Involvement of APOBEC3B in mutation induction by irradiation

The role of distinct APOBEC/ADAR mRNA levels in mutational signatures linked to aging and ultraviolet radiation

The APOBEC/AID family is known for its mutator activity, and recent evidence also supports the potential impact of ADARs. Furthermore, the mutator impacts of APOBEC/ADAR mutations have not yet been investigated. Assessment of pancancer TCGA exomes identified enriched somatic variants among exomes with nonsynonymous APOBEC1, APOBEC3B, APOBEC3C, ADAR, and ADARB1 mutations, compared to exomes with synonymous ones. Principal component (PC) analysis reduced the number of potential players to eight in cancer exomes/genomes, and to five in cancer types. Multivariate regression analysis was used to assess the impact of the PCs on each COSMIC mutational signature among pancancer exomes/genomes and particular cancers, identifying several novel links, including SBS17b, SBS18, and ID7 mainly determined by APOBEC1 mRNA levels; SBS40, ID1, and ID2 by age; SBS3 and SBS16 by APOBEC3A/APOBEC3B mRNA levels; ID5 and DBS9 by DNA repair/replication (DRR) defects; and SBS7a-d, SBS38, ID4, ID8, ID13, and DBS1 by ultraviolet (UV) radiation/ADARB1 mRNA levels. APOBEC/ADAR mutations appeared to potentiate the impact of DRR defects on several mutational signatures, and some factors seemed to inversely affect certain signatures. These findings potentially implicate certain APOBEC/ADAR mutations/mRNA levels in distinct mutational signatures, particularly APOBEC1 mRNA levels in aging-related signatures and ADARB1 mRNA levels in UV radiation-related signatures.

Clinical Implications of APOBEC3-Mediated Mutagenesis in Breast Cancer

Over recent years, members of the APOBEC3 family of cytosine deaminases have been implicated in increased cancer genome mutagenesis, thereby contributing to intratumor and intertumor genomic heterogeneity and therapy resistance in, among others, breast cancer. Understanding the available methods for clinical detection of these enzymes, the conditions required for their (dysregulated) expression, the clinical impact they have, and the clinical implications they may offer is crucial in understanding the current impact of APOBEC3-mediated mutagenesis in breast cancer. Here, we provide a comprehensive review of recent developments in the detection of APOBEC3-mediated mutagenesis and responsible APOBEC3 enzymes, summarize the pathways that control their expression, and explore the clinical ramifications and opportunities they pose. We propose that APOBEC3-mediated mutagenesis can function as a helpful predictive biomarker in several standard-of-care breast cancer treatment plans and may be a novel target for treatment.

Aberrant APOBEC3B Expression in Breast Cancer Is Linked to Proliferation and Cell Cycle Phase

APOBEC3B (A3B) is aberrantly overexpressed in a subset of breast cancers, where it associates with advanced disease, poor prognosis, and treatment resistance, yet the causes of A3B dysregulation in breast cancer remain unclear. Here, A3B mRNA and protein expression levels were quantified in different cell lines and breast tumors and related to cell cycle markers using RT-qPCR and multiplex immunofluorescence imaging. The inducibility of A3B expression during the cell cycle was additionally addressed after cell cycle synchronization with multiple methods. First, we found that A3B protein levels within cell lines and tumors are heterogeneous and associate strongly with the proliferation marker Cyclin B1 characteristic of the G₂/M phase of the cell cycle. Second, in multiple breast cancer cell lines with high A3B, expression levels were observed to oscillate throughout the cell cycle and again associate with Cyclin B1. Third, induction of A3B expression is potently repressed throughout G₀/early G₁, likely by RB/E2F pathway effector proteins. Fourth, in cells with low A3B, induction of A3B through the PKC/ncNF-κB pathway occurs predominantly in actively proliferating cells and is largely absent in cells arrested in G₀. Altogether, these results support a model in which dysregulated A3B overexpression in breast cancer is the cumulative result of proliferation-associated relief from repression with concomitant pathway activation during the G₂/M phase of the cell cycle.

The reversibility of cancer radioresistance: a novel potential way to identify factors contributing to tumor radioresistance

To understand the molecular mechanisms responsible for radioresistance in cancer cells, we previously established clinically relevant radioresistant (CRR) cell lines from several human cancer cell lines. These CRR cells proliferate even under exposure to 2 Gy/day of X-rays for more than 30 days, which is a standard protocol for tumor radiotherapy. CRR cells received 2 Gy/day of X-rays to maintain their radioresistance (maintenance irradiation; MI). Interestingly, CRR cells that did not receive MI for more than a year lost their radioresistance, indicating that radiation-induced radioresistance is reversible. We designated these CRR-NoIR cells. Karyotyping of the parental and CRR cells revealed that the chromosomal composition of CRR cells is quite different from that of the parental cells. However, CRR and CRR-NoIR cells were more similar compared with the parental cells because CRR cells repair X-ray-induced DNA damage with higher fidelity. To identify the factor(s) involved in tumor radioresistance, previously published studies including ours have compared radioresistant cells to parental cells. In this review, we conclude that a comparison between CRR and CRR-NoIR cells, rather than parental cells, is the best way to identify factors involved in tumor radioresistance.

Unfavorable prognosis and clinical consequences of APOBEC3B expression in breast and other cancers: A systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION: Controversy exists regarding the association of apolipoprotein B mRNA editing enzyme catalytic subunit 3B APOBEC3B, (A3B) overexpression and poor prognosis, metastasis, and chemotherapy drug resistance in cancers. Here we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine its prognostic value and clinicopathological features in breast cancer and some other malignancies. MATERIALS AND METHODS: PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and EMBASE were searched up to Feb 2022 for the association of A3B with breast, ovarian, gastrointestinal and lung cancers. The pooled hazard ratios with 95% confidence interval (CI) were evaluated to assess disease-free survival (DFS), overall survival (OS), and recurrence-free survival (RFS) in cancers under study. RESULTS: Over 3700 patients were included in this meta-survey. Elevated levels of A3B were significantly related to low OS (pooled HR = 1.30; 95% CI:1.09–1.55, P < 0.01), poor DFS (pooled HR = 1.66; 95% CI:1.17–2.35, P < 0.01) and poor RFS (HR = 1.51, 95% CI:1.11–2.04, P = 0.01). Subgroup analysis revealed that high A3B expression was associated with poor OS in lung (HR = 1.85, 95% CI: 1.40–2.45), and breast cancers (HR = 1.38, 95% CI: 1.00–1.89). High expression of A3B did not display any significant association with clinicopathologic features. CONCLUSION: APOBEC3B overexpression is related to poor OS, DFS and RFS only in some cancer types and no generalized role could be predicted for all cancers.

The translational challenges of precision oncology

The translational challenges in the field of precision oncology are in part related to the biological complexity and diversity of this disease. Technological advances in genomics have facilitated large sequencing efforts and discoveries that have further supported this notion. In this review, we reflect on the impact of these discoveries on our understanding of several concepts: cancer initiation, cancer prevention, early detection, adjuvant therapy and minimal residual disease monitoring, cancer drug resistance, and cancer evolution in metastasis. We discuss key areas of focus for improving cancer outcomes, from biological insights to clinical application, and suggest where the development of these technologies will lead us. Finally, we discuss practical challenges to the wider adoption of molecular profiling in the clinic and the need for robust translational infrastructure.