Transcription-associated topoisomerase 2α activity is a major effector of cytotoxicity induced by G-quadruplex ligands

  1. Madeleine Bossaert
  2. Angélique Pipier
  3. Jean-Francois Riou
  4. Céline Noirot
  5. Linh-Trang Nguyễn
  6. Remy-Felix Serre
  7. Olivier Bouchez
  8. Eric Defrancq
  9. Patrick Calsou
  10. Sébastien Britton
  11. Dennis Gomez  Is a corresponding author
  1. Institut de Pharmacologie et Biologie Structurale, IPBS, Université de Toulouse, CNRS, UPS, Toulouse, France, France
  2. Muséum National d'Histoire Naturelle, CNRS, INSERM, France
  3. INRAE, UR 875, Genotoul Bioinfo, Castanet-Tolosan, France, France
  4. INRAE, US 1426, Castanet-Tolosan, France, France
  5. UMR CNRS 5250, Université Grenoble Alpes, Grenoble 38058, France, France

Abstract

G-quadruplexes (G4) are non-canonical DNA structures found in the genome of most species including human. Small molecules stabilizing these structures, called G4 ligands, have been identified and, for some of them, shown to induce cytotoxic DNA double-strand breaks. Through the use of an unbiased genetic approach, we identify here topoisomerase 2-alpha (TOP2A) as a major effector of cytotoxicity induced by two clastogenic G4 ligands, pyridostatin and CX-5461, the latter molecule currently undergoing phase I/II clinical trials in oncology. We show that both TOP2 activity and transcription account for DNA break production following G4 ligand treatments. In contrast, clastogenic activity of these G4 ligands is countered by topoisomerase 1 (TOP1), which limits co-transcriptional G4 formation, and by factors promoting transcriptional elongation. Altogether our results support that clastogenic G4 ligands act as DNA structure-driven TOP2-poisons at transcribed regions bearing G4 structures.

Data availability

RNA-seq data from wild-type HAP1 and CXR clones have been deposited on SRA with the project ID PRJNA637883

The following data sets were generated

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Madeleine Bossaert

    Cancer, Institut de Pharmacologie et Biologie Structurale, IPBS, Université de Toulouse, CNRS, UPS, Toulouse, France, Toulouse, France
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Angélique Pipier

    Cancer, Institut de Pharmacologie et Biologie Structurale, IPBS, Université de Toulouse, CNRS, UPS, Toulouse, France, Toulouse, France
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-8481-2860
  3. Jean-Francois Riou

    Muséum National d'Histoire Naturelle, CNRS, INSERM, Paris, France
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-0055-6506
  4. Céline Noirot

    Unité de Mathématique et Informatique Appliquées, INRAE, UR 875, Genotoul Bioinfo, Castanet-Tolosan, France, Castanet-Tolosan, France
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Linh-Trang Nguyễn

    Cancer, Institut de Pharmacologie et Biologie Structurale, IPBS, Université de Toulouse, CNRS, UPS, Toulouse, France, Toulouse, France
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Remy-Felix Serre

    GeT-PlaGe, Genotoul, INRAE, US 1426, Castanet-Tolosan, France, Castanet-Tolosan, France
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Olivier Bouchez

    GeT-PlaGe, Genotoul,, INRAE, US 1426, Castanet-Tolosan, France, Castanet-Tolosan, France
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Eric Defrancq

    Département de Chimie Moléculaire, UMR CNRS 5250, Université Grenoble Alpes, Grenoble 38058, France, Grenoble, France
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  9. Patrick Calsou

    Cancer, Institut de Pharmacologie et Biologie Structurale, IPBS, Université de Toulouse, CNRS, UPS, Toulouse, France, Toulouse, France
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  10. Sébastien Britton

    Cancer, Institut de Pharmacologie et Biologie Structurale, IPBS, Université de Toulouse, CNRS, UPS, Toulouse, France, Toulouse, France
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-7008-5316
  11. Dennis Gomez

    Cancer, Institut de Pharmacologie et Biologie Structurale, IPBS, Université de Toulouse, CNRS, UPS, Toulouse, France, Toulouse, France
    For correspondence
    dennis.gomez@ipbs.fr
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-9942-1451

Funding

Agence Nationale de la Recherche (ANR-17-CE18-0002-01)

  • Madeleine Bossaert
  • Angélique Pipier
  • Linh-Trang Nguyễn
  • Patrick Calsou
  • Sébastien Britton
  • Dennis Gomez

Agence Nationale de la Recherche (ANR-16-CE11-0006-01)

