Genome-wide Reinforcement of Cohesin Binding at Pre-existing Cohesin Sites in Response to Ionizing Radiation in Human Cells

The cohesin complex plays a central role in genome maintenance by regulation of chromosome segregation in mitosis and DNA damage response (DDR) in other phases of the cell cycle. The ATM/ATR phosphorylates SMC1 and SMC3, two core components of the cohesin complex to regulate checkpoint signaling and DNA repair. In this report, we show that the genome-wide binding of SMC1 and SMC3 after ionizing radiation (IR) is enhanced by reinforcing pre-existing cohesin binding sites in human cancer cells. We demonstrate that ATM and SMC3 phosphorylation at Ser¹⁰⁸³ regulate this process. We also demonstrate that acetylation of SMC3 at Lys¹⁰⁵ and Lys¹⁰⁶ is induced by IR and this induction depends on the acetyltransferase ESCO1 as well as the ATM/ATR kinases. Consistently, both ESCO1 and SMC3 acetylation are required for intra-S phase checkpoint and cellular survival after IR. Although both IR-induced acetylation and phosphorylation of SMC3 are under the control of ATM/ATR, the two forms of modification are independent of each other and both are required to promote reinforcement of SMC3 binding to cohesin sites. Thus, SMC3 modifications is a mechanism for genome-wide reinforcement of cohesin binding in response to DNA damage response in human cells and enhanced cohesion is a downstream event of DDR.     

DNA damage signaling in response to double-strand breaks during mitosis

The signaling cascade initiated in response to DNA double-strand breaks (DSBs) has been extensively investigated in interphase cells. Here, we show that mitotic cells treated with DSB-inducing agents activate a “primary” DNA damage response (DDR) comprised of early signaling events, including activation of the protein kinases ataxia telangiectasia mutated (ATM) and DNA-dependent protein kinase (DNA-PK), histone H2AX phosphorylation together with recruitment of mediator of DNA damage checkpoint 1 (MDC1), and the Mre11–Rad50–Nbs1 (MRN) complex to damage sites. However, mitotic cells display no detectable recruitment of the E3 ubiquitin ligases RNF8 and RNF168, or accumulation of 53BP1 and BRCA1, at DSB sites. Accordingly, we found that DNA-damage signaling is attenuated in mitotic cells, with full DDR activation only ensuing when a DSB-containing mitotic cell enters G1. Finally, we present data suggesting that induction of a primary DDR in mitosis is important because transient inactivation of ATM and DNA-PK renders mitotic cells hypersensitive to DSB-inducing agents.     

Acetylation of Histone H2AX at Lys 5 by the TIP60 Histone Acetyltransferase Complex Is Essential for the Dynamic Binding of NBS1 to Damaged Chromatin

The association and dissociation of DNA damage response (DDR) factors with damaged chromatin occurs dynamically, which is crucial for the activation of DDR signaling in a spatiotemporal manner. We previously showed that the TIP60 histone acetyltransferase complex acetylates histone H2AX, to facilitate H2AX exchange at sites of DNA damage. However, it remained unclear how the acetylation of histone H2AX by TIP60 is related to the DDR signaling. We found that the acetylation but not the phosphorylation of H2AX is essential for the turnover of NBS1 on damaged chromatin. The loss of H2AX acetylation at Lys 5 by TIP60 in cells disturbed the accumulation of NBS1 at sites of DNA damage. Although the phosphorylation of H2AX is also reportedly required for the retention of NBS1 at damage sites, our data indicated that the acetylation-dependent NBS1 turnover by TIP60 on damaged chromatin restricts the dispersal of NBS1 foci from the sites of DNA damage. These findings indicate the importance of the acetylation-dependent dynamic binding of NBS1 to damaged chromatin, created by histone H2AX exchange, for the proper accumulation of NBS1 at DNA damage sites.     

