Exonuclease mutations in DNA polymerase epsilon reveal replication strand specific mutation patterns and human origins of replication.

Tumors with somatic mutations in the proofreading exonuclease domain of DNA polymerase epsilon (POLE-exo*) exhibit a novel mutator phenotype, with markedly elevated TCT→TAT and TCG→TTG mutations and overall mutation frequencies often exceeding 100 mutations/Mb. Here, we identify POLE-exo* tumors in numerous cancers and classify them into two groups, A and B, according to their mutational properties. Group A mutants are found only in POLE, whereas Group B mutants are found in POLE and POLD1 and appear to be nonfunctional. In Group A, cell-free polymerase assays confirm that mutations in the exonuclease domain result in high mutation frequencies with a preference for C→A mutation. We describe the patterns of amino acid substitutions caused by POLE-exo* and compare them to other tumor types. The nucleotide preference of POLE-exo* leads to increased frequencies of recurrent nonsense mutations in key tumor suppressors such as TP53, ATM, and PIK3R1. We further demonstrate that strand-specific mutation patterns arise from some of these POLE-exo* mutants during genome duplication. This is the first direct proof of leading strand-specific replication by human POLE, which has only been demonstrated in yeast so far. Taken together, the extremely high mutation frequency and strand specificity of mutations provide a unique identifier of eukaryotic origins of replication.

Evidence for the kinetic partitioning of polymerase activity on G-quadruplex DNA.

We have investigated the action of the human DNA polymerase ε (hpol ε) and η (hpol η) catalytic cores on G-quadruplex (G4) DNA substrates derived from the promoter of the c-MYC proto-oncogene. The translesion enzyme hpol η exhibits a 6.2-fold preference for binding to G4 DNA over non-G4 DNA, while hpol ε binds both G4 and non-G4 substrates with nearly equal affinity. Kinetic analysis of single-nucleotide insertion by hpol η reveals that it is able to maintain >25% activity on G4 substrates compared to non-G4 DNA substrates, even when the primer template junction is positioned directly adjacent to G22 (the first tetrad-associated guanine in the c-MYC G4 motif). Surprisingly, hpol η fidelity increases ~15-fold when copying G22. By way of comparison, hpol ε retains ~4% activity and has a 33-fold decrease in fidelity when copying G22. The fidelity of hpol η is ~100-fold greater than that of hpol ε when comparing the misinsertion frequencies of the two enzymes opposite a tetrad-associated guanine. The kinetic differences observed for the B- and Y-family pols on G4 DNA support a model in which a simple kinetic switch between replicative and TLS pols could help govern fork progress during G4 DNA replication.

DNA polymerase ε and its roles in genome stability.

DNA Polymerase Epsilon (Pol ε) is one of three DNA Polymerases (along with Pol δ and Pol α) required for nuclear DNA replication in eukaryotes. Pol ε is comprised of four subunits, the largest of which is encoded by the POLE gene and contains the catalytic polymerase and exonuclease activities. The 3'-5' exonuclease proofreading activity is able to correct DNA synthesis errors and helps protect against genome instability. Recent cancer genome sequencing efforts have shown that 3% of colorectal and 7% of endometrial cancers contain mutations within the exonuclease domain of POLE and are associated with significantly elevated levels of single nucleotide substitutions (15-500 per Mb) and microsatellite stability. POLE mutations have also been found in other tumor types, though at lower frequency, suggesting roles in tumorigenesis more broadly in different tissue types. In addition to its proofreading activity, Pol ε contributes to genome stability through multiple mechanisms that are discussed in this review.

Explosive mutation accumulation triggered by heterozygous human Pol ε proofreading-deficiency is driven by suppression of mismatch repair.

Tumors defective for DNA polymerase (Pol) ε proofreading have the highest tumor mutation burden identified. A major unanswered question is whether loss of Pol ε proofreading by itself is sufficient to drive this mutagenesis, or whether additional factors are necessary. To address this, we used a combination of next generation sequencing and in vitro biochemistry on human cell lines engineered to have defects in Pol ε proofreading and mismatch repair. Absent mismatch repair, monoallelic Pol ε proofreading deficiency caused a rapid increase in a unique mutation signature, similar to that observed in tumors from patients with biallelic mismatch repair deficiency and heterozygous Pol ε mutations. Restoring mismatch repair was sufficient to suppress the explosive mutation accumulation. These results strongly suggest that concomitant suppression of mismatch repair, a hallmark of colorectal and other aggressive cancers, is a critical force for driving the explosive mutagenesis seen in tumors expressing exonuclease-deficient Pol ε.

Combined hereditary and somatic mutations of replication error repair genes result in rapid onset of ultra-hypermutated cancers.

DNA replication-associated mutations are repaired by two components: polymerase proofreading and mismatch repair. The mutation consequences of disruption to both repair components in humans are not well studied. We sequenced cancer genomes from children with inherited biallelic mismatch repair deficiency (bMMRD). High-grade bMMRD brain tumors exhibited massive numbers of substitution mutations (>250/Mb), which was greater than all childhood and most cancers (>7,000 analyzed). All ultra-hypermutated bMMRD cancers acquired early somatic driver mutations in DNA polymerase ɛ or δ. The ensuing mutation signatures and numbers are unique and diagnostic of childhood germ-line bMMRD (P < 10(-13)). Sequential tumor biopsy analysis revealed that bMMRD/polymerase-mutant cancers rapidly amass an excess of simultaneous mutations (∼600 mutations/cell division), reaching but not exceeding ∼20,000 exonic mutations in <6 months. This implies a threshold compatible with cancer-cell survival. We suggest a new mechanism of cancer progression in which mutations develop in a rapid burst after ablation of replication repair.