RPA guides UNG to uracil in ssDNA to facilitate antibody class switching and repair of mutagenic uracil at the replication fork.

Activation-induced cytidine deaminase (AID) interacts with replication protein A (RPA), the major ssDNA-binding protein, to promote deamination of cytosine to uracil in transcribed immunoglobulin (Ig) genes. Uracil-DNA glycosylase (UNG) acts in concert with AID during Ig diversification. In addition, UNG preserves genome integrity by base-excision repair (BER) in the overall genome. How UNG is regulated to support both mutagenic processing and error-free repair remains unknown. UNG is expressed as two isoforms, UNG1 and UNG2, which both contain an RPA-binding helix that facilitates uracil excision from RPA-coated ssDNA. However, the impact of this interaction in antibody diversification and genome maintenance has not been investigated. Here, we generated B-cell clones with targeted mutations in the UNG RPA-binding motif, and analysed class switch recombination (CSR), mutation frequency (5' Ig Sµ), and genomic uracil in clones representing seven Ung genotypes. We show that the UNG:RPA interaction plays a crucial role in both CSR and repair of AID-induced uracil at the Ig loci. By contrast, the interaction had no significant impact on total genomic uracil levels. Thus, RPA coordinates UNG during CSR and pre-replicative repair of mutagenic uracil in ssDNA but is not essential in post-replicative and canonical BER of uracil in dsDNA.

ALKBH3 partner ASCC3 mediates P-body formation and selective clearance of MMS-induced 1-methyladenosine and 3-methylcytosine from mRNA.

BACKGROUND: Reversible enzymatic methylation of mammalian mRNA is widespread and serves crucial regulatory functions, but little is known to what degree chemical alkylators mediate overlapping modifications and whether cells distinguish aberrant from canonical methylations. METHODS: Here we use quantitative mass spectrometry to determine the fate of chemically induced methylbases in the mRNA of human cells. Concomitant alteration in the mRNA binding proteome was analyzed by SILAC mass spectrometry. RESULTS: MMS induced prominent direct mRNA methylations that were chemically identical to endogenous methylbases. Transient loss of 40S ribosomal proteins from isolated mRNA suggests that aberrant methylbases mediate arrested translational initiation and potentially also no-go decay of the affected mRNA. Four proteins (ASCC3, YTHDC2, TRIM25 and GEMIN5) displayed increased mRNA binding after MMS treatment. ASCC3 is a binding partner of the DNA/RNA demethylase ALKBH3 and was recently shown to promote disassembly of collided ribosomes as part of the ribosome quality control (RQC) trigger complex. We find that ASCC3-deficient cells display delayed removal of MMS-induced 1-methyladenosine (m1A) and 3-methylcytosine (m3C) from mRNA and impaired formation of MMS-induced P-bodies. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings conform to a model in which ASCC3-mediated disassembly of collided ribosomes allows demethylation of aberrant m1A and m3C by ALKBH3. Our findings constitute first evidence of selective sanitation of aberrant mRNA methylbases over their endogenous counterparts and warrant further studies on RNA-mediated effects of chemical alkylators commonly used in the clinic.

RPA2 winged-helix domain facilitates UNG-mediated removal of uracil from ssDNA; implications for repair of mutagenic uracil at the replication fork.

Uracil occurs at replication forks via misincorporation of deoxyuridine monophosphate (dUMP) or via deamination of existing cytosines, which occurs 2-3 orders of magnitude faster in ssDNA than in dsDNA and is 100% miscoding. Tethering of UNG2 to proliferating cell nuclear antigen (PCNA) allows rapid post-replicative removal of misincorporated uracil, but potential 'pre-replicative' removal of deaminated cytosines in ssDNA has been questioned since this could mediate mutagenic translesion synthesis and induction of double-strand breaks. Here, we demonstrate that uracil-DNA glycosylase (UNG), but not SMUG1 efficiently excises uracil from replication protein A (RPA)-coated ssDNA and that this depends on functional interaction between the flexible winged-helix (WH) domain of RPA2 and the N-terminal RPA-binding helix in UNG. This functional interaction is promoted by mono-ubiquitination and diminished by cell-cycle regulated phosphorylations on UNG. Six other human proteins bind the RPA2-WH domain, all of which are involved in DNA repair and replication fork remodelling. Based on this and the recent discovery of the AP site crosslinking protein HMCES, we propose an integrated model in which templated repair of uracil and potentially other mutagenic base lesions in ssDNA at the replication fork, is orchestrated by RPA. The UNG:RPA2-WH interaction may also play a role in adaptive immunity by promoting efficient excision of AID-induced uracils in transcribed immunoglobulin loci.

HDACi mediate UNG2 depletion, dysregulated genomic uracil and altered expression of oncoproteins and tumor suppressors in B- and T-cell lines.

BACKGROUND: HDAC inhibitors (HDACi) belong to a new group of chemotherapeutics that are increasingly used in the treatment of lymphocyte-derived malignancies, but their mechanisms of action remain poorly understood. Here we aimed to identify novel protein targets of HDACi in B- and T-lymphoma cell lines and to verify selected candidates across several mammalian cell lines. METHODS: Jurkat T- and SUDHL5 B-lymphocytes were treated with the HDACi SAHA (vorinostat) prior to SILAC-based quantitative proteome analysis. Selected differentially expressed proteins were verified by targeted mass spectrometry, RT-PCR and western analysis in multiple mammalian cell lines. Genomic uracil was quantified by LC-MS/MS, cell cycle distribution analyzed by flow cytometry and class switch recombination monitored by FACS in murine CH12F3 cells. RESULTS: SAHA treatment resulted in differential expression of 125 and 89 proteins in Jurkat and SUDHL5, respectively, of which 19 were commonly affected. Among these were several oncoproteins and tumor suppressors previously not reported to be affected by HDACi. Several key enzymes determining the cellular dUTP/dTTP ratio were downregulated and in both cell lines we found robust depletion of UNG2, the major glycosylase in genomic uracil sanitation. UNG2 depletion was accompanied by hyperacetylation and mediated by increased proteasomal degradation independent of cell cycle stage. UNG2 degradation appeared to be ubiquitous and was observed across several mammalian cell lines of different origin and with several HDACis. Loss of UNG2 was accompanied by 30-40% increase in genomic uracil in freely cycling HEK cells and reduced immunoglobulin class-switch recombination in murine CH12F3 cells. CONCLUSION: We describe several oncoproteins and tumor suppressors previously not reported to be affected by HDACi in previous transcriptome analyses, underscoring the importance of proteome analysis to identify cellular effectors of HDACi treatment. The apparently ubiquitous depletion of UNG2 and PCLAF establishes DNA base excision repair and translesion synthesis as novel pathways affected by HDACi treatment. Dysregulated genomic uracil homeostasis may aid interpretation of HDACi effects in cancer cells and further advance studies on this class of inhibitors in the treatment of APOBEC-expressing tumors, autoimmune disease and HIV-1.