Distinct roles of structure-specific endonucleases EEPD1 and Metnase in replication stress responses

Cellular Responses to Widespread DNA Replication Stress

Replicative DNA polymerases are blocked by nearly all types of DNA damage. The resulting DNA replication stress threatens genome stability. DNA replication stress is also caused by depletion of nucleotide pools, DNA polymerase inhibitors, and DNA sequences or structures that are difficult to replicate. Replication stress triggers complex cellular responses that include cell cycle arrest, replication fork collapse to one-ended DNA double-strand breaks, induction of DNA repair, and programmed cell death after excessive damage. Replication stress caused by specific structures (e.g., G-rich sequences that form G-quadruplexes) is localized but occurs during the S phase of every cell division. This review focuses on cellular responses to widespread stress such as that caused by random DNA damage, DNA polymerase inhibition/nucleotide pool depletion, and R-loops. Another form of global replication stress is seen in cancer cells and is termed oncogenic stress, reflecting dysregulated replication origin firing and/or replication fork progression. Replication stress responses are often dysregulated in cancer cells, and this too contributes to ongoing genome instability that can drive cancer progression. Nucleases play critical roles in replication stress responses, including MUS81, EEPD1, Metnase, CtIP, MRE11, EXO1, DNA2-BLM, SLX1-SLX4, XPF-ERCC1-SLX4, Artemis, XPG, FEN1, and TATDN2. Several of these nucleases cleave branched DNA structures at stressed replication forks to promote repair and restart of these forks. We recently defined roles for EEPD1 in restarting stressed replication forks after oxidative DNA damage, and for TATDN2 in mitigating replication stress caused by R-loop accumulation in BRCA1-defective cells. We also discuss how insights into biological responses to genome-wide replication stress can inform novel cancer treatment strategies that exploit synthetic lethal relationships among replication stress response factors.

Novel Insights into RAD52’s Structure, Function, and Druggability for Synthetic Lethality and Innovative Anticancer Therapies

In recent years, the RAD52 protein has been highlighted as a mediator of many DNA repair mechanisms. While RAD52 was initially considered to be a non-essential auxiliary factor, its inhibition has more recently been demonstrated to be synthetically lethal in cancer cells bearing mutations and inactivation of specific intracellular pathways, such as homologous recombination. RAD52 is now recognized as a novel and critical pharmacological target. In this review, we comprehensively describe the available structural and functional information on RAD52. The review highlights the pathways in which RAD52 is involved and the approaches to RAD52 inhibition. We discuss the multifaceted role of this protein, which has a complex, dynamic, and functional 3D superstructural arrangement. This complexity reinforces the need to further investigate and characterize RAD52 to solve a challenging mechanistic puzzle and pave the way for a robust drug discovery campaign.

EEPD1 promotes repair of oxidatively-stressed replication forks

Unrepaired oxidatively-stressed replication forks can lead to chromosomal instability and neoplastic transformation or cell death. To meet these challenges cells have evolved a robust mechanism to repair oxidative genomic DNA damage through the base excision repair (BER) pathway, but less is known about repair of oxidative damage at replication forks. We found that depletion or genetic deletion of EEPD1 decreases clonogenic cell survival after oxidative DNA damage. We demonstrate that EEPD1 is recruited to replication forks stressed by oxidative damage induced by H2O2 and that EEPD1 promotes replication fork repair and restart and decreases chromosomal abnormalities after such damage. EEPD1 binds to abasic DNA structures and promotes resolution of genomic abasic sites after oxidative stress. We further observed that restoration of expression of EEPD1 via expression vector transfection restores cell survival and suppresses chromosomal abnormalities induced by oxidative stress in EEPD1-depleted cells. Consistent with this, we found that EEPD1 preserves replication fork integrity by preventing oxidatively-stressed unrepaired fork fusion, thereby decreasing chromosome instability and mitotic abnormalities. Our results indicate a novel role for EEPD1 in replication fork preservation and maintenance of chromosomal stability during oxidative stress.

