Global and local redistribution of somatic mutations enable the prediction of functional XPD mutations in bladder cancer

Xeroderma pigmentosum group D (XPD) is a DNA helicase involved in transcription initiation and nucleotide excision repair. Missense mutations in XPD are putative drivers in bladder cancer (BLCA) and are associated with a specific single base substitution mutational signature. However, the impact of XPD on the genome-wide distribution of somatic mutations remains unexplored. We analysed somatic mutation distribution in whole-genome sequenced (WGS) BLCA samples with (XPD mutant) and without XPD mutations (WT). XPD genotype had a large impact on the distribution of somatic mutations. XPD mutant samples had increased mutation density at open chromatin, including striking mutation hotspots at CTCF-cohesin binding sites (CBS). We validate these findings in additional WGS cohorts and BLCA exomes. Analysis of XPD occupancy and CBS hotspot mutations in other cancer types suggest that XPD protects CBS from DNA damage. Our study implicates XPD in genomic integrity maintenance at topologically-associating domain boundaries marked by CTCF-cohesin binding.

[1]  John J. Wyrick,et al.  CTCF binding modulates UV damage formation to promote mutation hot spots in melanoma , 2021, The EMBO journal.

[2]  Sikandar G. Khan,et al.  Xeroderma Pigmentosum: A Model for Human Premature Aging. , 2021, The Journal of investigative dermatology.

[3]  D. Marenduzzo,et al.  RNA polymerase II is required for spatial chromatin reorganization following exit from mitosis , 2020, bioRxiv.

[4]  Angela N. Brooks,et al.  Visualizing and interpreting cancer genomics data via the Xena platform , 2020, Nature Biotechnology.

[5]  Michael Q. Zhang,et al.  The landscape of RNA polymerase II associated chromatin interactions in prostate cancer. , 2020, The Journal of clinical investigation.

[6]  C. Kisker,et al.  In TFIIH the Arch domain of XPD is mechanistically essential for transcription and DNA repair , 2020, Nature Communications.

[7]  A. Sarasin,et al.  XPD/ERCC2 mutations interfere in cellular responses to oxidative stress. , 2019, Mutagenesis.

[8]  Yves Pommier,et al.  Topoisomerase II-Induced Chromosome Breakage and Translocation Is Determined by Chromosome Architecture and Transcriptional Activity. , 2019, Molecular cell.

[9]  Z. Cai,et al.  Whole-genome sequencing identifies ADGRG6 enhancer mutations and FRS2 duplications as angiogenesis-related drivers in bladder cancer , 2019, Nature Communications.

[10]  Ville Mustonen,et al.  The repertoire of mutational signatures in human cancer , 2018, Nature.

[11]  Regina Ryan,et al.  Analysis of 7,815 cancer exomes reveals associations between mutational processes and somatic driver mutations , 2018, PLoS genetics.

[12]  Qiang Li,et al.  ERCC2 Helicase Domain Mutations Confer Nucleotide Excision Repair Deficiency and Drive Cisplatin Sensitivity in Muscle-Invasive Bladder Cancer , 2018, Clinical Cancer Research.

[13]  P. Tan,et al.  Mutation hotspots at CTCF binding sites coupled to chromosomal instability in gastrointestinal cancers , 2018, Nature Communications.

[14]  Ruiyun Zhang,et al.  Comprehensive genomic profiling of neuroendocrine bladder cancer pinpoints molecular origin and potential therapeutics , 2018, Oncogene.

[15]  J. Michael Cherry,et al.  The Encyclopedia of DNA elements (ENCODE): data portal update , 2017, Nucleic Acids Res..

[16]  Radhakrishnan Sabarinathan,et al.  Reduced mutation rate in exons due to differential mismatch repair , 2017, Nature Genetics.

[17]  C. Semple,et al.  Chromatin loop anchors are associated with genome instability in cancer and recombination hotspots in the germline , 2017, Genome Biology.

[18]  R. C. Poulos,et al.  The interaction between cytosine methylation and processes of DNA replication and repair shape the mutational landscape of cancer genomes , 2017, Nucleic acids research.

[19]  Moriah H Nissan,et al.  OncoKB: A Precision Oncology Knowledge Base. , 2017, JCO precision oncology.

