Ectopic expression of RNF168 and 53BP1 increases mutagenic but not physiological non-homologous end joining

DNA double strand breaks (DSBs) formed during S phase are preferentially repaired by homologous recombination (HR), whereas G₁ DSBs, such as those occurring during immunoglobulin class switch recombination (CSR), are repaired by non-homologous end joining (NHEJ). The DNA damage response proteins 53BP1 and BRCA1 regulate the balance between NHEJ and HR. 53BP1 promotes CSR in part by mediating synapsis of distal DNA ends, and in addition, inhibits 5’ end resection. BRCA1 antagonizes 53BP1 dependent DNA end-blocking activity during S phase, which would otherwise promote mutagenic NHEJ and genome instability. Recently, it was shown that supra-physiological levels of the E3 ubiquitin ligase RNF168 results in the hyper-accumulation of 53BP1/BRCA1 which accelerates DSB repair. Here, we ask whether increased expression of RNF168 or 53BP1 impacts physiological versus mutagenic NHEJ. We find that the anti-resection activities of 53BP1 are rate-limiting for mutagenic NHEJ but not for physiological CSR. As heterogeneity in the expression of RNF168 and 53BP1 is found in human tumors, our results suggest that deregulation of the RNF168/53BP1 pathway could alter the chemosensitivity of BRCA1 deficient tumors.     

RIF1: A novel regulatory factor for DNA replication and DNA damage response signaling

DNA double strand breaks (DSBs) are highly toxic to the cells and accumulation of DSBs results in several detrimental effects in various cellular processes which can lead to neurological, immunological and developmental disorders. Failure of the repair of DSBs spurs mutagenesis and is a driver of tumorigenesis, thus underscoring the importance of the accurate repair of DSBs. Two major canonical DSB repair pathways are the non-homologous end joining (NHEJ) and homologous recombination (HR) pathways. 53BP1 and BRCA1 are the key mediator proteins which coordinate with other components of the DNA repair machinery in the NHEJ and HR pathways respectively, and their exclusive recruitment to DNA breaks/ends potentially decides the choice of repair by either NHEJ or HR. Recently, Rap1 interacting factor 1 has been identified as an important component of the DNA repair pathway which acts downstream of the ATM/53BP1 to inhibit the 5′–3′ end resection of broken DNA ends, in-turn facilitating NHEJ repair and inhibiting homology directed repair. Rif1 is conserved from yeast to humans but its function has evolved from telomere length regulation in yeast to the maintenance of genome integrity in mammalian cells. Recently its role in the maintenance of genomic integrity has been expanded to include the regulation of chromatin structure, replication timing and intra-S phase checkpoint. We present a summary of these important findings highlighting the various aspects of Rif1 functions and discuss the key implications for genomic integrity.     

H4K20me2 distinguishes pre-replicative from post-replicative chromatin to appropriately direct DNA repair pathway choice by 53BP1-RIF1-MAD2L2

The main pathways for the repair of DNA double strand breaks (DSBs) are non-homologous end-joining (NHEJ) and homologous recombination directed repair (HDR). These operate mutually exclusive and are activated by 53BP1 and BRCA1, respectively. As HDR can only succeed in the presence of an intact copy of replicated DNA, cells employ several mechanisms to inactivate HDR in the G1 phase of cell cycle. As cells enter S-phase, these inhibitory mechanisms are released and HDR becomes active. However, during DNA replication, NHEJ and HDR pathways are both functional and non-replicated and replicated DNA regions co-exist, with the risk of aberrant HDR activity at DSBs in non-replicated DNA. It has become clear that DNA repair pathway choice depends on inhibition of DNA end-resection by 53BP1 and its downstream factors RIF1 and MAD2L2. However, it is unknown how MAD2L2 accumulates at DSBs to participate in DNA repair pathway control and how the NHEJ and HDR repair pathways are appropriately activated at DSBs with respect to the replication status of the DNA, such that NHEJ acts at DSBs in pre-replicative DNA and HDR acts on DSBs in post-replicative DNA. Here we show that MAD2L2 is recruited to DSBs in H4K20 dimethylated chromatin by forming a protein complex with 53BP1 and RIF1 and that MAD2L2, similar to 53BP1 and RIF1, suppresses DSB accumulation of BRCA1. Furthermore, we show that the replication status of the DNA locally ensures the engagement of the correct DNA repair pathway, through epigenetics. In non-replicated DNA, saturating levels of the 53BP1 binding site, di-methylated lysine 20 of histone 4 (H4K20me2), lead to robust 53BP1-RIF1-MAD2L2 recruitment at DSBs, with consequent exclusion of BRCA1. Conversely, replication-associated 2-fold dilution of H4K20me2 promotes the release of the 53BP1-RIF1-MAD2L2 complex and favours the access of BRCA1. Thus, the differential H4K20 methylation status between pre-replicative and post-replicative DNA represents an intrinsic mechanism that locally ensures appropriate recruitment of the 53BP1-RIF1-MAD2L2 complex at DNA DSBs, to engage the correct DNA repair pathway.     

