Analysis of mutational signatures in C. elegans: Implications for cancer genome analysis
- PMID: 32980770
- DOI: 10.1016/j.dnarep.2020.102957
Analysis of mutational signatures in C. elegans: Implications for cancer genome analysis
Abstract
Genome integrity is constantly challenged by exogenous and endogenous insults, and mutations are associated with inherited disease and cancer. Here we summarize recent studies that utilized C. elegans whole genome next generation sequencing to experimentally determine mutational signatures associated with mutagen exposure, DNA repair deficiency or a combination of both and discuss the implications of these results for the understanding of cancer genome evolution. The experimental analysis of wild-type and DNA repair deficient nematodes propagated under unchallenged conditions over many generations revealed increased mutagenesis in approximately half of all DNA repair deficient strains, its rate, except for DNA mismatch repair, only being moderately increased. The exposure of wild-type and DNA repair defective strains to selected genotoxins, including UV-B and ionizing radiation, alkylating compounds, aristolochic acid, aflatoxin-B1, and cisplatin enabled the systematic analysis of the relative contributions of redundant repair modalities that mend DNA damage. Combining genotoxin exposure with DNA repair deficiency can manifest as altered mutation rates and/or as a change in mutational profiles, and reveals how different DNA alterations induced by one genotoxin are repaired by separate DNA repair pathways, often in a highly redundant way. Cancer genomes provide a snapshot of all mutational events that happened prior to cancer detection and sequencing, necessitating computational models to deduce mutational signatures using mathematical best fit approaches. While computationally deducing signatures from cancer genomes has been tremendously successful in associating some signatures to known mutagenic causes, many inferred signatures lack a clear link to a known mutagenic process. Moreover, analytical signatures might not reflect any distinct mutagenic processes. Nonetheless, combined effects of mutagen exposure and DNA damage-repair deficiency are also present in cancer genomes, but cannot be as easily detected owing to the unknown histories of genotoxic exposures and because biallelic in contrast to monoallelic DNA repair deficiency is rare. The impact of damage-repair interactions also manifests through selective pressure for DNA repair gene inactivation during cancer evolution. Using these considerations, we discuss a theoretical framework that explains why minute mutagenic changes, possibly too small to manifest as change in a signature, can have major effects in oncogenesis. Overall, the experimental analysis of mutational processes underscores that the interpretation of mutational signatures requires considering both the primary DNA lesion and repair status and imply that mutational signatures derived from cancer genomes may be more variable than currently anticipated.
Keywords: C. elegans; DNA repair; Mutational signatures.
Crown Copyright © 2020. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
Similar articles
-
Mutational signatures are jointly shaped by DNA damage and repair.Nat Commun. 2020 May 1;11(1):2169. doi: 10.1038/s41467-020-15912-7. Nat Commun. 2020. PMID: 32358516 Free PMC article.
-
C. elegans whole-genome sequencing reveals mutational signatures related to carcinogens and DNA repair deficiency.Genome Res. 2014 Oct;24(10):1624-36. doi: 10.1101/gr.175547.114. Epub 2014 Jul 16. Genome Res. 2014. PMID: 25030888 Free PMC article.
-
Mutational signatures of DNA mismatch repair deficiency in C. elegans and human cancers.Genome Res. 2018 May;28(5):666-675. doi: 10.1101/gr.226845.117. Epub 2018 Apr 10. Genome Res. 2018. PMID: 29636374 Free PMC article.
-
Mutational spectra and mutational signatures: Insights into cancer aetiology and mechanisms of DNA damage and repair.DNA Repair (Amst). 2018 Nov;71:6-11. doi: 10.1016/j.dnarep.2018.08.003. Epub 2018 Aug 24. DNA Repair (Amst). 2018. PMID: 30236628 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Having a direct look: analysis of DNA damage and repair mechanisms by next generation sequencing.Exp Cell Res. 2014 Nov 15;329(1):35-41. doi: 10.1016/j.yexcr.2014.08.011. Epub 2014 Aug 15. Exp Cell Res. 2014. PMID: 25131498 Free PMC article. Review.
Cited by
-
Experimental systems for the analysis of mutational signatures: no 'one-size-fits-all' solution.Biochem Soc Trans. 2023 Jun 28;51(3):1307-1317. doi: 10.1042/BST20221482. Biochem Soc Trans. 2023. PMID: 37283472 Free PMC article.
-
Deciphering complex genome rearrangements in C. elegans using short-read whole genome sequencing.Sci Rep. 2021 Sep 14;11(1):18258. doi: 10.1038/s41598-021-97764-9. Sci Rep. 2021. PMID: 34521941 Free PMC article.
-
Evaluation of mutagenic susceptibility of different stages in germ cell development of Caenorhabditis elegans using whole genome sequencing.Arch Toxicol. 2023 Aug;97(8):2261-2272. doi: 10.1007/s00204-023-03526-z. Epub 2023 May 20. Arch Toxicol. 2023. PMID: 37209179
-
The Base Excision Repair Pathway in the Nematode Caenorhabditis elegans.Front Cell Dev Biol. 2020 Dec 3;8:598860. doi: 10.3389/fcell.2020.598860. eCollection 2020. Front Cell Dev Biol. 2020. PMID: 33344454 Free PMC article. Review.
-
DNA repair, recombination, and damage signaling.Genetics. 2022 Feb 4;220(2):iyab178. doi: 10.1093/genetics/iyab178. Genetics. 2022. PMID: 35137093 Free PMC article. Review.
Publication types
MeSH terms
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical