Circular ecDNA promotes accessible chromatin and high oncogene expression
Nature,
Journal Year:
2019,
Volume and Issue:
575(7784), P. 699 - 703
Published: Nov. 20, 2019
Language: Английский
Extrachromosomal DNA is associated with oncogene amplification and poor outcome across multiple cancers
Nature Genetics,
Journal Year:
2020,
Volume and Issue:
52(9), P. 891 - 897
Published: Aug. 17, 2020
Language: Английский
Signatures of copy number alterations in human cancer
Christopher D. Steele,
No information about this author
Ammal Abbasi,
No information about this author
S. M. Ashiqul Islam
No information about this author
et al.
Nature,
Journal Year:
2022,
Volume and Issue:
606(7916), P. 984 - 991
Published: June 15, 2022
Abstract
Gains
and
losses
of
DNA
are
prevalent
in
cancer
emerge
as
a
consequence
inter-related
processes
replication
stress,
mitotic
errors,
spindle
multipolarity
breakage–fusion–bridge
cycles,
among
others,
which
may
lead
to
chromosomal
instability
aneuploidy
1,2
.
These
copy
number
alterations
contribute
initiation,
progression
therapeutic
resistance
3–5
Here
we
present
conceptual
framework
examine
the
patterns
human
that
is
widely
applicable
diverse
data
types,
including
whole-genome
sequencing,
whole-exome
reduced
representation
bisulfite
single-cell
sequencing
SNP6
microarray
data.
Deploying
this
9,873
cancers
representing
33
types
from
The
Cancer
Genome
Atlas
6
revealed
set
21
signatures
explain
97%
samples.
Seventeen
were
attributed
biological
phenomena
doubling,
aneuploidy,
loss
heterozygosity,
homologous
recombination
deficiency,
chromothripsis
haploidization.
aetiologies
four
remain
unexplained.
Some
harbour
amplicon
associated
with
extrachromosomal
DNA,
disease-specific
survival
proto-oncogene
gains
such
MDM2
In
contrast
base-scale
mutational
signatures,
no
signature
was
many
known
exogenous
risk
factors.
Our
results
synthesize
global
landscape
by
revealing
diversity
give
rise
these
alterations.
Language: Английский
Extrachromosomal oncogene amplification in tumour pathogenesis and evolution
Nature reviews. Cancer,
Journal Year:
2019,
Volume and Issue:
19(5), P. 283 - 288
Published: March 14, 2019
Language: Английский
Extrachromosomal circular DNA drives oncogenic genome remodeling in neuroblastoma
Nature Genetics,
Journal Year:
2019,
Volume and Issue:
52(1), P. 29 - 34
Published: Dec. 16, 2019
Language: Английский
ecDNA hubs drive cooperative intermolecular oncogene expression
Nature,
Journal Year:
2021,
Volume and Issue:
600(7890), P. 731 - 736
Published: Nov. 24, 2021
Language: Английский
Oncogenic extrachromosomal DNA functions as mobile enhancers to globally amplify chromosomal transcription
Cancer Cell,
Journal Year:
2021,
Volume and Issue:
39(5), P. 694 - 707.e7
Published: April 8, 2021
Language: Английский
Single-cell multimodal glioma analyses identify epigenetic regulators of cellular plasticity and environmental stress response
Nature Genetics,
Journal Year:
2021,
Volume and Issue:
53(10), P. 1456 - 1468
Published: Sept. 30, 2021
Language: Английский
Cancer evolution: Darwin and beyond
The EMBO Journal,
Journal Year:
2021,
Volume and Issue:
40(18)
Published: Aug. 30, 2021
Review30
August
2021Open
Access
Cancer
evolution:
Darwin
and
beyond
Roberto
Vendramin
orcid.org/0000-0001-7191-4887
Research
UK
Lung
Centre
of
Excellence,
University
College
London
Institute,
London,
Search
for
more
papers
by
this
author
Kevin
Litchfield
Corresponding
Author
[email
protected]
Charles
Swanton
Evolution
Genome
Instability
Laboratory,
The
Francis
Crick
Information
Vendramin1,
*,1
*,1,2
1Cancer
2Cancer
*Corresponding
author.