A novel role for Greatwall kinase in recovery from DNA damage

Activation of the DNA damage response (DDR) is critical for genomic integrity and tumor suppression. The occurrence of DNA damage quickly evokes the DDR through ATM/ATR-dependent signal transduction, which promotes DNA repair and activates the checkpoint to halt cell cycle progression. The shut off process of the DDR upon satisfaction of DNA repair, also known as “checkpoint recovery,” involves deactivation of DDR elements, but the mechanism is poorly understood. Greatwall kinase (Gwl) has been identified as a key element in the G₂/M transition and helps maintain M phase through inhibition of PP2A/B55δ, the principal phosphatase for Cdk-phosphorylated substrates. Here, we show that Gwl also promotes recovery from DNA damage and is itself directly inhibited by the DNA damage response (DDR). In Xenopus egg extracts, immunodepletion of Gwl increased the DDR to damaged DNA, whereas addition of wild-type, but not kinase-dead Gwl, inhibited the DDR. The removal of damaged DNA from egg extracts leads to recovery from checkpoint arrest and entry into mitosis, a process impaired by Gwl depletion and enhanced by Gwl overexpression. Moreover, activation of Cdk1 after the removal of damaged DNA is regulated by Gwl. Collectively, these results defines Gwl as a new regulator of the DDR, which plays an important role in recovery from DNA damage.Key words: Greatwall,; DNA damage; checkpoint recovery     

ATM Inhibition Potentiates Death of Androgen Receptor-inactivated Prostate Cancer Cells with Telomere Dysfunction

Androgen receptor (AR) plays a role in maintaining telomere stability in prostate cancer cells, as AR inactivation induces telomere dysfunction within 3 h. Since telomere dysfunction in other systems is known to activate ATM (ataxia telangiectasia mutated)-mediated DNA damage response (DDR) signaling pathways, we investigated the role of ATM-mediated DDR signaling in AR-inactivated prostate cancer cells. Indeed, the induction of telomere dysfunction in cells treated with AR-antagonists (Casodex or MDV3100) or AR-siRNA was associated with a dramatic increase in phosphorylation (activation) of ATM and its downstream effector Chk2 and the presenceof phosphorylated ATM at telomeres, indicating activation of DDR signaling at telomeres. Moreover, Casodex washout led to the reversal of telomere dysfunction, indicating repair of damaged telomeres. ATM inhibitor blocked ATM phosphorylation, induced PARP cleavage, abrogated cell cycle checkpoint activation and attenuated the formation of γH2AX foci at telomeres in AR-inactivated cells, suggesting that ATM inhibitor induces apoptosis in AR-inactivated cells by blocking the repair of damaged DNA at telomeres. Finally, colony formation assay revealed a dramatic decrease in the survival of cells co-treated with Casodex and ATM inhibitor as compared with those treated with either Casodex or ATM inhibitor alone. These observations indicate that inhibitors of DDR signaling pathways may offer a unique opportunity to enhance the potency of AR-targeted therapies for the treatment of androgen-sensitive as well as castration-resistant prostate cancer.     

hMSH2 recruits ATR to DNA damage sites for activation during DNA damage-induced apoptosis

DNA damage response (DDR) activates a complex signaling network that triggers DNA repair, cell cycle arrest, and/or cell death. Depending on the type and severity of DNA lesion, DDR is controlled by "master" regulators including ATM and ATR protein kinases. Cisplatin, a major chemotherapy drug that cross-links DNA, induces ATR-dependent DDR, resulting in apoptosis. However, it is unclear how ATR is activated. To identify the key regulators of ATR, we analyzed the proteins that associate with ATR after cisplatin treatment by blue native-PAGE and co-immunoprecipitation. The mismatch repair protein hMSH2 was found to be a major ATR-binding protein. Functionally, ATR activation and its recruitment to nuclear foci during cisplatin treatment were attenuated, and DNA damage signaling, involving Chk2, p53, and PUMA-α, was suppressed in hMSH2-deficient cells. ATR activation induced by the DNA methylating agent N-methyl-N-nitrosourea was also shown to be hMSH2-dependent. Intriguingly, hMSH2-mediated ATR recruitment and activation appeared independent of replication protein A, Rad17, and the Rad9-Hus1-Rad1 protein complex. Together the results support a hMSH2-dependent pathway of ATR activation and downstream Chk2/p53 signaling.     