Targeting Replication Stress Response Pathways to Enhance Genotoxic Chemo- and Radiotherapy

Proliferating cells regularly experience replication stress caused by spontaneous DNA damage that results from endogenous reactive oxygen species (ROS), DNA sequences that can assume secondary and tertiary structures, and collisions between opposing transcription and replication machineries. Cancer cells face additional replication stress, including oncogenic stress that results from the dysregulation of fork progression and origin firing, and from DNA damage induced by radiotherapy and most cancer chemotherapeutic agents. Cells respond to such stress by activating a complex network of sensor, signaling and effector pathways that protect genome integrity. These responses include slowing or stopping active replication forks, protecting stalled replication forks from collapse, preventing late origin replication firing, stimulating DNA repair pathways that promote the repair and restart of stalled or collapsed replication forks, and activating dormant origins to rescue adjacent stressed forks. Currently, most cancer patients are treated with genotoxic chemotherapeutics and/or ionizing radiation, and cancer cells can gain resistance to the resulting replication stress by activating pro-survival replication stress pathways. Thus, there has been substantial effort to develop small molecule inhibitors of key replication stress proteins to enhance tumor cell killing by these agents. Replication stress targets include ATR, the master kinase that regulates both normal replication and replication stress responses; the downstream signaling kinase Chk1; nucleases that process stressed replication forks (MUS81, EEPD1, Metnase); the homologous recombination catalyst RAD51; and other factors including ATM, DNA-PKcs, and PARP1. This review provides an overview of replication stress response pathways and discusses recent pre-clinical studies and clinical trials aimed at improving cancer therapy by targeting replication stress response factors.

Nucleases and Co-Factors in DNA Replication Stress Responses

DNA replication stress is a constant threat that cells must manage to proliferate and maintain genome integrity. DNA replication stress responses, a subset of the broader DNA damage response (DDR), operate when the DNA replication machinery (replisome) is blocked or replication forks collapse during S phase. There are many sources of replication stress, such as DNA lesions caused by endogenous and exogenous agents including commonly used cancer therapeutics, and difficult-to-replicate DNA sequences comprising fragile sites, G-quadraplex DNA, hairpins at trinucleotide repeats, and telomeres. Replication stress is also a consequence of conflicts between opposing transcription and replication, and oncogenic stress which dysregulates replication origin firing and fork progression. Cells initially respond to replication stress by protecting blocked replisomes, but if the offending problem (e.g., DNA damage) is not bypassed or resolved in a timely manner, forks may be cleaved by nucleases, inducing a DNA double-strand break (DSB) and providing a means to accurately restart stalled forks via homologous recombination. However, DSBs pose their own risks to genome stability if left unrepaired or misrepaired. Here we focus on replication stress response systems, comprising DDR signaling, fork protection, and fork processing by nucleases that promote fork repair and restart. Replication stress nucleases include MUS81, EEPD1, Metnase, CtIP, MRE11, EXO1, DNA2-BLM, SLX1-SLX4, XPF-ERCC1-SLX4, Artemis, XPG, and FEN1. Replication stress factors are important in cancer etiology as suppressors of genome instability associated with oncogenic mutations, and as potential cancer therapy targets to enhance the efficacy of chemo- and radiotherapeutics.

