Mechanism of single-stranded DNA annealing by RAD52-RPA complex.

RAD52 is important for the repair of DNA double-stranded breaks1,2, mitotic DNA synthesis3-5 and alternative telomere length maintenance6,7. Central to these functions, RAD52 promotes the annealing of complementary single-stranded DNA (ssDNA)8,9 and provides an alternative to BRCA2/RAD51-dependent homologous recombination repair10. Inactivation of RAD52 in homologous-recombination-deficient BRCA1- or BRCA2-defective cells is synthetically lethal11,12, and aberrant expression of RAD52 is associated with poor cancer prognosis13,14. As a consequence, RAD52 is an attractive therapeutic target against homologous-recombination-deficient breast, ovarian and prostate cancers15-17. Here we describe the structure of RAD52 and define the mechanism of annealing. As reported previously18-20, RAD52 forms undecameric (11-subunit) ring structures, but these rings do not represent the active form of the enzyme. Instead, cryo-electron microscopy and biochemical analyses revealed that ssDNA annealing is driven by RAD52 open rings in association with replication protein-A (RPA). Atomic models of the RAD52-ssDNA complex show that ssDNA sits in a positively charged channel around the ring. Annealing is driven by the RAD52 N-terminal domains, whereas the C-terminal regions modulate the open-ring conformation and RPA interaction. RPA associates with RAD52 at the site of ring opening with critical interactions occurring between the RPA-interacting domain of RAD52 and the winged helix domain of RPA2. Our studies provide structural snapshots throughout the annealing process and define the molecular mechanism of ssDNA annealing by the RAD52-RPA complex.

Structure and function of the RAD51B-RAD51C-RAD51D-XRCC2 tumour suppressor.

Homologous recombination is a fundamental process of life. It is required for the protection and restart of broken replication forks, the repair of chromosome breaks and the exchange of genetic material during meiosis. Individuals with mutations in key recombination genes, such as BRCA2 (also known as FANCD1), or the RAD51 paralogues RAD51B, RAD51C (also known as FANCO), RAD51D, XRCC2 (also known as FANCU) and XRCC3, are predisposed to breast, ovarian and prostate cancers1-10 and the cancer-prone syndrome Fanconi anaemia11-13. The BRCA2 tumour suppressor protein-the product of BRCA2-is well characterized, but the cellular functions of the RAD51 paralogues remain unclear. Genetic knockouts display growth defects, reduced RAD51 focus formation, spontaneous chromosome abnormalities, sensitivity to PARP inhibitors and replication fork defects14,15, but the precise molecular roles of RAD51 paralogues in fork stability, DNA repair and cancer avoidance remain unknown. Here we used cryo-electron microscopy, AlphaFold2 modelling and structural proteomics to determine the structure of the RAD51B-RAD51C-RAD51D-XRCC2 complex (BCDX2), revealing that RAD51C-RAD51D-XRCC2 mimics three RAD51 protomers aligned within a nucleoprotein filament, whereas RAD51B is highly dynamic. Biochemical and single-molecule analyses showed that BCDX2 stimulates the nucleation and extension of RAD51 filaments-which are essential for recombinational DNA repair-in reactions that depend on the coupled ATPase activities of RAD51B and RAD51C. Our studies demonstrate that BCDX2 orchestrates RAD51 assembly on single stranded DNA for replication fork protection and double strand break repair, in reactions that are critical for tumour avoidance.

Reducing False Positives through the Application of Fluorescence Lifetime Technology: A Comparative Study Using TYK2 Kinase as a Model System.

The predominant assay detection methodologies used for enzyme inhibitor identification during early-stage drug discovery are fluorescence-based. Each fluorophore has a characteristic fluorescence decay, known as the fluorescence lifetime, that occurs throughout a nanosecond-to-millisecond timescale. The measurement of fluorescence lifetime as a reporter for biological activity is less common than fluorescence intensity, even though the latter has numerous issues that can lead to false-positive readouts. The confirmation of hit compounds as true inhibitors requires additional assays, cost, and time to progress from hit identification to lead drug-candidate optimization. To explore whether the use of fluorescence lifetime technology (FLT) can offer comparable benefits to label-free-based approaches such as RapidFire mass spectroscopy (RF-MS) and a superior readout compared to time-resolved fluorescence resonance energy transfer (TR-FRET), three equivalent assays were developed against the clinically validated tyrosine kinase 2 (TYK2) and screened against annotated compound sets. FLT provided a marked decrease in the number of false-positive hits when compared to TR-FRET. Further cellular screening confirmed that a number of potential inhibitors directly interacted with TYK2 and inhibited the downstream phosphorylation of the signal transducer and activator of transcription 4 protein (STAT4).

Cellular Target Engagement Approaches to Monitor Epigenetic Reader Domain Interactions.

Malfunctions in the basic epigenetic mechanisms such as histone modifications, DNA methylation, and chromatin remodeling are implicated in a number of cancers and immunological and neurodegenerative conditions. Within GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) we have utilized a number of variations of the NanoBRET technology for the direct measurement of compound-target engagement within native cellular environments to drive high-throughput, routine structure-activity relationship (SAR) profiling across differing epigenetic targets. NanoBRET is a variation of the bioluminescence resonance energy transfer (BRET) methodology utilizing proteins of interest fused to either NanoLuc, a small, high-emission-intensity luciferase, or HaloTag, a modified dehalogenase enzyme that can be selectively labeled with a fluorophore. The combination of these two technologies has enabled the application of NanoBRET to biological systems such as epigenetic protein-protein interactions, which have previously been challenging. By synergizing target engagement assays with more complex primary cell phenotypic assays, we have been able to demonstrate compound-target selectivity profiles to enhance cellular potency and offset potential liability risks. Additionally, we have shown that in the absence of a robust, cell phenotypic assay, it is possible to utilize NanoBRET target engagement assays to aid chemistry in progressing at a higher scale than would have otherwise been achievable. The NanoBRET target engagement assays utilized have further shown an excellent correlation with more reductionist biochemical and biophysical assay systems, clearly demonstrating the possibility of using such assay systems at scale, in tandem with, or in preference to, lower-throughput cell phenotypic approaches.