DNA damage response is suppressed by the high cyclin-dependent kinase 1 activity in mitotic mammalian cells

DNA damage response (DDR) is vital for genomic stability, and its deficiency is linked to tumorigenesis. Extensive studies in interphase (G(1)-S-G(2)) mammalian cells have revealed the mechanisms of DDR in great detail; however, how mitotic cells respond to DNA damage remains less defined. We report here that a full DDR is suppressed in mitotic mammalian cells until telophase/cytokinesis. Although early DDR markers such as the phosphorylations of ataxia telangiectasia mutated (ATM) and histone H2A.x (H2AX) can be readily detected, the ionizing radiation-induced foci (IRIF) formation of late DDR markers such as breast cancer type 1 susceptibility protein (BRCA1) and p53-binding protein 1 (53BP1) are absent until the telophase/cytokinesis stage. We further showed that the IR-induced ubiquitination cascade around DNA damage sites did not occur in mitotic cells, which explains, at least in part, why BRCA1 and 53BP1 cannot be recruited to the damaged sites. These observations indicate that DDR is suppressed in mitotic cells after the step of γH2AX formation. Not surprisingly, we found that the absence of a full DDR in mitotic cells was associated with the high cyclin-dependent kinase 1 (CDK1) activities. More 53BP1 IRIF could be detected when the irradiated mitotic cells were treated with a CDK1 inhibitor. Further, the activation of CDK5 in interphase cells impedes the formation of 53BP1 IRIF. Together, these results suggest that the DDR is suppressed by the high CDK1 activity in mitotic mammalian cells.     

Polo-like kinase 1 inhibits DNA damage response during mitosis

In response to genotoxic stress, cells protect their genome integrity by activation of a conserved DNA damage response (DDR) pathway that coordinates DNA repair and progression through the cell cycle. Extensive modification of the chromatin flanking the DNA lesion by ATM kinase and RNF8/RNF168 ubiquitin ligases enables recruitment of various repair factors. Among them BRCA1 and 53BP1 are required for homologous recombination and non-homologous end joining, respectively. Whereas mechanisms of DDR are relatively well understood in interphase cells, comparatively less is known about organization of DDR during mitosis. Although ATM can be activated in mitotic cells, 53BP1 is not recruited to the chromatin until cells exit mitosis. Here we report mitotic phosphorylation of 53BP1 by Plk1 and Cdk1 that impairs the ability of 53BP1 to bind the ubiquitinated H2A and to properly localize to the sites of DNA damage. Phosphorylation of 53BP1 at S1618 occurs at kinetochores and in cytosol and is restricted to mitotic cells. Interaction between 53BP1 and Plk1 depends on the activity of Cdk1. We propose that activity of Cdk1 and Plk1 allows spatiotemporally controlled suppression of 53BP1 function during mitosis.     

Polo-like kinase 1 inhibits DNA damage response during mitosis

In response to genotoxic stress, cells protect their genome integrity by activation of a conserved DNA damage response (DDR) pathway that coordinates DNA repair and progression through the cell cycle. Extensive modification of the chromatin flanking the DNA lesion by ATM kinase and RNF8/RNF168 ubiquitin ligases enables recruitment of various repair factors. Among them BRCA1 and 53BP1 are required for homologous recombination and non-homologous end joining, respectively. Whereas mechanisms of DDR are relatively well understood in interphase cells, comparatively less is known about organization of DDR during mitosis. Although ATM can be activated in mitotic cells, 53BP1 is not recruited to the chromatin until cells exit mitosis. Here we report mitotic phosphorylation of 53BP1 by Plk1 and Cdk1 that impairs the ability of 53BP1 to bind the ubiquitinated H2A and to properly localize to the sites of DNA damage. Phosphorylation of 53BP1 at S1618 occurs at kinetochores and in cytosol and is restricted to mitotic cells. Interaction between 53BP1 and Plk1 depends on the activity of Cdk1. We propose that activity of Cdk1 and Plk1 allows spatiotemporally controlled suppression of 53BP1 function during mitosis.     