[20]  R. C. Poulos,et al.  Functional Mutations Form at CTCF-Cohesin Binding Sites in Melanoma Due to Uneven Nucleotide Excision Repair across the Motif. , 2016, Cell reports.

[21]  H. Kamiya,et al.  Mutations induced by 8-hydroxyguanine (8-oxo-7,8-dihydroguanine), a representative oxidized base, in mammalian cells , 2016, Genes and Environment.

[22]  J. Lieb,et al.  Cisplatin DNA damage and repair maps of the human genome at single-nucleotide resolution , 2016, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[23]  Simon Tavaré,et al.  Mutational signatures in esophageal adenocarcinoma define etiologically distinct subgroups with therapeutic relevance , 2016, Nature Genetics.

[24]  Martin S. Taylor,et al.  Mutational Biases Drive Elevated Rates of Substitution at Regulatory Sites across Cancer Types , 2016, PLoS genetics.

[25]  Anushi Shah,et al.  Differential DNA repair underlies mutation hotspots at active promoters in cancer genomes , 2016, Nature.

[26]  Gad Getz,et al.  Somatic ERCC2 Mutations Are Associated with a Distinct Genomic Signature in Urothelial Tumors , 2016, Nature Genetics.

[27]  S. Antonarakis,et al.  APOBEC-induced mutations in human cancers are strongly enriched on the lagging DNA strand during replication , 2016, Genome research.

[28]  Daniel S. Day,et al.  Activation of proto-oncogenes by disruption of chromosome neighborhoods , 2015, Science.

[29]  Radhakrishnan Sabarinathan,et al.  Nucleotide excision repair is impaired by binding of transcription factors to DNA , 2015, Nature.

[30]  Niko Välimäki,et al.  CTCF/cohesin-binding sites are frequently mutated in cancer , 2015, Nature Genetics.

[31]  K. Hansen,et al.  Reconstructing A/B compartments as revealed by Hi-C using long-range correlations in epigenetic data , 2015, Genome Biology.

[32]  Igor B. Rogozin,et al.  Disruption of Transcriptional Coactivator Sub1 Leads to Genome-Wide Re-distribution of Clustered Mutations Induced by APOBEC in Active Yeast Genes , 2015, PLoS genetics.

[33]  J. Egly,et al.  TFIIH subunit alterations causing xeroderma pigmentosum and trichothiodystrophy specifically disturb several steps during transcription. , 2015, American journal of human genetics.

[34]  Ben Lehner,et al.  Differential DNA mismatch repair underlies mutation rate variation across the human genome , 2015, Nature.

[35]  S. Gabriel,et al.  Somatic ERCC2 mutations correlate with cisplatin sensitivity in muscle-invasive urothelial carcinoma. , 2014, Cancer discovery.

[36]  Fidel Ramírez,et al.  deepTools: a flexible platform for exploring deep-sequencing data , 2014, Nucleic Acids Res..

[37]  N. Maizels,et al.  G-quadruplexes are genomewide targets of transcriptional helicases XPB and XPD , 2014, Nature chemical biology.

[38]  The Cancer Genome Atlas Research Network,et al.  Comprehensive molecular characterization of urothelial bladder carcinoma , 2014, Nature.

[39]  David T. W. Jones,et al.  Signatures of mutational processes in human cancer , 2013, Nature.

[40]  Steven A. Roberts,et al.  An APOBEC cytidine deaminase mutagenesis pattern is widespread in human cancers , 2013, Nature Genetics.

[41]  Wouter de Laat,et al.  CTCF: the protein, the binding partners, the binding sites and their chromatin loops , 2013, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.

[42]  B. Schuster-Böckler,et al.  Chromatin organization is a major influence on regional mutation rates in human cancer cells , 2012, Nature.

[43]  J. Egly,et al.  TFIIH: when transcription met DNA repair , 2012, Nature Reviews Molecular Cell Biology.

[44]  Aaron R. Quinlan,et al.  Bioinformatics Applications Note Genome Analysis Bedtools: a Flexible Suite of Utilities for Comparing Genomic Features , 2022 .

[45]  R. Sampliner,et al.  Bile acids in combination with low pH induce oxidative stress and oxidative DNA damage: relevance to the pathogenesis of Barrett’s oesophagus , 2006, Gut.