HP1 promotes tumor suppressor BRCA1 functions during the DNA damage response

The DNA damage response (DDR) involves both the control of DNA damage repair and signaling to cell cycle checkpoints. Therefore, unraveling the underlying mechanisms of the DDR is important for understanding tumor suppression and cellular resistance to clastogenic cancer therapeutics. Because the DDR is likely to be influenced by chromatin regulation at the sites of DNA damage, we investigated the role of heterochromatin protein 1 (HP1) during the DDR process. We monitored double-strand breaks (DSBs) using the γH2AX foci marker and found that depleting cells of HP1 caused genotoxic stress, a delay in the repair of DSBs and elevated levels of apoptosis after irradiation. Furthermore, we found that these defects in repair were associated with impaired BRCA1 function. Depleting HP1 reduced recruitment of BRCA1 to DSBs and caused defects in two BRCA1-mediated DDR events: (i) the homologous recombination repair pathway and (ii) the arrest of cell cycle at the G₂/M checkpoint. In contrast, depleting HP1 from cells did not affect the non-homologous end-joining (NHEJ) pathway: instead it elevated the recruitment of the 53BP1 NHEJ factor to DSBs. Notably, all three subtypes of HP1 seemed to be almost equally important for these DDR functions. We suggest that the dynamic interaction of HP1 with chromatin and other DDR factors could determine DNA repair choice and cell fate after DNA damage. We also suggest that compromising HP1 expression could promote tumorigenesis by impairing the function of the BRCA1 tumor suppressor.     

SHLD2/FAM35A co‐operates with REV7 to coordinate DNA double‐strand break repair pathway choice

DNA double‐strand breaks (DSBs) can be repaired by two major pathways: non‐homologous end‐joining (NHEJ) and homologous recombination (HR). DNA repair pathway choice is governed by the opposing activities of 53BP1, in complex with its effectors RIF1 and REV7, and BRCA1. However, it remains unknown how the 53BP1/RIF1/REV7 complex stimulates NHEJ and restricts HR to the S/G2 phases of the cell cycle. Using a mass spectrometry (MS)‐based approach, we identify 11 high‐confidence REV7 interactors and elucidate the role of SHLD2 (previously annotated as FAM35A and RINN2) as an effector of REV7 in the NHEJ pathway. FAM35A depletion impairs NHEJ‐mediated DNA repair and compromises antibody diversification by class switch recombination (CSR) in B cells. FAM35A accumulates at DSBs in a 53BP1‐, RIF1‐, and REV7‐dependent manner and antagonizes HR by limiting DNA end resection. In fact, FAM35A is part of a larger complex composed of REV7 and SHLD1 (previously annotated as C20orf196 and RINN3), which promotes NHEJ and limits HR. Together, these results establish SHLD2 as a novel effector of REV7 in controlling the decision‐making process during DSB repair.     