A novel role for Greatwall kinase in recovery from DNA damage

Activation of the DNA damage response (DDR) is critical for genomic integrity and tumor suppression. The occurrence of DNA damage quickly evokes the DDR through ATM/ATR-dependent signal transduction, which promotes DNA repair and activates the checkpoint to halt cell cycle progression (Halazonetis et al., 2008; Motoyama and Naka, 2004; Zhou and Elledge, 2000). The "turn off" process of the DDR upon satisfaction of DNA repair, also known as "checkpoint recovery", involves deactivation of DDR elements, but the mechanism is poorly understood. Greatwall kinase (Gwl) has been identified as a key element in the G2/M transition (Archambault et al., 2007; Jackson, 2006; Zhao et al., 2008; Yu et al., 2004; Yu et al., 2006; Zhao et al., 2006) and helps maintain M phase through inhibition of PP2A/B55δ (Burgess et al., 2010; Castilho et al., 2009; Goldberg, 2010; Lorca et al., 2010; Vigneron et al., 2009), the principal phosphatase for Cdk-phosphorylated substrates. Here we show that Gwl also promotes recovery from DNA damage and is itself directly inhibited by the DNA damage response (DDR). In Xenopus egg extracts, immunodepletion of Gwl increased the DDR to damaged DNA, whereas addition of wild type, but not kinase dead Gwl, inhibited the DDR. The removal of damaged DNA from egg extracts leads to recovery from checkpoint arrest and entry into mitosis, a process impaired by Gwl depletion and enhanced by Gwl over-expression. Moreover, activation of Cdk1 after the removal of damaged DNA is regulated by Gwl. Collectively, these results defines Gwl as a new regulator of the DDR, which plays an important role in recovery from DNA     

Give me a break,but not in mitosis: The mitotic DNA damage response marks DNA double strand breaks with early signaling events

DNA double-strand breaks (DSBs) are extremely cytotoxic lesions with a single unrepaired DSB being sufficient to induce cell death. A complex signaling cascade, termed the DNA damage response (DDR), is in place to deal with such DNA lesions and maintain genome stability. Recent work by us and others has found that the signaling cascade activated by DSBs in mitosis is truncated, displaying apical, but not downstream, components of the DDR. The E3 Ubiquitin ligases RNF8, RNF168 and BRCA1, along with the DDR mediator 53BP1, are not recruited to DSB sites in mitosis, and activation of downstream checkpoint kinases is also impaired. Here, we show that RNF8 and RNF168 are recruited to DNA damage foci in late mitosis, presumably to prime sites for 53BP1 recruitment in early G₁. Interestingly, we show that, although RNF8, RNF168 and 53BP1 are excluded from DSB sites during most of mitosis, they associate with mitotic structures such as the kinetochore, suggesting roles for these DDR factors during mitotic cell division. We discuss these and other recent findings and suggest how these novel data collectively contribute to our understanding of mitosis and how cells deal with DNA damage during this crucial cell cycle stage.Key words: mitosis, DNA damage response, DNA double-strand breaks, signaling cascade, chromatin     

Condensin recruitment to chromatin is inhibited by Chk2 kinase in response to DNA damage

The DNA damage checkpoint, when activated in response to genotoxic damage during S phase, arrests cells in G2 phase of the cell cycle. ATM, ATR, Chk1 and Chk2 kinases are the main effectors of this checkpoint pathway. The checkpoint kinases prevent the onset of mitosis by eliciting well characterized inhibitory phosphorylation of Cdk1. Since Cdk1 is required for the recruitment of condensin, it is thought that upon DNA damage the checkpoint also indirectly blocks chromosome condensation via Cdk1 inhibition. Here we report that the G2 damage checkpoint prevents stable recruitment of the chromosome-packaging-machinery components condensin complex I and II onto the chromatin even in the presence of an active Cdk1. DNA damage-induced inhibition of condensin subunit recruitment is mediated specifically by the Chk2 kinase, implying that the condensin complexes are targeted by the checkpoint in response to DNA damage, independently of Cdk1 inactivation. Thus, the G2 checkpoint directly prevents stable recruitment of condensin complexes to actively prevent chromosome compaction during G2 arrest, presumably to ensure efficient repair of the genomic damage.     