Metnase and EEPD1: DNA Repair Functions and Potential Targets in Cancer Therapy

Cells respond to DNA damage by activating signaling and DNA repair systems, described as the DNA damage response (DDR). Clarifying DDR pathways and their dysregulation in cancer are important for understanding cancer etiology, how cancer cells exploit the DDR to survive endogenous and treatment-related stress, and to identify DDR targets as therapeutic targets. Cancer is often treated with genotoxic chemicals and/or ionizing radiation. These agents are cytotoxic because they induce DNA double-strand breaks (DSBs) directly, or indirectly by inducing replication stress which causes replication fork collapse to DSBs. EEPD1 and Metnase are structure-specific nucleases, and Metnase is also a protein methyl transferase that methylates histone H3 and itself. EEPD1 and Metnase promote repair of frank, two-ended DSBs, and both promote the timely and accurate restart of replication forks that have collapsed to single-ended DSBs. In addition to its roles in HR, Metnase also promotes DSB repair by classical non-homologous recombination, and chromosome decatenation mediated by TopoIIα. Although mutations in Metnase and EEPD1 are not common in cancer, both proteins are frequently overexpressed, which may help tumor cells manage oncogenic stress or confer resistance to therapeutics. Here we focus on Metnase and EEPD1 DNA repair pathways, and discuss opportunities for targeting these pathways to enhance cancer therapy.

Structure, Activity, and Function of SETMAR Protein Lysine Methyltransferase

SETMAR is a protein lysine methyltransferase that is involved in several DNA processes, including DNA repair via the non-homologous end joining (NHEJ) pathway, regulation of gene expression, illegitimate DNA integration, and DNA decatenation. However, SETMAR is an atypical protein lysine methyltransferase since in anthropoid primates, the SET domain is fused to an inactive DNA transposase. The presence of the DNA transposase domain confers to SETMAR a DNA binding activity towards the remnants of its transposable element, which has resulted in the emergence of a gene regulatory function. Both the SET and the DNA transposase domains are involved in the different cellular roles of SETMAR, indicating the presence of novel and specific functions in anthropoid primates. In addition, SETMAR is dysregulated in different types of cancer, indicating a potential pathological role. While some light has been shed on SETMAR functions, more research and new tools are needed to better understand the cellular activities of SETMAR and to investigate the therapeutic potential of SETMAR.

RAD52: Paradigm of Synthetic Lethality and New Developments

DNA double-strand breaks and inter-strand cross-links are the most harmful types of DNA damage that cause genomic instability that lead to cancer development. The highest fidelity pathway for repairing damaged double-stranded DNA is termed Homologous recombination (HR). Rad52 is one of the key HR proteins in eukaryotes. Although it is critical for most DNA repair and recombination events in yeast, knockouts of mammalian RAD52 lack any discernable phenotypes. As a consequence, mammalian RAD52 has been long overlooked. That is changing now, as recent work has shown RAD52 to be critical for backup DNA repair pathways in HR-deficient cancer cells. Novel findings have shed light on RAD52's biochemical activities. RAD52 promotes DNA pairing (D-loop formation), single-strand DNA and DNA:RNA annealing, and inverse strand exchange. These activities contribute to its multiple roles in DNA damage repair including HR, single-strand annealing, break-induced replication, and RNA-mediated repair of DNA. The contributions of RAD52 that are essential to the viability of HR-deficient cancer cells are currently under investigation. These new findings make RAD52 an attractive target for the development of anti-cancer therapies against BRCA-deficient cancers.

The Safe Path at the Fork: Ensuring Replication-Associated DNA Double-Strand Breaks are Repaired by Homologous Recombination

Cells must replicate and segregate their DNA to daughter cells accurately to maintain genome stability and prevent cancer. DNA replication is usually fast and accurate, with intrinsic (proofreading) and extrinsic (mismatch repair) error-correction systems. However, replication forks slow or stop when they encounter DNA lesions, natural pause sites, and difficult-to-replicate sequences, or when cells are treated with DNA polymerase inhibitors or hydroxyurea, which depletes nucleotide pools. These challenges are termed replication stress, to which cells respond by activating DNA damage response signaling pathways that delay cell cycle progression, stimulate repair and replication fork restart, or induce apoptosis. Stressed forks are managed by rescue from adjacent forks, repriming, translesion synthesis, template switching, and fork reversal which produces a single-ended double-strand break (seDSB). Stressed forks also collapse to seDSBs when they encounter single-strand nicks or are cleaved by structure-specific nucleases. Reversed and cleaved forks can be restarted by homologous recombination (HR), but seDSBs pose risks of mis-rejoining by non-homologous end-joining (NHEJ) to other DSBs, causing genome rearrangements. HR requires resection of broken ends to create 3' single-stranded DNA for RAD51 recombinase loading, and resected ends are refractory to repair by NHEJ. This Mini Review highlights mechanisms that help maintain genome stability by promoting resection of seDSBs and accurate fork restart by HR.