Ring Finger Nuclear Factor RNF168 Is Important for Defects in Homologous Recombination Caused by Loss of the Breast Cancer Susceptibility Factor BRCA1

The RING finger nuclear factor RNF168 is required for recruitment of several DNA damage response factors to double strand breaks (DSBs), including 53BP1 and BRCA1. Because 53BP1 and BRCA1 function antagonistically during the DSB repair pathway homologous recombination (HR), the influence of RNF168 on HR has been unclear. We report that RNF168 depletion causes an elevated frequency of two distinct HR pathways (homology-directed repair and single strand annealing), suppresses defects in HR caused by BRCA1 silencing, but does not suppress HR defects caused by disruption of CtIP, RAD50, BRCA2, or RAD51. Furthermore, RNF168-depleted cells can form ionizing radiation-induced foci of the recombinase RAD51 without forming BRCA1 ionizing radiation-induced foci, indicating that this loss of BRCA1 recruitment to DSBs does not reflect a loss of function during HR. Additionally, we find that RNF168 and 53BP1 have a similar influence on HR. We suggest that RNF168 is important for HR defects caused by BRCA1 loss.     

Opposing roles for 53BP1 during homologous recombination

Although DNA non-homologous end-joining repairs most DNA double-strand breaks (DSBs) in G2 phase, late repairing DSBs undergo resection and repair by homologous recombination (HR). Based on parallels to the situation in G1 cells, previous work has suggested that DSBs that undergo repair by HR predominantly localize to regions of heterochromatin (HC). By using H3K9me3 and H4K20me3 to identify HC regions, we substantiate and extend previous evidence, suggesting that HC-DSBs undergo repair by HR. Next, we examine roles for 53BP1 and BRCA1 in this process. Previous studies have shown that 53BP1 is pro-non-homologous end-joining and anti-HR. Surprisingly, we demonstrate that in G2 phase, 53BP1 is required for HR at HC-DSBs with its role being to promote phosphorylated KAP-1 foci formation. BRCA1, in contrast, is dispensable for pKAP-1 foci formation but relieves the barrier caused by 53BP1. As 53BP1 is retained at irradiation-induced foci during HR, we propose that BRCA1 promotes displacement but retention of 53BP1 to allow resection and any necessary HC modifications to complete HR. In contrast to this role for 53BP1 in HR in G2 phase, we show that it is dispensable for HR in S phase, where HC regions are likely relaxed during replication.     

BRCA1 functions independently of homologous recombination in DNA interstrand crosslink repair

Brca1 is required for DNA repair by homologous recombination (HR) and normal embryonic development. Here we report that deletion of the DNA damage response factor 53BP1 overcomes embryonic lethality in Brca1-nullizygous mice and rescues HR deficiency, as measured by hypersensitivity to polyADP-ribose polymerase (PARP) inhibition. However, Brca1,53BP1 double-deficient cells are hypersensitive to DNA interstrand crosslinks (ICLs), indicating that BRCA1 has an additional role in DNA crosslink repair that is distinct from HR. Disruption of the nonhomologous end-joining (NHEJ) factor, Ku, promotes DNA repair in Brca1-deficient cells; however deletion of either Ku or 53BP1 exacerbates genomic instability in cells lacking FANCD2, a mediator of the Fanconi anemia pathway for ICL repair. BRCA1 therefore has two separate roles in ICL repair that can be modulated by manipulating NHEJ, whereas FANCD2 provides a key activity that cannot be bypassed by ablation of 53BP1 or Ku.     

