Literature DB >> 36266663

Replication stress generates distinctive landscapes of DNA copy number alterations and chromosome scale losses.

Nadeem Shaikh1, Alice Mazzagatti1, Simone De Angelis1, Sarah C Johnson1, Bjorn Bakker2,3, Diana C J Spierings2, René Wardenaar2, Eleni Maniati1, Jun Wang1, Michael A Boemo4, Floris Foijer2, Sarah E McClelland5.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: A major driver of cancer chromosomal instability is replication stress, the slowing or stalling of DNA replication. How replication stress and genomic instability are connected is not known. Aphidicolin-induced replication stress induces breakages at common fragile sites, but the exact causes of fragility are debated, and acute genomic consequences of replication stress are not fully explored.
RESULTS: We characterize DNA copy number alterations (CNAs) in single, diploid non-transformed cells, caused by one cell cycle in the presence of either aphidicolin or hydroxyurea. Multiple types of CNAs are generated, associated with different genomic regions and features, and observed copy number landscapes are distinct between aphidicolin and hydroxyurea-induced replication stress. Coupling cell type-specific analysis of CNAs to gene expression and single-cell replication timing analyses pinpointed the causative large genes of the most recurrent chromosome-scale CNAs in aphidicolin. These are clustered on chromosome 7 in RPE1 epithelial cells but chromosome 1 in BJ fibroblasts. Chromosome arm level CNAs also generate acentric lagging chromatin and micronuclei containing these chromosomes.
CONCLUSIONS: Chromosomal instability driven by replication stress occurs via focal CNAs and chromosome arm scale changes, with the latter confined to a very small subset of chromosome regions, potentially heavily skewing cancer genome evolution. Different inducers of replication stress lead to distinctive CNA landscapes providing the opportunity to derive copy number signatures of specific replication stress mechanisms. Single-cell CNA analysis thus reveals the impact of replication stress on the genome, providing insights into the molecular mechanisms which fuel chromosomal instability in cancer.
© 2022. The Author(s).

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2022        PMID: 36266663      PMCID: PMC9583511          DOI: 10.1186/s13059-022-02781-0

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Genome Biol        ISSN: 1474-7596            Impact factor:   17.906


  67 in total

1.  Collisions between replication and transcription complexes cause common fragile site instability at the longest human genes.

Authors:  Anne Helmrich; Monica Ballarino; Laszlo Tora
Journal:  Mol Cell       Date:  2011-12-23       Impact factor: 17.970

2.  Oncogenes create a unique landscape of fragile sites.

Authors:  Karin Miron; Tamar Golan-Lev; Raz Dvir; Eyal Ben-David; Batsheva Kerem
Journal:  Nat Commun       Date:  2015-05-11       Impact factor: 14.919

Review 3.  Large common fragile site genes and cancer.

Authors:  David I Smith; Sarah McAvoy; Yu Zhu; Damon S Perez
Journal:  Semin Cancer Biol       Date:  2006-10-26       Impact factor: 15.707

Review 4.  Control of DNA replication timing in the 3D genome.

Authors:  Claire Marchal; Jiao Sima; David M Gilbert
Journal:  Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol       Date:  2019-09-02       Impact factor: 94.444

5.  Cell-type-specific replication initiation programs set fragility of the FRA3B fragile site.

Authors:  Anne Letessier; Gaël A Millot; Stéphane Koundrioukoff; Anne-Marie Lachagès; Nicolas Vogt; R Scott Hansen; Bernard Malfoy; Olivier Brison; Michelle Debatisse
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2011-01-23       Impact factor: 49.962

6.  ERCC1 and MUS81-EME1 promote sister chromatid separation by processing late replication intermediates at common fragile sites during mitosis.

Authors:  Valeria Naim; Therese Wilhelm; Michelle Debatisse; Filippo Rosselli
Journal:  Nat Cell Biol       Date:  2013-06-30       Impact factor: 28.824

7.  HTSeq--a Python framework to work with high-throughput sequencing data.

Authors:  Simon Anders; Paul Theodor Pyl; Wolfgang Huber
Journal:  Bioinformatics       Date:  2014-09-25       Impact factor: 6.937

8.  Single-cell sequencing reveals karyotype heterogeneity in murine and human malignancies.

Authors:  Bjorn Bakker; Aaron Taudt; Mirjam E Belderbos; David Porubsky; Diana C J Spierings; Tristan V de Jong; Nancy Halsema; Hinke G Kazemier; Karina Hoekstra-Wakker; Allan Bradley; Eveline S J M de Bont; Anke van den Berg; Victor Guryev; Peter M Lansdorp; Maria Colomé-Tatché; Floris Foijer
Journal:  Genome Biol       Date:  2016-05-31       Impact factor: 13.583

9.  Ribonucleotide Reductase Requires Subunit Switching in Hypoxia to Maintain DNA Replication.

Authors:  Iosifina P Foskolou; Christian Jorgensen; Katarzyna B Leszczynska; Monica M Olcina; Hanna Tarhonskaya; Bauke Haisma; Vincenzo D'Angiolella; William K Myers; Carmen Domene; Emily Flashman; Ester M Hammond
Journal:  Mol Cell       Date:  2017-04-13       Impact factor: 17.970

10.  Replication stress links structural and numerical cancer chromosomal instability.

Authors:  Rebecca A Burrell; Sarah E McClelland; David Endesfelder; Petra Groth; Marie-Christine Weller; Nadeem Shaikh; Enric Domingo; Nnennaya Kanu; Sally M Dewhurst; Eva Gronroos; Su Kit Chew; Andrew J Rowan; Arne Schenk; Michal Sheffer; Michael Howell; Maik Kschischo; Axel Behrens; Thomas Helleday; Jiri Bartek; Ian P Tomlinson; Charles Swanton
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2013-02-28       Impact factor: 49.962

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.