High-throughput functional characterization of combinations of transcriptional activators and repressors.

Despite growing knowledge of the functions of individual human transcriptional effector domains, much less is understood about how multiple effector domains within the same protein combine to regulate gene expression. Here, we measure transcriptional activity for 8,400 effector domain combinations by recruiting them to reporter genes in human cells. In our assay, weak and moderate activation domains synergize to drive strong gene expression, whereas combining strong activators often results in weaker activation. In contrast, repressors combine linearly and produce full gene silencing, and repressor domains often overpower activation domains. We use this information to build a synthetic transcription factor whose function can be tuned between repression and activation independent of recruitment to target genes by using a small-molecule drug. Altogether, we outline the basic principles of how effector domains combine to regulate gene expression and demonstrate their value in building precise and flexible synthetic biology tools. A record of this paper's transparent peer review process is included in the supplemental information.

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.

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.

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.