Tel:
+44
207679
6500;
E-mail:
203796
2047;
EMBO
Journal
(2021)40:e108389https://doi.org/10.15252/embj.2021108389
This
article
is
part
the
Reviews
2021
series.
PDFDownload
PDF
text
main
figures.
ToolsAdd
to
favoritesDownload
CitationsTrack
CitationsPermissions
ShareFacebookTwitterLinked
InMendeleyWechatReddit
Figures
&
Info
Abstract
Clinical
laboratory
studies
over
recent
decades
have
established
branched
evolution
as
a
feature
cancer.
However,
while
grounded
in
somatic
selection,
several
lines
evidence
suggest
Darwinian
model
alone
insufficient
fully
explain
cancer
evolution.
First,
role
macroevolutionary
events
tumour
initiation
progression
contradicts
Darwin's
central
thesis
gradualism.
Whole-genome
doubling,
chromosomal
chromoplexy
chromothripsis
represent
examples
single
catastrophic
which
can
drive
Second,
neutral
play
some
tumours,
indicating
that
selection
not
always
driving
Third,
increasing
appreciation
ageing
soma
has
led
generalised
theories
age-dependent
carcinogenesis.
Here,
we
review
these
concepts
others,
collectively
argue
extends
Darwin.
We
also
highlight
clinical
opportunities
be
grasped
through
targeting
vulnerabilities
arising
from
non-Darwinian
patterns
Introduction
In
his
revolutionary
work
(Darwin,
1859),
provided
an
evolutionary
framework
enabled
understanding
diversification
extinction
application
three
key
concepts:
variation,
heredity
selection.
More
than
100
years
later,
observation
heterogeneity
advanced
malignancies
Peter
Nowell
hypothesise
tumorigenesis
process,
whereby
same
principles
could
applied
elucidate
mechanisms
responsible
formation
development
(Nowell,
1976).
Owing
Nowell's
seminal
work,
been
historically
adopted
develop
models
therapy
resistance
(Michor
et
al,
2004;
Gatenby
Vincent,
2008;
Pepper
2009;
Greaves
Maley,
2012)
(see
Box
1).
While
gene-centric
shown
trajectories
multiple
instances
(Gerlinger
Swanton,
2010;
Purushotham
Sullivan,
Gillies
2012),
suggested
additional
are
required
reconcile
full
spectrum
behaviours
Specifically,
now
supports
jumps
(Stephens
2011;
Baca
2013;
Sottoriva
2015),
likely
interspaced
phases
microevolutionary
Furthermore,
discordant
inheritance
between
cells
(Decarvalho
2018),
(Ling
2015;
Williams
2016;
Wu
2016),
cell
plasticity
(Pogrebniak
Curtis,
2018;
Mills
2019;
Boumahdi
de
Sauvage,
2020)
microenvironment
(Coussens
Werb,
2002;
Lin
Karin,
2007;
Laconi
demand
consideration
broader
set
models.
Understanding
how
influences
disease
such
processes
shaped
environmental
factors
treatment
remains
critical.
With
review,
discuss
our
process
but
light
data,
must
incorporate
into
larger
conceptual
inclusive
alternative
approaches
understand,
predict
better
respond
improve
patient
outcome.
basis
subclonal
diversity
viewed
perspective
(Greaves
2012).
Indeed,
tumours
frequently
typified
large
population
genetically
diverse
giving
rise
distinct
subpopulations.
Subclones
will
compete
with
one
another
limited
nutrients
metabolites
face
ever-shifting
selective
pressures
driven
both
endogenous
(i.e.
microenvironmental
geographical
barriers)
exogenous
therapy)
(Merlo
2006).
outcome
competition
survival
clones
adapted
grow
under
very
specific
conditions,
highly
contextual
blind
future.
Many
were
dominant
at
point
time
may
reach
dead
ends
disappear,
only
minority
able
persist.
Quoting
"One
general
law,
leading
advancement
all
organic
beings,
namely,
multiply,
vary,
let
strongest
live
weakest
die"
1859).
two
decades,
direct
support
reported,
principally
using
next-generation
sequencing
(NGS)
perform
detailed
characterisation
genetic
2).