DNA repair pathway choice—a PTIP of the hat to 53BP1

In the June issue of Cell, Nussenzweig and colleagues identify PTIP/PAXIP as a 53BP1 effector protein in the regulatory network that controls DSB repair pathway choice.Cell (2013) 153 6, 1266–1280 doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2013.05.023DNA double-stranded breaks (DSBs) are highly cytotoxic lesions that can induce genome rearrangements if not accurately repaired. DSBs can be repaired either through homologous recombination (HR) or non-homologous end-joining (NHEJ). HR is the preferred repair pathway during the S and G2 cell cycle phases because a sister chromatid provides a perfect template for ‘error-free'' repair. During G1, when HR is suppressed to prevent recombination with homologues, repair is achieved primarily by NHEJ. Molecularly, DSB repair pathway choice is largely regulated at the level of 5′ to 3′ DNA end resection, that is, the formation of the 3′ end single-stranded DNA overhangs that are used to initiate HR. End resection inhibits NHEJ and promotes HR.In the June issue of Cell, Nussenzweig and colleagues identified the protein PTIP (also known as PAXIP) as a new component of the regulatory network that controls DSB repair pathway choice [1]. This work has important implications for our understanding of the mechanisms by which genomic integrity is underpinned, and is especially germane to those interested in the genesis of breast and ovarian cancer caused by a defective BRCA1 protein, which is crucial for DSB repair by HR.53BP1 (also known as TP53BP1) is a key determinant of DSB repair pathway choice [2]. In response to DSBs, 53BP1 binds to chromatin at damaged sites, where it promotes NHEJ by blocking end resection. 53BP1 has a crucial role during class switch recombination (CSR) in B cells and the fusion of dysfunctional telomeres. An even more striking phenotype was observed in mice in which loss of 53BP1 reversed most of the phenotypes associated with BRCA1 deficiency, including cell and embryonic lethality as well as tumorigenesis [2]. These findings suggest that 53BP1 and BRCA1 battle each other to influence DSB repair pathway choice.Molecularly, 53BP1 is responsible for the defective HR seen in BRCA1-deficient cells. Furthermore, in those cells, 53BP1 promotes the formation of characteristic radial chromosomes that are caused by toxic NHEJ events, presumably during S phase. Understanding exactly how 53BP1 carries out its many functions has been a major challenge to the field as 53BP1 does not harbour any enzymatic activity. However, it has been shown that 53BP1 must accumulate on chromatin to be functional. In addition, a mutant 53BP1 allele in which all 28 ataxia telangiectasia-mutated (ATM) phosphorylation sites were changed to alanine (53BP1^28A) failed to rescue 53BP1 deficiency, suggesting that 53BP1 acts through phosphorylation-dependent protein interactions to promote NHEJ [2].RIF1 was identified as the first effector of 53BP1 in DSB repair [3,4,5,6,7]. RIF1 accumulates at DSB sites by binding to phosphorylated 53BP1 but, intriguingly, the loss of RIF1 has a milder effect than the loss of 53BP1 with respect to the fusion of dysfunctional telomeres [3], and RIF1 deficiency does not fully restore HR in BRCA1-deficient cells [7]. As the 53BP1^28A mutant is nearly as defective as the complete loss of 53BP1 for these activities, these observations indicate that additional 53BP1 effector proteins contribute to some of the 53BP1 functions.Nussenzweig and colleagues provide compelling evidence that the BRCT domain-containing protein PTIP is the missing 53BP1 effector protein [1]. The authors identified a separation-of-function mutation in 53BP1 that disrupted the first eight amino-terminal ATM sites (53BP1^8A). The 53BP1^8A mutant behaved the same as the wild-type protein with respect to CSR—a physiological process dependent on NHEJ—but failed to promote genome instability (radial chromosome formation) in BRCA1-deficient cells after treatment with a PARP inhibitor. Since RIF1-deficient cells have impaired CSR and RIF1 can localize to break sites in cells expressing the 53BP1^8A mutant, this suggests that a protein other than RIF1 binds to the N-terminal region of 53BP1 to inhibit HR.The newly identified 53BP1 effector protein PTIP is a multifunctional DNA repair factor that interacts with phosphorylated Ser 25 of 53BP1 through its tandem BRCT domains [8]—a site that was mutated in the 53BP1^8A allele. PTIP is also part of the MLL3/MLL4 histone H3 Lys 4 methyltransferase complexes but this function seems to be unrelated to its role as a 53BP1 co-factor.Nussenzweig and co-workers found that PTIP-deficient cells are sensitive to ionizing radiation but tolerant of DNA damaging agents that are toxic to HR-deficient cells, which suggests a role for PTIP in NHEJ. In agreement with this, the fusion frequency of uncapped telomeres was reduced in PTIP-deficient cells. Interestingly, as in the case of the 53BP1^8A allele, PTIP-deficient B cells were proficient in switching their immunoglobulin locus, although this switching event is impaired in RIF1^−/− B cells. This suggests that PTIP might participate selectively in pathological NHEJ.Nussenzweig and colleagues next generated a conditional