity and importance of the interaction between MMR and chromatin remodeling has only recently begun to be appreciated. This article reviews recent progress in understanding the mechanism of eukaryotic MMR in the context of chromatin structure and dynamics, considers the implications of these recent findings and discusses unresolved questions and challenges in understanding eukaryotic MMR.

Single molecule studies of DNA mismatch repair

DNA mismatch repair, which involves is a widely conserved set of proteins, is essential to limit genetic drift in all organisms. The same system of proteins plays key roles in many cancer related cellular transactions in humans. Although the basic process has been reconstituted in vitro using purified components, many fundamental aspects of DNA mismatch repair remain hidden due in part to the complexity and transient nature of the interactions between the mismatch repair proteins and DNA substrates. Single molecule methods offer the capability to uncover these transient but complex interactions and allow novel insights into mechanisms that underlie DNA mismatch repair. In this review, we discuss applications of single molecule methodology including electron microscopy, atomic force microscopy, particle tracking, FRET, and optical trapping to studies of DNA mismatch repair. These studies have led to formulation of mechanistic models of how proteins identify single base mismatches in the vast background of matched DNA and signal for their repair.

New histone supply regulates replication fork speed and PCNA unloading

Coupling of replication fork speed and PCNA unloading to nucleosome assembly may maintain chromatin integrity during transient histone shortage.

Correct duplication of DNA sequence and its organization into chromatin is central to genome function and stability. However, it remains unclear how cells coordinate DNA synthesis with provision of new histones for chromatin assembly to ensure chromosomal stability. In this paper, we show that replication fork speed is dependent on new histone supply and efficient nucleosome assembly. Inhibition of canonical histone biosynthesis impaired replication fork progression and reduced nucleosome occupancy on newly synthesized DNA. Replication forks initially remained stable without activation of conventional checkpoints, although prolonged histone deficiency generated DNA damage. PCNA accumulated on newly synthesized DNA in cells lacking new histones, possibly to maintain opportunity for CAF-1 recruitment and nucleosome assembly. Consistent with this, in vitro and in vivo analysis showed that PCNA unloading is delayed in the absence of nucleosome assembly. We propose that coupling of fork speed and PCNA unloading to nucleosome assembly provides a simple mechanism to adjust DNA replication and maintain chromatin integrity during transient histone shortage.

A reversible histone H3 acetylation cooperates with mismatch repair and replicative polymerases in maintaining genome stability

Mutations are a major driving force of evolution and genetic disease. In eukaryotes, mutations are produced in the chromatin environment, but the impact of chromatin on mutagenesis is poorly understood. Previous studies have determined that in yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae, Rtt109-dependent acetylation of histone H3 on K56 is an abundant modification that is introduced in chromatin in S phase and removed by Hst3 and Hst4 in G2/M. We show here that the chromatin deacetylation on histone H3 K56 by Hst3 and Hst4 is required for the suppression of spontaneous gross chromosomal rearrangements, base substitutions, 1-bp insertions/deletions, and complex mutations. The rate of base substitutions in hst3Δ hst4Δ is similar to that in isogenic mismatch repair-deficient msh2Δ mutant. We also provide evidence that H3 K56 acetylation by Rtt109 is important for safeguarding DNA from small insertions/deletions and complex mutations. Furthermore, we reveal that both the deacetylation and acetylation on histone H3 K56 are involved in mutation avoidance mechanisms that cooperate with mismatch repair and the proofreading activities of replicative DNA polymerases in suppressing spontaneous mutagenesis. Our results suggest that cyclic acetylation and deacetylation of chromatin contribute to replication fidelity and play important roles in the protection of nuclear DNA from diverse spontaneous mutations.

Mutations strongly predispose humans to cancer and many other diseases. Despite significant progress, we still do not fully understand the molecular mechanisms that protect us from mutations. Human DNA is part of a highly organized complex called chromatin. Chromatin regulates our development, metabolism, and behavior. Special enzymes modify chromatin by the addition and removal of chemical groups. Acetylation and deacetylation of chromatin have been conserved during evolution. The involvement of chromatin and its modifications in the protection of DNA from mutations is poorly understood. The yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae is an excellent model for studying the connection between chromatin modifications and mutations. Using this model, we found that the deacetylation and acetylation of chromatin on histone H3 lysine 56 are required for preventing a wide range of spontaneous mutations. Future studies will determine whether acetylation and deacetylation of chromatin are involved in protecting DNA from mutations in human cells.

