Elsevier

DNA Repair

Volume 56, August 2017, Pages 144-155
DNA Repair

Close encounters: Moving along bumps, breaks, and bubbles on expanded trinucleotide tracts

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dnarep.2017.06.017Get rights and content

Abstract

Expansion of simple triplet repeats (TNR) underlies more than 30 severe degenerative diseases. There is a good understanding of the major pathways generating an expansion, and the associated polymerases that operate during gap filling synthesis at these “difficult to copy” sequences. However, the mechanism by which a TNR is repaired depends on the type of lesion, the structural features imposed by the lesion, the assembled replication/repair complex, and the polymerase that encounters it. The relationships among these parameters are exceptionally complex and how they direct pathway choice is poorly understood. In this review, we consider the properties of polymerases, and how encounters with GC-rich or abnormal structures might influence polymerase choice and the success of replication and repair. Insights over the last three years have highlighted new mechanisms that provide interesting choices to consider in protecting genome stability.

Introduction

Alterations in simple repetitive sequences lie at the center of DNA evolution and sequence diversity, which drives adaptation [1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6]. However, rapid changes in repetitive sequences can also result in deleterious effects on gene expression and function, leading to disease. Simple trinucleotide repeats (TNR) have taken on special significance in this regard since their expansion underlies more than 30 human neurodegenerative and neuromuscular diseases [7], [8], [9], [10].

The structure-forming potential of TNRs lies at the heart of the instability (Fig. 1A–C) [7], [8], [9], [10], and the structural details of their features were established early on [11], [12]. Trinucleotide repeats are quasi-palindromes, and form hydrogen bonded, hairpins harboring A/A, T/T, or C/C mismatches (Fig. 1A, N = A,T,G) within their stem [11], [12], [13], or, depending on the sequence, triplex [14], [15], [16], [17] (Fig. 1B) and quadruplex structures [18], [19] (Fig. 1C), among others [20], [21], [22] (Fig. 1B,C). Indeed, some TNRs can form quadruplexes comprising both DNA and RNA [23], [24]. Regardless of the type of structure, it must be removed to avoid mutation [25], and if not, the gene grows by roughly the size of the extrahelical DNA loop that forms during a biological transaction (e.g., Fig. 1C). Indeed, in yeast, triplet repeats capable of forming secondary structure escape repair [26] and increase the frequency of expansion by 5–1000-fold [27], [28], [29]. Equivalent small unstructured loops are rapidly removed and do not expand [26].

The location of the expanded TNRs can occur anywhere in or around a gene (Fig. 1D), but whether it occurs in coding or non-coding regions determines the size of the expansion [7], [8], [9], [10]. One can easily predict that genetic selection would rid organisms of a cells expressing a toxic, expanded protein, while non-coding expansions would bebetter tolerated [9]. However, there is an unexplained linkage between the TNR gene position of disease-length allele and the parent who transmits the expansion. Short expansions in coding alleles tend to be transmitted through the male germline, while long expansions in non-coding alleles tend to be transmitted through the female germline [9]. In HD, for example, it was noted early on that patients develop disease if they were above a premutation theshold of roughly 35 CAGs (Fig. 1E) [30], [31], [32], [33]. Transmitted CAG expansions rarely grow beyond 100 CAG repeats in a living patient [9], [34], and intergenerational “jumps” are most often between 3 and 15 TNRs [30], [31], [34], [35]. If transmitted maternally, the size of the CAG expansion changes little or even shortens [36]. The same patterns are observed in HD primate models [37] and in mouse models [38], [39], [40] of HD, although the threshold for expansion occurs at longer tract lengths.

In non-coding TNR alleles in Fragile X syndrome (FXS) [41], [42], [43], myotonic dystrophy 1 gene (DM1) [44], [45], and Frierdreichs ataxia (FRDA) [46], [47] patients (Fig. 1C), the expansions are larger. The premutationpremutation range for CGG, CTG and GAA repeats, repectively, is around 55–200, and TNR expansion to the full mutation occurs in the oocytes with gains of hundreds of repeats and thousands in congenital cases [48], [49], [50]. In the non-coding TNRs, contractions typically occur during male transmission [51], [52], indicating that the sperm is far more restrictive in the TNR lengths that are tolerated[53]. For example, the full mutation allele in FXS is deleted back to its premutation length in the sons of premutation mothers around fetal day 13, in their dividing spermatogonia [54], [55]. Sons of premutation mothers cannot transmit a disease-length allele, yet it is maintained in their somatic cells and causes disease [54], [55]. In oocytes from FXS mothers, the large expanded allele continues to expand with age even though cell division has ceased.