BRCA1^−/− PTIP^−/− mouse to investigate the contribution of PTIP to the genome instability of BRCA1-deficient B cells. Loss of PTIP restored normal growth kinetics and genome stability to BRCA1-deficient cells treated with a PARP inhibitor. In addition, RAD51 IR-induced focus formation was restored in BRCA1^−/− PTIP^−/− cells. As the primary defect of BRCA1-deficient cells with respect to HR seems to be at the level of resection, the accumulation of the single-stranded DNA-binding protein RPA into IR-induced foci was then analysed. The finding that PTIP-deficient cells have an increased number of RPA foci per cell supports a role for PTIP in blocking resection. Together, this suggests that PTIP opposes DNA end resection and mutagenic DSB repair in BRCA1-deficient cells.These results were surprising as they revealed that the 53BP1 activities relating to physiological NHEJ (during CSR) and mutagenic NHEJ (after PARP inhibition) can be separated, and that they are carried out by two distinct proteins that ‘read'' ATM-dependent 53BP1 phosphorylation. The relationship between 53BP1, RIF1 and PTIP is probably complex, as suggested by the possible competition between RIF1 and PTIP, and the observation that both proteins contribute in an additive manner to the fusion of dysfunctional telomeres, downstream from 53BP1.According to these findings, multiple phosphorylation events in 53BP1 seem to integrate ATM activity to control distinct aspects of DSB repair pathway choice (Fig 1). Establishing exactly how an increase of ATM activity at break sites is translated into the coordination of 53BP1 phosphorylation, with RIF1 and PTIP binding, will be an important milestone towards understanding 53BP1 function. Indeed, multi-site phosphorylation and its recognition by binding proteins can be used to develop switch-like responses that might be important for organizing the chromatin at DSB sites.Open in a separate windowFigure 153BP1 phospho-dependent interactions involved in DSB repair. PTIP and RIF1 interact with chromatin-bound and ATM-phosphorylated 53BP1 at DSB sites. PTIP binds directly to 53BP1 phosphorylated on Ser 14;25 (within the first eight Ser/Thr-Q sites). RIF1 binds to phosphorylated 53BP1 either directly or through an intermediate factor (X). The carboxy-terminal seven Ser/Thr-Q sites (9–15 Ser/Thr-Q sites) are involved in the interaction of RIF1–53BP1, although the amino-terminal eight Ser/Thr-Q sites might stabilize the binding. It is unknown whether PTIP and RIF1 can associate simultaneously with 53BP1 (left side of the figure), or if the binding is exclusive, due to either differential phosphorylation of the Ser/Thr-Q sites or steric hindrance (right side of the figure). 53BP1, PTIP and RIF1 block DNA end-resection and promote NHEJ repair. Although both PTIP and RIF1 contribute to dysfunctional telomere fusions, they also have distinct functions downstream from 53BP1. While RIF1 is essential for CSR and has a milder effect on toxic NHEJ events, PTIP is dispensable for CSR and has a more prominent role in toxic NHEJ events that lead to genome instability in BRCA1-deficient cells. ATM, ataxia telangiectasia-mutated; CSR, class switch recombination; DSB, double-stranded break; NHEJ, non-homologous end-joining.The identification of PTIP as a new 53BP1 effector also deepens the mystery of DSB repair pathway choice regulation by 53BP1. Future studies are needed to elucidate how 53BP1 and its effector proteins block resection. Are PTIP and RIF1 blocking specific nucleases? Do they act in a temporally distinct fashion or are they distributed in distinct subdomains of the chromatin flanking DSB sites? What is the function of PTIP in relation to the cell cycle? Testing whether RIF1 binds directly to 53BP1, and if so to which phosphorylated site, might answer some of the above questions. The identification of a RIF1 mutation that selectively disrupts 53BP1 binding would enable surgical manipulation of the 53BP1–RIF1–PTIP circuit at DSB sites.Another unresolved issue is whether 53BP1 acts solely by recruiting RIF1 and PTIP, or whether 53BP1 has a more active role in blocking resection. We have shown that 53BP1 localizes to the chromatin flanking the DSBs by binding to methylated and ubiquitinated nucleosomes, in a wheel clamp-like manner [9]. This suggests that 53BP1 might modify the nucleosomal array structure in a way that makes it refractory to the resection machinery. Recognizing how nucleosomes modified by 53BP1 cooperate with RIF1 and PTIP might provide clues to the role of these two proteins in end protection.It is important to note that in human cells, PTIP might not be recruited to DSB sites in a 53BP1- and ATM-dependent manner [8]. Furthermore, in the avian B-cell line DT40, PTIP promotes HR instead of inhibiting it [10]. It will be important to revisit these studies to tease out whether these differences are due to context-, experiment- or species-specific effects.The identification of PTIP as a candidate genetic modifier of BRCA1-deficient tumours is an important finding. As noted by the authors, disabling the PTIP–53BP1 interaction pharmacologically might selectively restore HR in BRCA1-deficient cells, which might be useful in certain contexts, for example as a chemopreventive strategy.     