The Drosophila Grp/Chk1 DNA damage checkpoint controls entry into anaphase

It is well established that DNA damage induces checkpoint-mediated interphase arrest in higher eukaryotes, but recent studies demonstrate that DNA damage delays entry into anaphase as well. Damaged DNA in syncytial and gastrulating Drosophila embryos delays the metaphase/anaphase transition . In human cultured cells, DNA damage also induces a delay in mitosis . However, the mechanism by which DNA damage delays the anaphase onset is controversial. Some studies implicate a DNA damage checkpoint , whereas other studies invoke a spindle checkpoint . To resolve this issue, we compared the effects of random DNA breaks induced by X-irradiation to site-specific I-CreI endonuclease-induced chromosome breaks on cell-cycle progression in wild-type and checkpoint-defective Drosophila neuroblasts. We found that both the BubR1 spindle checkpoint pathway and the Grp/Chk1 DNA damage checkpoint pathway are involved in delaying the metaphase/anaphase transition after extensive X-irradiation-induced DNA damage, whereas Grp/Chk1, but not BubR1, is required to delay anaphase onset in the presence of I-CreI-induced double-strand breaks. On the basis of these results, we propose that DNA damage in nonkinetochore regions produces a Grp/Chk1 DNA-damage-checkpoint-mediated delay in the metaphase/anaphase transition.     

Oligomerization of MDC1 protein is important for proper DNA damage response

Mediator of DNA damage checkpoint 1 (MDC1) plays an important role in the DNA damage response (DDR). MDC1 functions as a mediator protein and binds multiple proteins involved in different aspects of the DDR. However, little is know about the organization of MDC1 complexes. Here we show that ataxia telangiectasia, mutated (ATM) phosphorylates MDC1 at Thr-98 following DNA damage, which promotes its oligomerization. Oligomerization of MDC1 is important for the accumulation of MDC1 complex at the sites of DNA damage. Mutation of Thr-98 (T98A) would abolish its oligomerization and result in a defect in DNA damage checkpoint activation and increased sensitivity to irradiation. Taken together, these results suggest that the oligomerization of MDC1 plays an important role in DDR and help understand the formation of proteins complexes at the sites of DNA damage.     

Give me a break,but not in mitosis

DNA double-strand breaks (DSBs) are extremely cytotoxic with a single unrepaired DSB being sufficient to induce cell death. A complex signalling cascade, termed the DNA damage response (DDR), is in place to deal with such DNA lesions and maintain genome stability. Recent work by us and others has found that the signalling cascade activated by DSBs in mitosis is truncated, displaying apical, but not downstream, components of the DDR. The E3 Ubiquitin ligases RNF8, RNF168 and BRCA1, along with the DDR mediator 53BP1, are not recruited to DSB sites in mitosis, and activation of downstream checkpoint kinases is also impaired. Here, we show that RNF8 and RNF168 are recruited to DNA damage foci in late mitosis, presumably to prime sites for 53BP1 recruitment in early G1. Interestingly, we show that, although RNF8, RNF168 and 53BP1 are excluded from DSB sites during most of mitosis, they associate with mitotic structures such as the kinetochore, suggesting roles for these DDR factors during mitotic cell division. We discuss these and other recent findings and suggest how these novel data collectively contribute to our understanding of mitosis and how cells deal with DNA damage during this crucial cell cycle stage.     

A novel single‐cell method provides direct evidence of persistent DNA damage in senescent cells and aged mammalian tissues

The DNA damage response (DDR) arrests cell cycle progression until DNA lesions, like DNA double‐strand breaks (DSBs), are repaired. The presence of DSBs in cells is usually detected by indirect techniques that rely on the accumulation of proteins at DSBs, as part of the DDR. Such detection may be biased, as some factors and their modifications may not reflect physical DNA damage. The dependency on DDR markers of DSB detection tools has left questions unanswered. In particular, it is known that senescent cells display persistent DDR foci, that we and others have proposed to be persistent DSBs, resistant to endogenous DNA repair activities. Others have proposed that these peculiar DDR foci might not be sites of damaged DNA per se but instead stable chromatin modifications, termed DNA‐SCARS. Here, we developed a method, named ‘DNA damage in situ ligation followed by proximity ligation assay’ (DI‐PLA) for the detection and imaging of DSBs in cells. DI‐PLA is based on the capture of free DNA ends in fixed cells in situ, by ligation to biotinylated double‐stranded DNA oligonucleotides, which are next recognized by antibiotin anti‐bodies. Detection is enhanced by PLA with a partner DDR marker at the DSB. We validated DI‐PLA by demonstrating its ability to detect DSBs induced by various genotoxic insults in cultured cells and tissues. Most importantly, by DI‐PLA, we demonstrated that both senescent cells in culture and tissues from aged mammals retain true unrepaired DSBs associated with DDR markers.     