Roles of homologous recombination in response to ionizing radiation-induced DNA damage

PURPOSE

Ionizing radiation induces a vast array of DNA lesions including base damage, and single- and double-strand breaks (SSB, DSB). DSBs are among the most cytotoxic lesions, and mis-repair causes small- and large-scale genome alterations that can contribute to carcinogenesis. Indeed, ionizing radiation is a 'complete' carcinogen. DSBs arise immediately after irradiation, termed 'frank DSBs,' as well as several hours later in a replication-dependent manner, termed 'secondary' or 'replication-dependent DSBs. DSBs resulting from replication fork collapse are single-ended and thus pose a distinct problem from two-ended, frank DSBs. DSBs are repaired by error-prone nonhomologous end-joining (NHEJ), or generally error-free homologous recombination (HR), each with sub-pathways. Clarifying how these pathways operate in normal and tumor cells is critical to increasing tumor control and minimizing side effects during radiotherapy.

CONCLUSIONS

The choice between NHEJ and HR is regulated during the cell cycle and by other factors. DSB repair pathways are major contributors to cell survival after ionizing radiation, including tumor-resistance to radiotherapy. Several nucleases are important for HR-mediated repair of replication-dependent DSBs and thus replication fork restart. These include three structure-specific nucleases, the 3' MUS81 nuclease, and two 5' nucleases, EEPD1 and Metnase, as well as three end-resection nucleases, MRE11, EXO1, and DNA2. The three structure-specific nucleases evolved at very different times, suggesting incremental acceleration of replication fork restart to limit toxic HR intermediates and genome instability as genomes increased in size during evolution, including the gain of large numbers of HR-prone repetitive elements. Ionizing radiation also induces delayed effects, observed days to weeks after exposure, including delayed cell death and delayed HR. In this review we highlight the roles of HR in cellular responses to ionizing radiation, and discuss the importance of HR as an exploitable target for cancer radiotherapy.

Genome-wide mapping of binding sites of the transposase-derived SETMAR protein in the human genome

Throughout evolution, DNA transposons provide a recurrent supply of genetic information to give rise to novel gene functions by fusion of their transposase domain to various domains of host-encoded proteins. One of these "domesticated", transposase-derived factors is SETMAR/Metnase which is a naturally occurring fusion protein that consists of a histone-lysine methyltransferase domain and an HsMar1 transposase. To elucidate the biological role of SETMAR, it is crucial to identify genomic targets to which SETMAR specifically binds and link these sites to the regulation of gene expression. Herein, we mapped the genomic landscape of SETMAR binding in a near-haploid human leukemia cell line (HAP1) in order to identify on-target and off-target binding sites at high resolution and to elucidate their role in terms of gene expression. Our analysis revealed a perfect correlation between SETMAR and inverted terminal repeats (ITRs) of HsMar1 transposon remnants, which are considered as natural target sites for SETMAR binding. However, we did not detect any untargeted events at non-ITR sequences, calling into question previously proposed off-target binding sites. We identified sequence fidelity of the ITR motif as a key factor for determining the binding affinity of SETMAR for chromosomes, as higher conservation of ITR sequences resulted in increased affinity for chromatin and stronger repression of SETMAR-bound gene loci. These associations highlight how SETMAR's chromatin binding fine-tune gene regulatory networks in human tumour cells.