RAD18 promotes DNA double-strand break repair during G1 phase through chromatin retention of 53BP1

Recruitment of RAD18 to stalled replication forks facilitates monoubiquitination of PCNA during S-phase, promoting translesion synthesis at sites of UV irradiation-induced DNA damage. In this study, we show that RAD18 is also recruited to ionizing radiation (IR)-induced sites of DNA double-strand breaks (DSBs) forming foci which are co-localized with 53BP1, NBS1, phosphorylated ATM, BRCA1 and γ-H2AX. RAD18 associates with 53BP1 and is recruited to DSB sites in a 53BP1-dependent manner specifically during G1-phase, RAD18 monoubiquitinates KBD domain of 53BP1 at lysine 1268 in vitro. A monoubiquitination-resistant 53BP1 mutant harboring a substitution at lysine 1268 is not retained efficiently at the chromatin in the vicinity of DSBs. In Rad18-null cells, retention of 53BP1 foci, efficiency of DSB repair and post-irradiation viability are impaired compared with wild-type cells. Taken together, these results suggest that RAD18 promotes 53BP1-directed DSB repair by enhancing retention of 53BP1, possibly through an interaction between RAD18 and 53BP1 and the modification of 53BP1.     

Homologous recombination protects mammalian cells from replication-associated DNA double-strand breaks arising in response to methyl methanesulfonate

DNA-methylating agents of the S_N2 type target DNA mostly at ring nitrogens, producing predominantly N-methylated purines. These adducts are repaired by base excision repair (BER). Since defects in BER cause accumulation of DNA single-strand breaks (SSBs) and sensitize cells to the agents, it has been suggested that some of the lesions on their own or BER intermediates (e.g. apurinic sites) are cytotoxic, blocking DNA replication and inducing replication-mediated DNA double-strand breaks (DSBs). Here, we addressed the question of whether homologous recombination (HR) or non-homologous end-joining (NHEJ) or both are involved in the repair of DSBs formed following treatment of cells with methyl methanesulfonate (MMS). We show that HR defective cells (BRCA2, Rad51D and XRCC3 mutants) are dramatically more sensitive to MMS-induced DNA damage as measured by colony formation, apoptosis and chromosomal aberrations, while NHEJ defective cells (Ku80 and DNA-PK_CS mutants) are only mildly sensitive to the killing, apoptosis-inducing and clastogenic effects of MMS. On the other hand, the HR mutants were almost completely refractory to the formation of sister chromatid exchanges (SCEs) following MMS treatment. Since DSBs are expected to be formed specifically in the S-phase, we assessed the formation and kinetics of repair of DSBs by γH2AX quantification in a cell cycle specific manner. In the cytotoxic dose range of MMS a significant amount of γH2AX foci was induced in S, but not G1- and G2-phase cells. A major fraction of γH2AX foci colocalized with 53BP1 and phosphorylated ATM, indicating they are representative of DSBs. DSB formation following MMS treatment was also demonstrated by the neutral comet assay. Repair kinetics revealed that HR mutants exhibit a significant delay in DSB repair, while NHEJ mutants completed S-phase specific DSB repair with a kinetic similar to the wildtype. Moreover, DNA-PKcs inhibition in HR mutants did not affect the repair kinetics after MMS treatment. Overall, the data indicate that agents producing N-alkylpurines in the DNA induce replication-dependent DSBs. Further, they show that HR is the major pathway of protection of cells against DSB formation, killing and genotoxicity following S_N2-alkylating agents.     