One
earliest
was
Shah
al
(2009),
where
matched
primary
metastatic
tissue
lobular
breast
sequenced
revealing
extensive
mutational
∼80%
non-synonymous
mutations
metastasis
absent
site
(Shah
2009).
finding
pervasive
additionally
reported
Kornelia
Polyak,
demonstrated
composed
variety
types
morphologies
behaviours,
source
clonal
(Campbell
2007).
Early
abundant,
subpopulations
revealed
single-cell
2)
Nick
Navin
others
(Navin
2011).
Regarding
haematological
malignancies,
Anderson
al.
among
first
show
branching
acute
lymphoblastic
leukaemia
(Anderson
Our
own
Gerlinger
(2012)
profiled
30
samples
four
renal
carcinoma
patients
63
69%
detectable
across
every
region
These
observations
extent
relevance
parallel
suppressor
genes
(SETD2,
PTEN,
KDM5C),
suggesting
inactivation
gene
times
within
tumour.
report
followed
Nik-Zainal
(2012b),
who
studied
life
history
21
identifying
variation
individual
(Nik-Zainal
2012b).
study
showed
further
each
containing
lineage,
representing
50%
cells.
Extending
detail
on
Gundem
(2015)
utilised
autopsy
sampling
10
prostate
identify
seeding
common
event
(Gundem
2015).
emphasised
diversification,
complexity
routes
sites.
early
small
sample
sizes.
range
meant
nature
patterns,
generalisable
or
histology
specific,
remained
undetermined.
Despite
limitations,
NGS
gave
hence
supporting
growth
(Fig
demonstration
solid
spurred
change
thinking
community
recognise
importance
Branched
applicable
relatively
homogeneous
and/or
metastases,
particularly
aggressive
subclones
achieve
sweep
present
clinically
profile
(Reiter
2018)
Clear
described
pancreatic
cancer,
virtually
major
driver
alterations
(KRAS,
CDKN2A,
TP53,
SMAD4)
most
ancestor
observed
metastases
(Makohon-Moore
2017).
Similar
carcinomas,
∼10–20%
exhibit
mutations,
poor
(Turajlic
2018).
It
proposed
reflect
differences
inherent
biology
given
impact
upon
dissemination
(Iacobuzio-Donahue
2020).
Figure
1.
Models
linear
(A),
(B),
macroevolution
(C)
(D)
Muller
plots
dynamic
changes
size
(left),
lineages
phylogenetic
trees
(centre)
number
(right).
Colours
indicate
different
clones.
Download
figure
PowerPoint
accumulating
subject
pressure
sufficient
histories,
points
existence
important
features
Macroevolution
punctuated
Neo-Darwinian
generally
assume
acquired
sequentially
gradual
fashion
time.
cases,
genomic
aberrations
occur
short
bursts
2013),
consequence
instability
(CIN)
(Bakhoum
Landau,
2017),
breakage-fusion-bridge
(BFB)
cycles
(Gisselsson
2000),
(Baca
Notta
2016)
other
similar
According
model,
alternate
long
relative
equilibrium
periods
intense
evolution,
acquire
strong
(Cross
Such
saltatory
that,
least
certain
circumstances
make
jumps,
contrary
what
predicted.
reminiscent
"hopeful
monsters"
theorised
Richard
Goldschmidt,
i.e.
organisms
profound
mutant
genotype
compared
their
parents
hold
potential
establish
novel
lineage
(Goldschmidt,
1941).
Hence,
change,
potentially
obtain
greater
fitness
would
possible
accumulation
alterations,
owing
simultaneous
acquisition
(Korbel
Campbell,
2013).
phenotypic
hereditary
if
any
all,
often
deleterious
rare
it
result
increase
cellular
generation
viable
1941;
2014b).
2.
Scales
Schematic
illustration
determinants
influence
interdependent
mechanisms,
microscopic
(left)
macroscopic
(right)
scale.
death,
implicates
drivers
progression.