  • Angélique Pipier
  • Jean-Francois Riou
  • Eric Defrancq
  • Patrick Calsou
  • Sébastien Britton
  • Dennis Gomez

CANCEROPOLE GSO (Emergence funding CX-Break"")

  • Madeleine Bossaert
  • Angélique Pipier
  • Linh-Trang Nguyễn
  • Patrick Calsou
  • Sébastien Britton
  • Dennis Gomez

Ligue Contre le Cancer (Equipe Labellisée 2018)

  • Madeleine Bossaert
  • Angélique Pipier
  • Linh-Trang Nguyễn
  • Patrick Calsou
  • Sébastien Britton
  • Dennis Gomez

Agence Nationale de la Recherche (ANR-10-INBS-09)

  • Céline Noirot
  • Remy-Felix Serre
  • Olivier Bouchez

The funders had no role in study design, data collection and interpretation, or the decision to submit the work for publication.

Reviewing Editor

  1. Andrés Aguilera, CABIMER, Universidad de Sevilla, Spain

Version history

  1. Received: November 25, 2020
  2. Accepted: June 16, 2021
  3. Accepted Manuscript published: June 28, 2021 (version 1)
  4. Version of Record published: July 14, 2021 (version 2)

Copyright

© 2021, Bossaert et al.

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License permitting unrestricted use and redistribution provided that the original author and source are credited.

Metrics

  • 3,932
    views
  • 562
    downloads
  • 43
    citations

Views, downloads and citations are aggregated across all versions of this paper published by eLife.

Download links

A two-part list of links to download the article, or parts of the article, in various formats.

Downloads (link to download the article as PDF)

Open citations (links to open the citations from this article in various online reference manager services)

Cite this article (links to download the citations from this article in formats compatible with various reference manager tools)

  1. Madeleine Bossaert
  2. Angélique Pipier
  3. Jean-Francois Riou
  4. Céline Noirot
  5. Linh-Trang Nguyễn
  6. Remy-Felix Serre
  7. Olivier Bouchez
  8. Eric Defrancq
  9. Patrick Calsou
  10. Sébastien Britton
  11. Dennis Gomez
(2021)
Transcription-associated topoisomerase 2α activity is a major effector of cytotoxicity induced by G-quadruplex ligands
eLife 10:e65184.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.65184

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.65184

Further reading

    1. Cancer Biology
    2. Genetics and Genomics
    Kevin Nuno, Armon Azizi ... Ravindra Majeti
    Research Article

    Relapse of acute myeloid leukemia (AML) is highly aggressive and often treatment refractory. We analyzed previously published AML relapse cohorts and found that 40% of relapses occur without changes in driver mutations, suggesting that non-genetic mechanisms drive relapse in a large proportion of cases. We therefore characterized epigenetic patterns of AML relapse using 26 matched diagnosis-relapse samples with ATAC-seq. This analysis identified a relapse-specific chromatin accessibility signature for mutationally stable AML, suggesting that AML undergoes epigenetic evolution at relapse independent of mutational changes. Analysis of leukemia stem cell (LSC) chromatin changes at relapse indicated that this leukemic compartment underwent significantly less epigenetic evolution than non-LSCs, while epigenetic changes in non-LSCs reflected overall evolution of the bulk leukemia. Finally, we used single-cell ATAC-seq paired with mitochondrial sequencing (mtscATAC) to map clones from diagnosis into relapse along with their epigenetic features. We found that distinct mitochondrially-defined clones exhibit more similar chromatin accessibility at relapse relative to diagnosis, demonstrating convergent epigenetic evolution in relapsed AML. These results demonstrate that epigenetic evolution is a feature of relapsed AML and that convergent epigenetic evolution can occur following treatment with induction chemotherapy.

    1. Cancer Biology
    2. Cell Biology
    Ibtisam Ibtisam, Alexei F Kisselev
    Short Report

    Rapid recovery of proteasome activity may contribute to intrinsic and acquired resistance to FDA-approved proteasome inhibitors. Previous studies have demonstrated that the expression of proteasome genes in cells treated with sub-lethal concentrations of proteasome inhibitors is upregulated by the transcription factor Nrf1 (NFE2L1), which is activated by a DDI2 protease. Here, we demonstrate that the recovery of proteasome activity is DDI2-independent and occurs before transcription of proteasomal genes is upregulated but requires protein translation. Thus, mammalian cells possess an additional DDI2 and transcription-independent pathway for the rapid recovery of proteasome activity after proteasome inhibition.