AKT1/BRCA1 in the control of homologous recombination and genetic stability: the missing link between hereditary and sporadic breast cancers

Endogenous replicative stress could be one trigger leading to tumor initiation: indeed, activation of the DNA damage response (DDR), considered the result of replicative stress, is observed in pre-cancerous cells; moreover, in hereditary breast cancers, almost all of the genes affected relate to the DDR. The most frequently mutated gene in hereditary breast cancers, BRCA1, is essential for homologous recombination (HR), a fundamental process for maintaining genome stability that permits the reactivation of blocked replication forks. Recent studies have established links between DDR and the oncogenic kinase AKT1, which is upregulated in about 50% of sporadic breast cancers. More specifically, the activation of AKT1 shows a deficient phenotype in BRCA1 and HR, revealing molecular similarities between hereditary and sporadic breast cancers. However, these results reveal a paradox regarding the physiological role of AKT1: in non-tumor cells, AKT1 promotes cellular proliferation, but consequently endangers genome integrity during replication if HR is inhibited. Since HR could itself lead to genetic instability, we propose that, under physiological conditions, moderate activation of AKT1 does not inhibit but prevents an excess of HR. The regulation of AKT1 would represent a fine transitory system for controlling HR and maintaining genomic integrity

PARP3 affects the relative contribution of homologous recombination and nonhomologous end-joining pathways

The repair of toxic double-strand breaks (DSB) is critical for the maintenance of genome integrity. The major mechanisms that cope with DSB are: homologous recombination (HR) and classical or alternative nonhomologous end joining (C-NHEJ versus A-EJ). Because these pathways compete for the repair of DSB, the choice of the appropriate repair pathway is pivotal. Among the mechanisms that influence this choice, deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) end resection plays a critical role by driving cells to HR, while accurate C-NHEJ is suppressed. Furthermore, end resection promotes error-prone A-EJ. Increasing evidence define Poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase 3 (PARP3, also known as ARTD3) as an important player in cellular response to DSB. In this work, we reveal a specific feature of PARP3 that together with Ku80 limits DNA end resection and thereby helps in making the choice between HR and NHEJ pathways. PARP3 interacts with and PARylates Ku70/Ku80. The depletion of PARP3 impairs the recruitment of YFP-Ku80 to laser-induced DNA damage sites and induces an imbalance between BRCA1 and 53BP1. Both events result in compromised accurate C-NHEJ and a concomitant increase in DNA end resection. Nevertheless, HR is significantly reduced upon PARP3 silencing while the enhanced end resection causes mutagenic deletions during A-EJ. As a result, the absence of PARP3 confers hypersensitivity to anti-tumoral drugs generating DSB

The Cohesion complex maintains genome stability by preventing end joining of distant DNA ends in S phase

Genome instability is a hallmark of cancer cells. The joining of distant DNA double-strand ends (DSEs) ineluctably leads to genome rearrangements. We found that the cohesion complex maintains genome stability by repressing the joining of distant DSEs specifically in the S phase, i.e., the main phase producing one-ended DSEs

Initiation of DNA double strand break repair: signaling and single-stranded resection dictate the choice between homologous recombination, non-homologous end-joining and alternative end-joining

A DNA double strand break (DSB) is a highly toxic lesion, which can generate genetic instability and profound genome rearrangements. However, DSBs are required to generate diversity during physiological processes such as meiosis or the establishment of the immune repertoire. Thus, the precise regulation of a complex network of processes is necessary for the maintenance of genomic stability, allowing genetic diversity but protecting against genetic instability and its consequences on oncogenesis. Two main strategies are employed for DSB repair: homologous recombination (HR) and non-homologous end-joining (NHEJ). HR is initiated by single-stranded DNA (ssDNA) resection and requires sequence homology with an intact partner, while NHEJ requires neither resection at initiation nor a homologous partner. Thus, resection is an pivotal step at DSB repair initiation, driving the choice of the DSB repair pathway employed. However, an alternative end-joining (A-EJ) pathway, which is highly mutagenic, has recently been described; A-EJ is initiated by ssDNA resection but does not require a homologous partner. The choice of the appropriate DSB repair system, for instance according the cell cycle stage, is essential for genome stability maintenance. In this context, controlling the initial events of DSB repair is thus an essential step that may be irreversible, and the wrong decision should lead to dramatic consequences. Here, we first present the main DSB repair mechanisms and then discuss the importance of the choice of the appropriate DSB repair pathway according to the cell cycle phase. In a third section, we present the early steps of DSB repair i.e., DSB signaling, chromatin remodeling, and the regulation of ssDNA resection. In the last part, we discuss the competition between the different DSB repair mechanisms. Finally, we conclude with the importance of the fine tuning of this network for genome stability maintenance and for tumor protection in fine