Rac1 Protein Signaling Is Required for DNA Damage Response Stimulated by Topoisomerase II Poisons

To investigate the potency of the topoisomerase II (topo II) poisons doxorubicin and etoposide to stimulate the DNA damage response (DDR), S139 phosphorylation of histone H2AX (γH2AX) was analyzed using rat cardiomyoblast cells (H9c2). Etoposide caused a dose-dependent increase in the γH2AX level as shown by Western blotting. By contrast, the doxorubicin response was bell-shaped with high doses failing to increase H2AX phosphorylation. Identical results were obtained by immunohistochemical analysis of γH2AX focus formation, comet assay-based DNA strand break analysis, and measuring the formation of the topo II-DNA cleavable complex. At low dose, doxorubicin activated ataxia telangiectasia mutated (ATM) but not ATM and Rad3-related (ATR). Both the lipid-lowering drug lovastatin and the Rac1-specific inhibitor NSC23766 attenuated doxorubicin- and etoposide-stimulated H2AX phosphorylation, induction of DNA strand breaks, and topo II-DNA complex formation. Lovastatin and NSC23766 acted in an additive manner. They did not attenuate doxorubicin-induced increase in p-ATM and p-Chk2 levels. DDR stimulated by topo II poisons was partially blocked by inhibition of type I p21-associated kinases. DDR evoked by the topoisomerase I poison topotecan remained unaffected by lovastatin. The data show that the mechanisms involved in DDR stimulated by topo II poisons are agent-specific with anthracyclines lacking DDR-stimulating activity at high doses. Pharmacological inhibition of Rac1 signaling counteracts doxorubicin- and etoposide-stimulated DDR by disabling the formation of the topo II-DNA cleavable complex. Based on the data we suggest that Rac1-regulated mechanisms are required for DNA damage induction and subsequent activation of the DDR following treatment with topo II but not topo I poisons.     

