» Articles » PMID: 34405474

Assessing Acute Myeloid Leukemia Susceptibility in Rearrangement-driven Patients by DNA Breakage at Topoisomerase II and CCCTC-binding Factor/cohesin Binding Sites

Overview
Date 2021 Aug 18
PMID 34405474
Citations 4
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

An initiating DNA double strand break (DSB) event precedes the formation of cancer-driven chromosomal abnormalities, such as gene rearrangements. Therefore, measuring DNA breaks at rearrangement-participating regions can provide a unique tool to identify and characterize susceptible individuals. Here, we developed a highly sensitive and low-input DNA break mapping method, the first of its kind for patient samples. We then measured genome-wide DNA breakage in normal cells of acute myeloid leukemia (AML) patients with KMT2A (previously MLL) rearrangements, compared to that of nonfusion AML individuals, as a means to evaluate individual susceptibility to gene rearrangements. DNA breakage at the KMT2A gene region was significantly greater in fusion-driven remission individuals, as compared to nonfusion individuals. Moreover, we identified select topoisomerase II (TOP2)-sensitive and CCCTC-binding factor (CTCF)/cohesin-binding sites with preferential DNA breakage in fusion-driven patients. Importantly, measuring DSBs at these sites, in addition to the KMT2A gene region, provided greater predictive power when assessing individual break susceptibility. We also demonstrated that low-dose etoposide exposure further elevated DNA breakage at these regions in fusion-driven AML patients, but not in nonfusion patients, indicating that these sites are preferentially sensitive to TOP2 activity in fusion-driven AML patients. These results support that mapping of DSBs in patients enables discovery of novel break-prone regions and monitoring of individuals susceptible to chromosomal abnormalities, and thus cancer. This will build the foundation for early detection of cancer-susceptible individuals, as well as those preferentially susceptible to therapy-related malignancies caused by treatment with TOP2 poisons.

Citing Articles

3C methods in cancer research: recent advances and future prospects.

Yoon I, Kim U, Jung K, Song Y, Park T, Lee D Exp Mol Med. 2024; 56(4):788-798.

PMID: 38658701 PMC: 11059347. DOI: 10.1038/s12276-024-01236-9.


DNA fragility at topologically associated domain boundaries is promoted by alternative DNA secondary structure and topoisomerase II activity.

Raimer Young H, Hou P, Bartosik A, Atkin N, Wang L, Wang Z Nucleic Acids Res. 2024; 52(7):3837-3855.

PMID: 38452213 PMC: 11040008. DOI: 10.1093/nar/gkae164.


Epigenetic balance ensures mechanistic control of MLL amplification and rearrangement.

Gray Z, Chakraborty D, Duttweiler R, Alekbaeva G, Murphy S, Chetal K Cell. 2023; 186(21):4528-4545.e18.

PMID: 37788669 PMC: 10591855. DOI: 10.1016/j.cell.2023.09.009.


3D chromatin architecture and transcription regulation in cancer.

Deng S, Feng Y, Pauklin S J Hematol Oncol. 2022; 15(1):49.

PMID: 35509102 PMC: 9069733. DOI: 10.1186/s13045-022-01271-x.

References
1.
Uuskula-Reimand L, Hou H, Samavarchi-Tehrani P, Vietri Rudan M, Liang M, Medina-Rivera A . Topoisomerase II beta interacts with cohesin and CTCF at topological domain borders. Genome Biol. 2016; 17(1):182. PMC: 5006368. DOI: 10.1186/s13059-016-1043-8. View

2.
Figueroa-Gonzalez G, Perez-Plasencia C . Strategies for the evaluation of DNA damage and repair mechanisms in cancer. Oncol Lett. 2017; 13(6):3982-3988. PMC: 5452911. DOI: 10.3892/ol.2017.6002. View

3.
Suzuki M, Liao W, Wos F, Johnston A, DeGrazia J, Ishii J . Whole-genome bisulfite sequencing with improved accuracy and cost. Genome Res. 2018; 28(9):1364-1371. PMC: 6120621. DOI: 10.1101/gr.232587.117. View

4.
Canela A, Maman Y, Jung S, Wong N, Callen E, Day A . Genome Organization Drives Chromosome Fragility. Cell. 2017; 170(3):507-521.e18. PMC: 6133249. DOI: 10.1016/j.cell.2017.06.034. View

5.
Berwick M, Vineis P . Markers of DNA repair and susceptibility to cancer in humans: an epidemiologic review. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2000; 92(11):874-97. DOI: 10.1093/jnci/92.11.874. View