TNRs not only expand during transmission in the germ cell [9], [30], [32], TNRs continue to expand in somatic cells throughout life [56], [57]. In HD, for example, the somatic expansion exceeds the size of the inherited lengths, and rare alleles of up to 1000 have been detected in animals [57] (Fig. 1F). The somatic changes in the long TNRs are observed in most non-coding genes, but the size changes of the somatic lengths are small by comparison to the large jumps that occur in early germ cell development. Importantly, both the germ cells and the somatic expansions contribute to toxicity [58], [59], [60], [61]. In this regard, the somatic expansion has raised the possiblity that shortening the repeats during life may be therapeutic [62], [63]. Indeed, use of genetic and pharmacological methods to reduce the TNR length in somatic cells has improved pathophysiology in HD [34], [35], [64], FXS [65], GAA [66], [67], and DM1 [68].

Not surprisingly, these tantalizing features of expansion continue to spark interest into this fascinating mutation, and raise issues as to whether there are mutliple underlying mechanisms. Secondary structure within the TNRs is at the root of the problem; it can be constitutive or arise actively during polymerase passage, but in both cases create a need to process and remove the impediment. Self-folding of a structure-capable DNA is stable enough to either block polymerase passage, or to peel away from the duplex just long enough that the advancing polymerase prevents reannealing of the extrahelical strand [69]. In either case, the structure is trapped, and the cell faces a decision to unwind, to remove, to move past, or to incorporate the looped DNA. Genome stability or instability ensues depending on the choice. By this simple definition, polymerase fidelity and processivity over these tracts are likely to be as important as the stability of the structure in determining the mechanisms and the extent of mutation.

Surprisingly little is known about the role of polymerases in completing error-prone synthesis, or what features of a lesion might determine or exclude the use of a particular polymerase at TNR tracts. Based on structure, mammalian polymerases fall into three of five classes (Table 1), which play pivotal roles in DNA replication (pols γ, φ, ν, α, δ, ε) (family A,B), base excision repair (pol β) (family X), replication and repair in mitochondrial DNA (pol γ) (family A), non-homologous end-joining and immunological diversity (pols λ, μ, and terminaldeoxynucleotidyl transferase) (family X), and DNA damage tolerance including translesion synthesis (η, κ, ζ, Rev1) (family Y) (Table 1). Some of their known roles are summarized (Table 2), and each polymerase is described in detail in excellent reviews [70], [71], [72].

Over the past 3 years, however, there have been surprising new insights into the mechanisms that build on our understanding of expansion and highlight the importance of polymerases. Here, we discuss polymerase encounters on abnormal structures or “difficult to copy” TNRs. In the following sections, we will focus on polymerase encounters at three representative DNA barriers, which we refer to as bumps (small chemical lesions), bubbles (RNA loops, and secondary structures), and breaks. Each of these present distinct perturbation contexts of the DNA helix and the outcome of expansion relies on distinct genomic and polymerase contexts. Three questions will be considered: (1) is expansion a process of replication or repair, i.e., would expansion arise from use of a repair or replicative polymerase, (2) do disease-length repeats alter the ways in which they are viewed by a polymerase when damage is encountered, (3) how might secondary structures alter the polymerase that is chosen.

So, does expansion occur during replication or repair, and how do we distinguish among the polymerases that might be used? The hereditary nature of the expansion diseases prompted early focus on the germ cell, and early replication-dependent expansion in spermatogonia was a popular hypothesis. However, over the last 20 years, the consensus viewpoint has shifted to DNA repair as the major expansion mechanism in both dividing and non-diving cells [7], [8], [9], [10]. Expansion occurs in neurons and quiescent oocytes [38], [73], [74]. Neither cell type divides, but widespread age-dependent expansion occurs in both [49], [50], [51], [52]. No new oocytes are created after birth, indicating that age-dependent expansion in adult oocytes cannot arise from a new round of proliferation [75]. Proliferating patient fibroblasts or lymphoblasts harboring disease-length alleles do not typically expand in culture. However, in one cell line isolated from a DM1 transgenic mouse, the rate of CTG tracts is unrelated to the rate of replication [76]. On long CGG tracts, replicative polymerases stall [77], and frequently break in cells [78], [79]. As modeled in yeast and in mammalian cells, expansions during proliferation arise from rescue of stalled forks by recombination [80], break-induced replication (BIR) [81], and strand switching [82], [83]. Thus, unlike early models, the consensus viewpoint is that expansion is a process of repair even in proliferating cells.