Antagonistic relationship of NuA4 with the non-homologous end-joining machinery at DNA damage sites

The NuA4 histone acetyltransferase complex, apart from its known role in gene regulation, has also been directly implicated in the repair of DNA double-strand breaks (DSBs), favoring homologous recombination (HR) in S/G2 during the cell cycle. Here, we investigate the antagonistic relationship of NuA4 with non-homologous end joining (NHEJ) factors. We show that budding yeast Rad9, the 53BP1 ortholog, can inhibit NuA4 acetyltransferase activity when bound to chromatin in vitro. While we previously reported that NuA4 is recruited at DSBs during the S/G2 phase, we can also detect its recruitment in G1 when genes for Rad9 and NHEJ factors Yku80 and Nej1 are mutated. This is accompanied with the binding of single-strand DNA binding protein RPA and Rad52, indicating DNA end resection in G1 as well as recruitment of the HR machinery. This NuA4 recruitment to DSBs in G1 depends on Mre11-Rad50-Xrs2 (MRX) and Lcd1/Ddc2 and is linked to the hyper-resection phenotype of NHEJ mutants. It also implicates NuA4 in the resection-based single-strand annealing (SSA) repair pathway along Rad52. Interestingly, we identified two novel non-histone acetylation targets of NuA4, Nej1 and Yku80. Acetyl-mimicking mutant of Nej1 inhibits repair of DNA breaks by NHEJ, decreases its interaction with other core NHEJ factors such as Yku80 and Lif1 and favors end resection. Altogether, these results establish a strong reciprocal antagonistic regulatory function of NuA4 and NHEJ factors in repair pathway choice and suggests a role of NuA4 in alternative repair mechanisms in situations where some DNA-end resection can occur in G1.     

PARP-mediated repair,homologous recombination,and back-up non-homologous end joining-like repair of single-strand nicks

Double-strand breaks (DSBs) in chromosomal DNA can induce both homologous recombination (HR) and non-homologous end-joining (NHEJ). Recently we showed that single-strand nicks induce HR with a significant reduction in toxicity and mutagenic effects associated with NHEJ. To further investigate the differences and similarities of DSB- and nick-induced repair, we used an integrated reporter system in human cells to measure HR and NHEJ produced by the homing endonuclease I-AniI and a designed ‘nickase’ variant that nicks the same target site, focusing on the PARP and HR repair pathways. PARP inhibitors, which block single-strand break repair, increased the rate of nick-induced HR up to 1.7-fold but did not affect DSB-induced HR or mutNHEJ. Additionally, expression of the PALB2 WD40 domain in trans acted as a dominant-negative inhibitor of both DSB- and nick-induced HR, sensitized cells to PARP inhibition, and revealed an alternative mutagenic repair pathway for nicks. Thus, while both DSB- and nick-induced HR use a common pathway, their substrates are differentially processed by cellular factors. These results also suggest that the synthetic lethality of PARP and BRCA may be due to repair of nicks through an error prone, NHEJ-like mechanism that is active when both PARP and HR pathways are blocked.     

Repair of chromosomal double-strand breaks by precise ligation in human cells

Double-strand breaks (DSBs), a common type of DNA lesion, occur daily in human cells as a result of both endogenous and exogenous damaging agents. DSBs are repaired in two general ways: by the homology-dependent, error-free pathways of homologous recombination (HR) and by the homology-independent, error-prone pathways of nonhomologous end-joining (NHEJ), with NHEJ predominating in most cells. DSBs with compatible ends can be re-joined in vitro with DNA ligase alone, which raises the question of whether such DSBs require the more elaborate machinery of NHEJ to be repaired in cells. Here we report that chromosomal DSBs with compatible ends introduced by the rare-cutting endonuclease, ISceI, are repaired by precise ligation nearly 100% of the time in human cells. Precise ligation depends on the classical NHEJ components Ku70, XRCC4, and DNA ligase IV, since siRNA knockdowns of these factors significantly reduced the efficiency of precise ligation. Interestingly, knockdown of the tumor suppressors p53 or BRCA1 showed similar effects as the knockdowns of NHEJ factors. In contrast, knockdown of components involved in alternative NHEJ, mismatch repair, nucleotide excision repair, and single-strand break repair did not reduce precise ligation. In summary, our results demonstrate that DSBs in human cells are efficiently repaired by precise ligation, which requires classical NHEJ components and is enhanced by p53 and BRCA1.     