Noncanonical Roles of RAD51

Homologous recombination (HR), an evolutionary conserved pathway, plays a paramount role(s) in genome plasticity. The pivotal HR step is the strand invasion/exchange of double-stranded DNA by a homologous single-stranded DNA (ssDNA) covered by RAD51. Thus, RAD51 plays a prime role in HR through this canonical catalytic strand invasion/exchange activity. The mutations in many HR genes cause oncogenesis. Surprisingly, despite its central role in HR, the invalidation of RAD51 is not classified as being cancer prone, constituting the “RAD51 paradox”. This suggests that RAD51 exercises other noncanonical roles that are independent of its catalytic strand invasion/exchange function. For example, the binding of RAD51 on ssDNA prevents nonconservative mutagenic DNA repair, which is independent of its strand exchange activity but relies on its ssDNA occupancy. At the arrested replication forks, RAD51 plays several noncanonical roles in the formation, protection, and management of fork reversal, allowing for the resumption of replication. RAD51 also exhibits noncanonical roles in RNA-mediated processes. Finally, RAD51 pathogenic variants have been described in the congenital mirror movement syndrome, revealing an unexpected role in brain development. In this review, we present and discuss the different noncanonical roles of RAD51, whose presence does not automatically result in an HR event, revealing the multiple faces of this prominent actor in genomic plasticity

Homologous recombination, cancer and the ‘RAD51 paradox’

International audienceAbstract Genetic instability is a hallmark of cancer cells. Homologous recombination (HR) plays key roles in genome stability and variability due to its roles in DNA double-strand break and interstrand crosslink repair, and in the protection and resumption of arrested replication forks. HR deficiency leads to genetic instability, and, as expected, many HR genes are downregulated in cancer cells. The link between HR deficiency and cancer predisposition is exemplified by familial breast and ovarian cancers and by some subgroups of Fanconi anaemia syndromes. Surprisingly, although RAD51 plays a pivotal role in HR, i.e., homology search and in strand exchange with a homologous DNA partner, almost no inactivating mutations of RAD51 have been associated with cancer predisposition; on the contrary, overexpression of RAD51 is associated with a poor prognosis in different types of tumours. Taken together, these data highlight the fact that RAD51 differs from its HR partners with regard to cancer susceptibility and expose what we call the ‘RAD51 paradox’. Here, we catalogue the dysregulations of HR genes in human pathologies, including cancer and Fanconi anaemia or congenital mirror movement syndromes, and we discuss the RAD51 paradox

Defects in XRCC4 and KU80 differentially affect the joining of distal nonhomologous ends

XRCC4-null mice have a more severe phenotype than KU80-null mice. Here, we address whether this difference in phenotype is connected to nonhomologous end-joining (NHEJ). We used intrachromosomal substrates to monitor NHEJ of two distal double-strand breaks (DSBs) targeted by I-SceI, in living cells. In xrcc4-defective XR-1 cells, a residual but significant end-joining process exists, which primarily uses microhomologies distal from the DSB. However, NHEJ efficiency was strongly reduced in xrcc4-defective XR-1 cells versus complemented cells, contrasting with KU-deficient xrs6 cells, which showed levels of end-joining similar to those of complemented cells. Nevertheless, sequence analysis of the repair junctions indicated that the accuracy of end-joining was strongly affected in both xrcc4-deficient and KU-deficient cells. More specifically, these data showed that the KU80/XRCC4 pathway is conservative and not intrinsically error-prone but can accommodate non-fully complementary ends at the cost of limited mutagenesis

53BP1 Protects against CtIP-Dependent Capture of Ectopic Chromosomal Sequences at the Junction of Distant Double-Strand Breaks

DNA double-strand breaks (DSB) are very harmful lesions that can generate genome rearrangements. In this study, we used intrachromosomal reporters to compare both the efficiency and accuracy of end-joining occurring with close (34 bp apart) vs. distant DSBs (3200 bp apart) in human fibroblasts. We showed that a few kb between two intrachromosomal I-SceI-induced DSBs are sufficient to foster deletions and capture/insertions at the junction scar. Captured sequences are mostly coupled to deletions and can be partial duplications of the reporter (i.e., sequences adjacent to the DSB) or insertions of ectopic chromosomal sequences (ECS). Interestingly, silencing 53BP1 stimulates capture/insertions with distant but not with close double-strand ends (DSEs), although deletions were stimulated in both case. This shows that 53BP1 protects both close and distant DSEs from degradation and that the association of unprotection with distance between DSEs favors ECS capture. Reciprocally, silencing CtIP lessens ECS capture both in control and 53BP1-depleted cells. We propose that close ends are immediately/rapidly tethered and ligated, whereas distant ends first require synapsis of the distant DSEs prior to ligation. This "spatio-temporal" gap gives time and space for CtIP to initiate DNA resection, suggesting an involvement of single-stranded DNA tails for ECS capture. We therefore speculate that the resulting single-stranded DNA copies ECS through microhomology-mediated template switching