If expansion occurs during repair, what polymerases are used? All DNA replication and repair polymerases carry out gap-filling synthesis in three basic reactions, and pair the template with incoming nucleotide using a common structural framework, depicted as a finger, palm, and thumb structure (Fig. 2) [84]. Moreover, DNA secondary structures apparently influence polymerase function [85], [86], [87]. High-fidelity polymerases have precise active site geometry and closely monitor the DNA minor groove during translocation of the nascent base pair, which can trigger the 3′–5′ exonuclease proofreading activity if a mismatch or abnormal base pair is sensed (Fig. 2A,B) [70], [71], [72], [86], [88], [89]. However, their rigid structural constraints require correctly matched base pairs, and unusual DNA structures are not accepted in the active site [70], [71], [72], [86], [88], [89], [90], [91], [92], [93]. A DNA translesion polymerase (TLP) will typically lack exonuclease activity and has evolved larger active sites to accommodate the damage template, as well as the incoming nucleotide in the optimal geometry [70], [71], [72], [86], [88], [89], [91], [92], [93]. However, the impact of encountering a TNR secondary structure for these error-prone polymerases is unknown in most cases [86].

Section snippets

Encountering bumps within triplet repeat tracts

The cell’s main strategy to deal with an oxidized base is to remove it and fill the gap with the correct base using base excision repair (BER), and to a lesser extend NER/TCR [7], [8], [9], [10], [93]. In BER, the oxidized bases are recognized and removed by a DNA glycosylase, followed by Apoendonuclease 1 (APE1) processing to generate a 3′OH suitable for polymerase extension [7], [8], [9], [10]. Gap-filling synthesis is performed by polymerase β (pol β) [90], [93] (or back-up by other X family

Encountering bubbles and breaks within TNRs

But what happens if a polymerase encounters a stable TNR secondary structure or an R-loop? We refer to both of these structures as DNA “bubbles” since the two anti-parallel DNA strands remain open and cannot reanneal to reform duplex DNA. They differ, however, in that a secondary structure blocks polymerase by intra-strand pairing while the R-loop uses interstrand pairing between DNA and RNA.

Concluding remarks and future perspectives

Although our understanding of instability is ever increasing, new questions keep emerging, even as older ones are solved. For example, if stable R-loops lead to transcriptional silencing and hypermethylationat the FXS allele, why do oocytes harboring full mutations expand in smaller steps with age? DNA repair nuclease factors must be able to access the site to cause instability, yet these sites are generally “nuclease resistant” in heterochromatin. If BIR occurs during replication stalling and

Conflict of interest

The authors have no conflicts if interest.

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by National Institutes of Health grants NS060115 (to CTM), GM119161 (to CTM)and CA092584 (to CTM). The authors would like to thank S. Mirkin, L. Symington, K. Cimprich, S. Doublie, S. Wallace, S. Wilson, and T. Kunkel who generously gave us permission for the use of images for illustration in this review.

References (194)

  • N.L. Dean et al.

    Instability in the transmission of the myotonic dystrophy CTG repeat in human oocytes and preimplantation embryos

    Fertil. Steril.

    (2006)
  • N.D. Temmerman et al.

    Intergenerational instability of the expanded CTG repeat in the DMPK gene: studies in human gametes and preimplantation embryos

    Am. J. Hum. Genet.

    (2004)
  • C.Y. Park et al.

    Reversion of FMR1 methylation and silencing by editing the triplet repeats in fragile X iPSC-derived neurons

    Cell Rep.

    (2015)
  • E.L. van Agtmaal et al.

    CRISPR/Cas9-Induced (CTGCAG)n repeat instability in the myotonic dystrophy type 1 locus: implications for therapeutic genome editing

    Mol. Ther.

    (2017)
  • D.-Y. Lee et al.

    Trinucleotide expansion in disease: why is there a length threshold?

    Curr. Opin. Genet. Dev.

    (2014)
  • D. Kumari et al.

    Evidence for chromosome fragility at the frataxin locus in Friedreich ataxia

    Mutat. Res./Fundam. Mol. Mech. Mutagen.

    (2015)
  • J. Gerhardt et al.

    The DNA replication program is altered at the FMR1 locus in fragile X embryonic stem cells

    Mol. Cell

    (2014)
  • Ekaterina V. Mirkin et al.

    To switch or not to switch: at the origin of repeat expansion disease

    Mol. Cell

    (2014)
  • D. Branzei et al.

    DNA damage tolerance by recombination: molecular pathways and DNA structures

    DNA Repair

    (2016)
  • C.M. Wickramasinghe et al.

    Contributions of the specialised DNA polymerases to replication of structured DNA

    DNA Repair

    (2015)
  • L. Pellegrini et al.

    New insights into the mechanism of DNA duplication by the eukaryotic replisome

    Trends Biochem. Sci.

    (2016)
  • L. Zhao et al.

    Translesion synthesis insights into the selection and switching of DNA polymerases

    Genes (Basel)

    (2017)
  • E.A. Belousova et al.