Keeping 53BP1 out of focus in mitosis

A recent study published in Science reveals the mechanism and biological importance of DNA damage response abrogation in mitotic cells.For many years, much research has focused on understanding how cells maintain genome integrity despite DNA being constantly challenged by factors of both endogenous and exogenous nature. DNA double-strand breaks (DSBs) are the most deleterious DNA lesions, and if left unrepaired or repaired incorrectly, a single DSB can trigger genome instability or even cell death¹. Therefore, any DSB has to be recognized and repaired by processes encompassed within the DNA damage response (DDR). Notably, while the ends of mammalian linear chromosomes naturally resemble DSBs, their structure and association with the so-called “Shelterin” complex normally makes them invisible to the DDR².As soon as a DSB is formed, it is sensed and directly bound by the Ku70-Ku80 and/or MRE11-NBS1-RAD50 protein complexes, which recruit and activate the DDR kinases DNA-PKcs and ATM, respectively. The first steps in the DDR to DSBs are followed by cascades of events involving protein post-translational modifications (PTMs) and formation of large protein assemblies at DSB sites known as ionizing radiation-induced foci (IRIF)³. Protein phosphorylation and ubiquitylation are at the heart of these signaling processes³. For example, following recruitment of the DDR mediator protein MDC1 to the phospho-epitope created by ATM and DNA-PKcs on variant histone H2AX, MDC1 is itself phosphorylated by ATM on multiple serines and threonines⁴. MDC1 phosphorylation on a group of threonines near its N-terminus and conforming to the consensus TQXF generates binding sites for the FHA domain of E3-ubiquitin ligase RNF8^5,6. Together with the E2-conjugating enzyme UBC13, RNF8, and another E3 ligase, RNF168, trigger formation of mainly lysine 63-linked ubiquitin adducts in DSB-proximal chromatin, promoting recruitment of downstream factors necessary for DNA repair, such as the RAP80-Abraxas-BRCA1 complex and 53BP1³.Significantly, the full DDR happens only in interphase cells, whereas if mitotic cells sustain DSBs, the process appears to be blocked at the stage of RNF8 recruitment, resulting in IRIF devoid of detectable ubiquitin conjugates⁷. Consequently, 53BP1 and BRCA1 are not recruited to IRIF during mitosis. Even more strikingly, although RNF8 and RNF168 are associated with mitotic IRIF in anaphase, hyperphosphorylated 53BP1 remains excluded from chromatin until cells progress into G1 phase⁷. Based on these findings, it was hypothesized that mitosis-specific PTMs on RNF8 and 53BP1 might preclude formation of repair-competent IRIF⁷. However, the precise mechanistic explanation of the “interrupted” DDR in mitosis remained to be unravelled.A recent study published in Science by the group of Daniel Durocher addressed the question of how full IRIF assembly and DSB repair are prevented in mitotic cells⁸. First, Orthwein et al. focused on the mechanism that abrogates RNF8 recruitment to DSBs during mitosis. They demonstrated that CDK1-dependent mitosis-specific phosphorylation of RNF8 on T198 abolished interaction between RNF8 and its target phospho-TQXF motifs in MDC1. This important finding was somewhat surprising, given that MDC1 binding is mediated by the RNF8 FHA domain^5,6 and T198 is located some distance away from this domain. It will thus be interesting to see how T198 phosphorylation abrogates MDC1 binding, for example via T198 being juxtaposed to the FHA domain in the RNF8 3D structure, through phosphorylated T198 docking with the phospho-binding region of the FHA domain, or via another mechanism. In this regard, we note that T198 is part of an STP motif, which upon modification by CDK1 could constitute a priming site for PLK1 kinase⁹. Thus, T198 phosphorylation might be followed by PLK1-mediated RNF8 phosphorylation. Interestingly, certain sites in RNF8 conform to the PLK1 consensus motif, with those at T39 and T316 being evolutionarily conserved in vertebrates. Moreover, T39 is located in the FHA domain, close to R42, mutation of which abolishes RNF8 interaction with MDC1^5,6. It would therefore be worthwhile mutating these potential PLK1 sites and establishing whether this affects mitotic control of RNF8 binding to MDC1.After identifying T198 as critical for preventing RNF8 recruitment to DSBs during mitosis, Orthwein et al. observed that, while mutating this residue to alanine restored recruitment of RNF8 (and BRCA1) to mitotic IRIF, 53BP1 still remained excluded from DSB sites. This prompted the authors to look for mitosis-specific PTMs of 53BP1 by mass spectrometry, leading to the discovery of two novel phosphosites mapped to the recently described ubiquitin-dependent recruitment (UDR) motif, which mediates binding to ubiquitylated H2A and is required for 53BP1 IRIF formation¹⁰. Notably, the same residues, T1609 and S1618, were also identified by Chowdhury and colleagues¹¹ as target sites for the PP4C/R3β phosphatase. This group showed that T1609 and S1618 must be dephosphorylated for 53BP1 to form IRIF. In accord with these findings, Orthwein et al. established that when T1609 and S1618 were mutated to alanines, the ensuing “53BP1-TASA” protein was recruited to sites of DNA damage during mitosis in cells expressing RNF8-T198A. Moreover, unlike normal cells, cells co-expressing RNF8-T198A and 53BP1-TASA carried out DSB joining reactions during mitosis and were extremely hypersensitive to ionizing radiation (IR). The authors also found that, following irradiation in mitosis, cells carrying these mutant RNF8 and 53BP1 proteins displayed increased rates of kinetochore-positive micronucleus formation, suggesting mis-segregation of full chromosomes. In addition, chromosomes in these cells were prone to sister telomere fusions, thereby helping to explain their elevated levels of aneuploidy and IR hypersensitivity.The research described above has not only revealed how DSB repair is suppressed in mitosis but has also established that this suppression is biologically important. Orthwein et al. propose that, as mitotic telomeres become “underprotected” when mitosis is prolonged upon stress¹², this could lead to telomere fusion if DNA end-joining pathway is active. The suppression of DSB signaling and repair mediated by RNF8 and 53BP1 mitotic phosphorylation therefore probably evolved as a mechanism to mitigate this threat to genome stability. A key question that still remains is why mitotic telomeres become underprotected in the first place? Also, what features in telomere structure or replication and segregation processes make it more beneficial for the cells to keep chromosome ends less protected at the cost of inhibiting the DDR during mitosis? Finally, given that cancers often harbor cell cycle and/or DDR defects¹, it will be of interest to see whether defective mitotic control of DSB repair might play a role in tumor evolution, or could provide opportunities for developing better anti-cancer therapies.