BRCA1 modulates the autophosphorylation status of DNA-PKcs in S phase of the cell cycle

Non-homologous end-joining (NHEJ) and homologous recombination (HR) are the two prominent pathways responsible for the repair of DNA double-strand breaks (DSBs). NHEJ is not restricted to a cell-cycle stage, whereas HR is active primarily in the S/G2 phases suggesting there are cell cycle-specific mechanisms that play a role in the choice between NHEJ and HR. Here we show NHEJ is attenuated in S phase via modulation of the autophosphorylation status of the NHEJ factor DNA-PKcs at serine 2056 by the pro-HR factor BRCA1. BRCA1 interacts with DNA-PKcs in a cell cycle-regulated manner and this interaction is mediated by the tandem BRCT domain of BRCA1, but surprisingly in a phospho-independent manner. BRCA1 attenuates DNA-PKcs autophosphorylation via directly blocking the ability of DNA-PKcs to autophosphorylate. Subsequently, blocking autophosphorylation of DNA-PKcs at the serine 2056 phosphorylation cluster promotes HR-required DNA end processing and loading of HR factors to DSBs and is a possible mechanism by which BRCA1 promotes HR.     

Spindle Checkpoint Factors Bub1 and Bub2 Promote DNA Double-Strand Break Repair by Nonhomologous End Joining

The nonhomologous end-joining (NHEJ) pathway is essential for the preservation of genome integrity, as it efficiently repairs DNA double-strand breaks (DSBs). Previous biochemical and genetic investigations have indicated that, despite the importance of this pathway, the entire complement of genes regulating NHEJ remains unknown. To address this, we employed a plasmid-based NHEJ DNA repair screen in budding yeast (Saccharomyces cerevisiae) using 369 putative nonessential DNA repair-related components as queries. Among the newly identified genes associated with NHEJ deficiency upon disruption are two spindle assembly checkpoint kinases, Bub1 and Bub2. Both observation of resulting phenotypes and chromatin immunoprecipitation demonstrated that Bub1 and -2, either alone or in combination with cell cycle regulators, are recruited near the DSB, where phosphorylated Rad53 or H2A accumulates. Large-scale proteomic analysis of Bub kinases phosphorylated in response to DNA damage identified previously unknown kinase substrates on Tel1 S/T-Q sites. Moreover, Bub1 NHEJ function appears to be conserved in mammalian cells. 53BP1, which influences DSB repair by NHEJ, colocalizes with human BUB1 and is recruited to the break sites. Thus, while Bub is not a core component of NHEJ machinery, our data support its dual role in mitotic exit and promotion of NHEJ repair in yeast and mammals.     

Genetic dissection of vertebrate 53BP1: a major role in non-homologous end joining of DNA double strand breaks

53BP1 (p53 binding protein) is a BRCT domain-containing protein that is rapidly recruited to DNA double strand breaks (DSBs). To investigate the role of 53BP1 in the DNA damage response, we generated 53BP1(-/-) cells from the chicken DT40 cell line. As in mammalian cells, mutation of 53BP1 increased cellular sensitivity to ionizing radiation. Although depletion of 53BP1 resulted in checkpoint defects in mammalian cells, DT40 53BP1(-/-) cells had normal intra S phase and G2/M checkpoints. G1 specific radiosensitivity and a higher sensitivity to topoisomerase II suggested defective non-homologous end joining (NHEJ) defects in DT40 53BP1(-/-) cells. Genetic analyses confirm this suggestion as we have demonstrated an epistatic relationship between 53BP1 and the NHEJ genes, Ku70 and Artemis, but not with Rad54, a gene essential for repair of DSBs by homologous recombination. We conclude that the major role of 53BP1 in supporting survival of DT40 cells that have suffered DNA DSBs is in facilitating repair by NHEJ.