Oncogene activation disturbs cellular processes and accommodates a complex landscape of changes in the genome that contribute to genomic instability, which accelerates mutation rates and promotes tumorigenesis. Part of this cellular turmoil involves deregulation of physiologic DNA replication, widely described as replication stress. Oncogene-induced replication stress is an early driver of genomic instability and is attributed to a plethora of factors, most notably aberrant origin fi ring, replication-transcription collisions, reactive oxygen species, and defective nucleotide metabolism.Signifi cance: Replication stress is a fundamental step and an early driver of tumorigenesis and has been associated with many activated oncogenes. Deciphering the mechanisms that contribute to the replication stress response may provide new avenues for targeted cancer treatment. In this review, we discuss the latest fi ndings on the DNA replication stress response and examine the various mechanisms through which activated oncogenes induce replication stress. Cancer Discov; 8(5);

Cancer is a disease associated with genomic instability that often results from oncogene activation. This in turn leads to hyperproliferation and replication stress. However, the molecular mechanisms that underlie oncogene-induced replication stress are still poorly understood. Oncogenes such as HRASV12 promote proliferation by upregulating general transcription factors to stimulate RNA synthesis. Here we investigate whether this increase in transcription underlies oncogene-induced replication stress. We show that in cells overexpressing HRASV12, elevated expression of the general transcription factor TATA-box binding protein (TBP) leads to increased RNA synthesis, which together with R-loop accumulation results in replication fork slowing and DNA damage. Furthermore, overexpression of TBP alone causes the hallmarks of oncogene-induced replication stress, including replication fork slowing, DNA damage and senescence. Consequently, we reveal that increased transcription can be a mechanism of oncogene-induced DNA damage, providing a molecular link between upregulation of the transcription machinery and genomic instability in cancer.

easyFRAP is free software, available under the General Public License (GPL). Executable and source files, supplementary material and sample data sets can be downloaded at: ccl.med.upatras.gr/easyfrap.html.

SummaryTelomere maintenance critically depends on the distinct activities of telomerase, which adds telomeric repeats to solve the end replication problem, and RTEL1, which dismantles DNA secondary structures at telomeres to facilitate replisome progression. Here, we establish that reversed replication forks are a pathological substrate for telomerase and the source of telomere catastrophe in Rtel1−/− cells. Inhibiting telomerase recruitment to telomeres, but not its activity, or blocking replication fork reversal through PARP1 inhibition or depleting UBC13 or ZRANB3 prevents the rapid accumulation of dysfunctional telomeres in RTEL1-deficient cells. In this context, we establish that telomerase binding to reversed replication forks inhibits telomere replication, which can be mimicked by preventing replication fork restart through depletion of RECQ1 or PARG. Our results lead us to propose that telomerase inappropriately binds to and inhibits restart of reversed replication forks within telomeres, which compromises replication and leads to critically short telomeres.

Telomere end-protection by the shelterin complex prevents DNA damage signalling and promiscuous repair at chromosome ends. Evidence suggests that the 3’ single-stranded telomere end can assemble into a lasso-like t-loop configuration1,2, which has been proposed to safeguard chromosome ends from being recognized as DNA double strand breaks2. Mechanisms must also exist to transiently disassemble t-loops to allow faithful telomere replication and to permit telomerase access to the 3’-end to solve the end replication problem. However, the regulation and physiological importance of t-loops in end-protection remains uncertain. Here, we identify a CDK phosphorylation site in the shelterin subunit, TRF2 (Ser365), whose dephosphorylation in S-phase by the PP6C/R3 phosphatase provides a narrow window during which the helicase RTEL1 is able to transiently access and unwind t-loops to facilitate telomere replication. Re-phosphorylation of TRF2 on Ser365 outside of S-phase is required to release RTEL1 from telomeres, which not only protects t-loops from promiscuous unwinding and inappropriate ATM activation, but also counteracts replication conflicts at DNA secondary structures arising within telomeres and across the genome. Hence, a phospho-switch in TRF2 coordinates assembly and disassembly of t-loops during the cell cycle, which protects telomeres from replication stress and an unscheduled DNA damage response.

SummaryFor genomic integrity to be maintained, the cell cycle and DNA damage responses must be linked. Cdt1, a G1-specific cell-cycle factor, is targeted for proteolysis by the Cul4-Ddb1Cdt2 ubiquitin ligase following DNA damage. Using a laser nanosurgery microscope to generate spatially restricted DNA damage within the living cell nucleus, we show that Cdt1 is recruited onto damaged sites in G1 phase cells, within seconds of DNA damage induction. PCNA, Cdt2, Cul4, DDB1 and p21Cip1 also accumulate rapidly to damaged sites. Cdt1 recruitment is PCNA-dependent, whereas PCNA and Cdt2 recruitment are independent of Cdt1. Fitting of fluorescence recovery after photobleaching profiles to an analytic reaction-diffusion model shows that Cdt1 and p21Cip1 exhibit highly dynamic binding at the site of damage, whereas PCNA appears immobile. Cdt2 exhibits both a rapidly exchanging and an apparently immobile subpopulation. Our data suggest that PCNA provides an immobile binding interface for dynamic Cdt1 interactions at the site of damage, which leads to rapid Cdt1 recruitment to damaged DNA, preceding Cdt1 degradation.

Highlights d Rtel1 loss and G4 stabilization cause overlapping transcriptional changes d Rtel1 loss and G4 stabilization cause transcription-replication conflicts d Replication stress caused by Rtel1 loss or RTEL1/PCNA mutation is R-loop dependent d G4 stabilization causes replication stress that is R-loop dependent

ARF is a tumour suppressor activated by oncogenic stress, which stabilizes p53. Although p53 is a key component of the response to DNA damage, a similar function for ARF has not been ascribed. Here we show that primary mouse and human cells lacking the tumour suppressor BRCA2 accumulate DNA damage, which triggers checkpoint signalling and ARF activation. Furthermore, senescence induced by Brca2 deletion in primary mouse and human cells is reversed by the loss of ARF, a phenotype recapitulated in cells lacking RAD51. Surprisingly, ARF is not necessary for p53 accumulation per se but for altering the spectrum of genes activated by this transcription factor. Specifically, ARF enables p53 transcription of Dusp4 and Dusp7, which encode a pair of phosphatases known to inactivate the MAP kinases ERK1/2. Our results ascribe a previously unanticipated function to the ARF tumour suppressor in genome integrity, controlled by replicative stress and ATM/ATR-dependent checkpoint responses.