Mechanisms of synthetic lethality between BRCA1/2 and 53BP1 deficiencies and DNA polymerase theta targeting.

A synthetic lethal relationship exists between disruption of polymerase theta (Polθ), and loss of either 53BP1 or homologous recombination (HR) proteins, including BRCA1; however, the mechanistic basis of these observations are unclear. Here we reveal two distinct mechanisms of Polθ synthetic lethality, identifying dual influences of 1) whether Polθ is lost or inhibited, and 2) the underlying susceptible genotype. Firstly, we find that the sensitivity of BRCA1/2- and 53BP1-deficient cells to Polθ loss, and 53BP1-deficient cells to Polθ inhibition (ART558) requires RAD52, and appropriate reduction of RAD52 can ameliorate these phenotypes. We show that in the absence of Polθ, RAD52 accumulations suppress ssDNA gap-filling in G2/M and encourage MRE11 nuclease accumulation. In contrast, the survival of BRCA1-deficient cells treated with Polθ inhibitor are not restored by RAD52 suppression, and ssDNA gap-filling is prevented by the chemically inhibited polymerase itself. These data define an additional role for Polθ, reveal the mechanism underlying synthetic lethality between 53BP1, BRCA1/2 and Polθ loss, and indicate genotype-dependent Polθ inhibitor mechanisms.

C16orf72/HAPSTR1/TAPR1 functions with BRCA1/Senataxin to modulate replication-associated R-loops and confer resistance to PARP disruption.

While the toxicity of PARP inhibitors to cells with defects in homologous recombination (HR) is well established, other synthetic lethal interactions with PARP1/PARP2 disruption are poorly defined. To inform on these mechanisms we conducted a genome-wide screen for genes that are synthetic lethal with PARP1/2 gene disruption and identified C16orf72/HAPSTR1/TAPR1 as a novel modulator of replication-associated R-loops. C16orf72 is critical to facilitate replication fork restart, suppress DNA damage and maintain genome stability in response to replication stress. Importantly, C16orf72 and PARP1/2 function in parallel pathways to suppress DNA:RNA hybrids that accumulate at stalled replication forks. Mechanistically, this is achieved through an interaction of C16orf72 with BRCA1 and the RNA/DNA helicase Senataxin to facilitate their recruitment to RNA:DNA hybrids and confer resistance to PARP inhibitors. Together, this identifies a C16orf72/Senataxin/BRCA1-dependent pathway to suppress replication-associated R-loop accumulation, maintain genome stability and confer resistance to PARP inhibitors.

A fork in the road: Where homologous recombination and stalled replication fork protection part ways.

In response to replication hindrances, DNA replication forks frequently stall and are remodelled into a four-way junction. In such a structure the annealed nascent strand is thought to resemble a DNA double-strand break and remodelled forks are vulnerable to nuclease attack by MRE11 and DNA2. Proteins that promote the recruitment, loading and stabilisation of RAD51 onto single-stranded DNA for homology search and strand exchange in homologous recombination (HR) repair and inter-strand cross-link repair also act to set up RAD51-mediated protection of nascent DNA at stalled replication forks. However, despite the similarities of these pathways, several lines of evidence indicate that fork protection is not simply analogous to the RAD51 loading step of HR. Protection of stalled forks not only requires separate functions of a number of recombination proteins, but also utilises nucleases important for the resection steps of HR in alternative ways. Here we discuss how fork protection arises and how its differences with HR give insights into the differing contexts of these two pathways.

Isomerization of BRCA1-BARD1 promotes replication fork protection.

The integrity of genomes is constantly threatened by problems encountered by the replication fork. BRCA1, BRCA2 and a subset of Fanconi anaemia proteins protect stalled replication forks from degradation by nucleases, through pathways that involve RAD51. The contribution and regulation of BRCA1 in replication fork protection, and how this role relates to its role in homologous recombination, is unclear. Here we show that BRCA1 in complex with BARD1, and not the canonical BRCA1-PALB2 interaction, is required for fork protection. BRCA1-BARD1 is regulated by a conformational change mediated by the phosphorylation-directed prolyl isomerase PIN1. PIN1 activity enhances BRCA1-BARD1 interaction with RAD51, thereby increasing the presence of RAD51 at stalled replication structures. We identify genetic variants of BRCA1-BARD1 in patients with cancer that exhibit poor protection of nascent strands but retain homologous recombination proficiency, thus defining domains of BRCA1-BARD1 that are required for fork protection and associated with cancer development. Together, these findings reveal a BRCA1-mediated pathway that governs replication fork protection.

The deSUMOylase SENP2 coordinates homologous recombination and nonhomologous end joining by independent mechanisms.

SUMOylation (small ubiquitin-like modifier) in the DNA double-strand break (DSB) response regulates recruitment, activity, and clearance of repair factors. However, our understanding of a role for deSUMOylation in this process is limited. Here we identify different mechanistic roles for deSUMOylation in homologous recombination (HR) and nonhomologous end joining (NHEJ) through the investigation of the deSUMOylase SENP2. We found that regulated deSUMOylation of MDC1 prevents excessive SUMOylation and its RNF4-VCP mediated clearance from DSBs, thereby promoting NHEJ. In contrast, we show that HR is differentially sensitive to SUMO availability and SENP2 activity is needed to provide SUMO. SENP2 is amplified as part of the chromosome 3q amplification in many cancers. Increased SENP2 expression prolongs MDC1 focus retention and increases NHEJ and radioresistance. Collectively, our data reveal that deSUMOylation differentially primes cells for responding to DSBs and demonstrates the ability of SENP2 to tune DSB repair responses.

Proteins that contain a functional Z-DNA-binding domain localize to cytoplasmic stress granules.

Long double-stranded RNA may undergo hyper-editing by adenosine deaminases that act on RNA (ADARs), where up to 50% of adenosine residues may be converted to inosine. However, although numerous RNAs may undergo hyper-editing, the role for inosine-containing hyper-edited double-stranded RNA in cells is poorly understood. Nevertheless, editing plays a critical role in mammalian cells, as highlighted by the analysis of ADAR-null mutants. In particular, the long form of ADAR1 (ADAR1(p150)) is essential for viability. Moreover, a number of studies have implicated ADAR1(p150) in various stress pathways. We have previously shown that ADAR1(p150) localized to cytoplasmic stress granules in HeLa cells following either oxidative or interferon-induced stress. Here, we show that the Z-DNA-binding domain (Zα(ADAR1)) exclusively found in ADAR1(p150) is required for its localization to stress granules. Moreover, we show that fusion of Zα(ADAR1) to either green fluorescent protein (GFP) or polypyrimidine binding protein 4 (PTB4) also results in their localization to stress granules. We additionally show that the Zα domain from other Z-DNA-binding proteins (ZBP1, E3L) is likewise sufficient for localization to stress granules. Finally, we show that Z-RNA or Z-DNA binding is important for stress granule localization. We have thus identified a novel role for Z-DNA-binding domains in mammalian cells.