    DNA polymerases β and λ and their roles in cell

    DNA Repair

    (2015)
  • K.E. Zahn et al.

    DNA polymerases provide a canon of strategies for translesion synthesis past oxidatively generated lesions

    Curr. Opin. Struct. Biol.

    (2011)
  • J.E. Demers et al.

    Evolution of nine microsatellite loci in the fungus Fusarium oxysporum

    J. Mol. Evol.

    (2015)
  • J. Jurka et al.

    Simple repetitive DNA sequences from primates: compilation and analysis

    J. Mol. Evol.

    (1995)
  • I.V. Kovtun et al.

    Features of trinucleotide repeat instability in vivo

    Cell Res.

    (2008)
  • M. Plohl et al.

    Satellite DNA evolution

    Genome Dynamics

    (2012)
  • G. Toth

    Microsatellites in different eukaryotic genomes: survey and analysis

    Genome Res.

    (2000)
  • C.T. McMurray

    Mechanisms of trinucleotide repeat instability during human development

    Nat. Rev. Genet.

    (2010)
  • K. Usdin et al.

    Repeat instability during DNA repair: insights from model systems

    Crit. Rev. Biochem. Mol. Biol.

    (2015)
  • A. Kiliszek et al.

    Structural studies of CNG repeats

    Nucleic Acids Res.

    (2014)
  • A.M. Gacy et al.

    Trinucleotide repeats that expand in human disease form hairpin structures in vitro

    Cell

    (1995)
  • M.D. Frank-Kamenetskii et al.

    Triplex DNA structures

    Annu. Rev. Biochem.

    (1995)
  • A. Jain et al.

    Formation and thermodynamic stability of intermodular (R*R•Y) DNA triplex In GAA/TTC repeats associated with Freidreich's ataxia

    J. Biomol. Struct. Dyn.

    (2002)
  • A. Madireddy et al.

    G-quadruplex-interacting compounds alter latent DNA replication and episomal persistence of KSHV

    Nucleic Acids Res.

    (2016)
  • B. Zamiri et al.

    Quadruplex formation by both G-rich and C-rich DNA strands of theC9orf72(GGGGCC)8•(GGCCCC)8 repeat: effect of CpG methylation

    Nucleic Acids Res.

    (2015)
  • Y.X. Wang et al.

    Extensive mutagenesis of the conserved box E motif in duck hepatitis B virus P protein reveals multiple functions in replication and a common structure with the primer grip in HIV-1 reverse transcriptase

    J. Virol.

    (2012)
  • Y. Zhang et al.

    Structure and dynamics of DNA and RNA double helices obtained from the GGGGCC and CCCCGG hexanucleotide repeats that are the hallmark of C9FTD/ALS diseases

    ACS Chem. Neurosci.

    (2017)
  • D. Gudanis et al.

    Structural characterization of a dimer of RNA duplexes composed of 8-bromoguanosine modified CGG trinucleotide repeats: a novel architecture of RNA quadruplexes

    Nucleic Acids Res.

    (2016)
  • M. Malgowska et al.

    Distinctive structural motifs of RNA G-quadruplexes composed of AGG, CGG and UGG trinucleotide repeats

    Nucleic Acids Res.

    (2014)
  • H. Moore et al.

    Triplet repeats form secondary structures that escape DNA repair in yeast

    Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci.

    (1999)
  • J.J. Miret et al.

    Orientation-dependent and sequence-specific expansions of CTG/CAG trinucleotide repeats in Saccharomyces cerevisiae

    Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci.

    (1998)
  • R. Pelletier et al.

    Replication and expansion of trinucleotide repeats in yeast

    Mol. Cell. Biol.

    (2003)
  • G.P. Bates et al.

    Huntington disease

    Nat. Rev. Dis. Primers

    (2015)
  • B. Giovannone et al.

    Analysis of (CAG)n size heterogeneity in somatic and sperm cell DNA from intermediate and expanded Huntington disease gene carriers

    Hum. Mutat.

    (1997)
  • B. Kremer et al.

    A worldwide study of the Huntington's disease mutation: the sensitivity and specificity of measuring CAG repeats

    N. Engl. J. Med.

    (1994)
  • Y. Trottier et al.

    Instability of CAG repeats in Huntington's disease: relation to parental transmission and age of onset

    J. Med. Genet.

    (1994)
  • S.E. Andrew et al.

    The relationship between trinucleotide (CAG) repeat length and clinical features of Huntington's disease

    Nat. Genet.

    (1993)
  • A. Nørremølle et al.

    Correlation between magnitude of CAG repeat length alterations and length of the paternal repeat in paternally inherited Huntington's disease

    Clin. Genet.

    (2008)
  • Cited by (0)

    View full text