Decoding the histone code: Role of H3K36me3 in mismatch repair and implications for cancer susceptibility and therapy

DNA mismatch repair (MMR) maintains genome stability primarily by correcting replication-associated mismatches. Defects in MMR lead to several human cancers characterized by frequent alterations in simple repetitive DNA sequences, a phenomenon called microsatellite instability (MSI). In most MSI-positive cancers, genetic or epigenetic changes that alter the function or expression of an essential MMR protein have been identified. However, in a subset of MSI-positive cancers, epigenetic or genetic changes have not been found in known MMR genes, such that the molecular basis of the MMR defect in these cells remains unknown. A possible answer to this puzzle emerged recently when it was discovered that H3K36me3, a well-studied posttranslational histone modification or histone mark, plays a role in regulating human MMR in vivo. In this review, potential roles for this histone mark to modulate genome stability and cancer susceptibility in human cells are discussed.

Targeting proliferating cell nuclear antigen and its protein interactions induces apoptosis in multiple myeloma cells

Multiple myeloma is a hematological cancer that is considered incurable despite advances in treatment strategy during the last decade. Therapies targeting single pathways are unlikely to succeed due to the heterogeneous nature of the malignancy. Proliferating cell nuclear antigen (PCNA) is a multifunctional protein essential for DNA replication and repair that is often overexpressed in cancer cells. Many proteins involved in the cellular stress response interact with PCNA through the five amino acid sequence AlkB homologue 2 PCNA-interacting motif (APIM). Thus inhibiting PCNA’s protein interactions may be a good strategy to target multiple pathways simultaneously. We initially found that overexpression of peptides containing the APIM sequence increases the sensitivity of cancer cells to contemporary therapeutics. Here we have designed a cell-penetrating APIM-containing peptide, ATX-101, that targets PCNA and show that it has anti-myeloma activity. We found that ATX-101 induced apoptosis in multiple myeloma cell lines and primary cancer cells, while bone marrow stromal cells and primary healthy lymphocytes were much less sensitive. ATX-101-induced apoptosis was caspase-dependent and cell cycle phase-independent. ATX-101 also increased multiple myeloma cells’ sensitivity against melphalan, a DNA damaging agent commonly used for treatment of multiple myeloma. In a xenograft mouse model, ATX-101 was well tolerated and increased the anti-tumor activity of melphalan. Therefore, targeting PCNA by ATX-101 may be a novel strategy in multiple myeloma treatment.

The histone mark H3K36me3 regulates human DNA mismatch repair through its interaction with MutSα

DNA mismatch repair (MMR) ensures replication fidelity by correcting mismatches generated during DNA replication. Although human MMR has been reconstituted in vitro, how MMR occurs in vivo is unknown. Here, we show that an epigenetic histone mark, H3K36me3, is required in vivo to recruit the mismatch recognition protein hMutSα (hMSH2-hMSH6) onto chromatin through direct interactions with the hMSH6 PWWP domain. The abundance of H3K36me3 in G1 and early S phases ensures that hMutSα is enriched on chromatin before mispairs are introduced during DNA replication. Cells lacking the H3K36 trimethyltransferase SETD2 display microsatellite instability (MSI) and an elevated spontaneous mutation frequency, characteristic of MMR-deficient cells. This work reveals that a histone mark regulates MMR in human cells and explains the long-standing puzzle of MSI-positive cancer cells that lack detectable mutations in known MMR genes.

Ribonucleotides misincorporated into DNA act as strand-discrimination signals in eukaryotic mismatch repair

To improve replication fidelity, mismatch repair (MMR) must detect non-Watson-Crick base pairs and direct their repair to the nascent DNA strand. Eukaryotic MMR in vitro requires pre-existing strand discontinuities for initiation; consequently, it has been postulated that MMR in vivo initiates at Okazaki fragment termini in the lagging strand and at nicks generated in the leading strand by the mismatch-activated MLH1/PMS2 endonuclease. We now show that a single ribonucleotide in the vicinity of a mismatch can act as an initiation site for MMR in human cell extracts and that MMR activation in this system is dependent on RNase H2. As loss of RNase H2 in S.cerevisiae results in a mild MMR defect that is reflected in increased mutagenesis, MMR in vivo might also initiate at RNase H2-generated nicks. We therefore propose that ribonucleotides misincoporated during DNA replication serve as physiological markers of the nascent DNA strand.

Postreplicative mismatch repair

The mismatch repair (MMR) system detects non-Watson-Crick base pairs and strand misalignments arising during DNA replication and mediates their removal by catalyzing excision of the mispair-containing tract of nascent DNA and its error-free resynthesis. In this way, MMR improves the fidelity of replication by several orders of magnitude. It also addresses mispairs and strand misalignments arising during recombination and prevents synapses between nonidentical DNA sequences. Unsurprisingly, MMR malfunction brings about genomic instability that leads to cancer in mammals. But MMR proteins have recently been implicated also in other processes of DNA metabolism, such as DNA damage signaling, antibody diversification, and repair of interstrand cross-links and oxidative DNA damage, in which their functions remain to be elucidated. This article reviews the progress in our understanding of the mechanism of replication error repair made during the past decade.

A proteomic characterization of factors enriched at nascent DNA molecules

DNA replication is facilitated by multiple factors that concentrate in the vicinity of replication forks. Here, we developed an approach that combines the isolation of proteins on nascent DNA chains with mass spectrometry (iPOND-MS), allowing a comprehensive proteomic characterization of the human replisome and replisome-associated factors. In addition to known replisome components, we provide a broad list of proteins that reside in the vicinity of the replisome, some of which were not previously associated with replication. For instance, our data support a link between DNA replication and the Williams-Beuren syndrome and identify ZNF24 as a replication factor. In addition, we reveal that SUMOylation is widespread for factors that concentrate near replisomes, which contrasts with lower UQylation levels at these sites. This resource provides a panoramic view of the proteins that concentrate in the surroundings of the replisome, which should facilitate future investigations on DNA replication and genome maintenance.

Structural, molecular and cellular functions of MSH2 and MSH6 during DNA mismatch repair, damage signaling and other noncanonical activities

The field of DNA mismatch repair (MMR) has rapidly expanded after the discovery of the MutHLS repair system in bacteria. By the mid 1990s yeast and human homologues to bacterial MutL and MutS had been identified and their contribution to hereditary non-polyposis colorectal cancer (HNPCC; Lynch syndrome) was under intense investigation. The human MutS homologue 6 protein (hMSH6), was first reported in 1995 as a G:T binding partner (GTBP) of hMSH2, forming the hMutSα mismatch-binding complex. Signal transduction from each DNA-bound hMutSα complex is accomplished by the hMutLα heterodimer (hMLH1 and hPMS2). Molecular mechanisms and cellular regulation of individual MMR proteins are now areas of intensive research. This review will focus on molecular mechanisms associated with mismatch binding, as well as emerging evidence that MutSα, and in particular, MSH6, is a key protein in MMR-dependent DNA damage response and communication with other DNA repair pathways within the cell. MSH6 is unstable in the absence of MSH2, however it is the DNA lesion-binding partner of this heterodimer. MSH6, but not MSH2, has a conserved Phe-X-Glu motif that recognizes and binds several different DNA structural distortions, initiating different cellular responses. hMSH6 also contains the nuclear localization sequences required to shuttle hMutSα into the nucleus. For example, upon binding to O(6)meG:T, MSH6 triggers a DNA damage response that involves altered phosphorylation within the N-terminal disordered domain of this unique protein. While many investigations have focused on MMR as a post-replication DNA repair mechanism, MMR proteins are expressed and active in all phases of the cell cycle. There is much more to be discovered about regulatory cellular roles that require the presence of MutSα and, in particular, MSH6.