For
example,
prospective
TRACERx
(TRAcking
(Rx))
(Jamal-Hanjani
elevated
copy
identified
being
strongly
associated
recurrence/death
risk
non-small
lung
(NSCLC),
whereas
nucleotide
variant
non-significant.
Similarly,
aneuploidy
detected
recurrent
gliomas
(Barthel
2019),
alongside
(characterised
high
weighted
genome
integrity
index
(Endesfelder
2014))
emerged
significant
determinant
clear
(ccRCC)
ccRCC,
losses
chromosomes
9p21.3
(CDKN2A)
14q31.1
(HIF1A)
specifically
reduced
prognostic
form
(SCNAs),
above
becoming
increasingly
recognised
pan-cancer
phenomenon
(Smith
Sheltzer,
A
outstanding
challenge
however
minimal
mapping
SCNA
cytobands,
find
causative
genes.
And
even
when
emerge,
case
CDKN2A
9p21
functional
delineate
precise
completed.
Additional
occurring
few
cataclysmic
events,
termed
chromoplexy,
ER/PR/HER2
negative
cancers
found
undergo
remain
stable
later
stages
(Gao
2016).
Tumour
chromothripsis,
thought
complex
rearrangements
involving
dozens
breakpoints
types,
bone
2011),
colon
(Kloosterman
neuroblastoma
(Molenaar
glioblastoma
(Malhotra
2013)
(Notta
An
extreme
caused
aforementioned
"big
bang"
crises
tumourigenesis
numerous
intermixed
substantially
evolve
due
weak
(Sottoriva
dynamics
cancers,
including
2015)
hepatocellular
well
conceptually
asexually
reproducing
organisms,
terms
cannot
mitigated
sexual
reproduction.
mechanism
alleviate
irreversible
detrimental
(e.g.
LOH
events)
whole
doubling
(WGD),
prevalent
(Storchova
Pellman,
Zack
Dewhurst
2014;
Bielski
entire
genome.
presence
additional,
doubled
wild-type
alleles
WGD
allow
tolerate
essential
(López
occurrence
therefore
creates
tolerant
permissive
environment
fuel
rapid
CIN,
facilitate
sub
functionalisation
duplicated
Huminiecki
Conant,
2012;
2014).
Consequently,
rates
(Zack
2014)
prognosis
intrinsic
drug
(McGranahan
Importantly,
classes
trigger
events.
instance,
prone
arise
genomically
unstable
cells,
those
harbouring
damaged
telomeres
hyperploidy
(Mardin
BFB
generate
amounts
providing
free
DNA
engage
rearrangement
compromising
centromere
function
(Umbreit
replication
stress
promoting
structural
numerical
(Burrell
triggering
nucleotide-level
mutagenesis
mediated
via
APOBEC3B
induction
(Kanu
turn
leads
incomplete
(Venkatesan
2021).
Relatedly,
regional
clusters
(kataegis)
2011)
lesion
segregation
(Aitken
architectures
2012a).
combination
rapidly
accelerates
causing
non-gradualism
class
itself
would.
Discordant
Recent
oncogene
amplification
extrachromosomal
(ecDNA)
frequent
(Verhaak
2019).
material
outside
autosomal
recognised,
reports
oncogenic
ecDNAs
going
back
far
1980s,
sequences
resembling
MYCN
(Kohl
1983).
last
frequency
started
appreciated,
thanks
techniques
long-read
whole-genome
circular
library
enrichment
structures
located
variable
(ranging
168
kb
5
Mb,
median
1.26
Mb)
(Wu
contain
oncogenes
(Bailey
provide
maintain
potent
expression
open
chromatin,
allows
increased
encoded
counterparts
Kim
defies
Mendelian
genetics.
replicated
during
S
phase,
but,
lack
centromeres,
they
unequal
randomly
inherited
daughter
mitosis.
As
such,
ecDNA-based
accelerate
non-Mendelian
expansion
backgrounds
random
distribution
fosters
cell-to-cell
variability
transcriptional
levels
oncogenes,
enabling
ITH
efficiently
amplifications
(Turner
2017;
Verhaak
Several
ecDNA
(albeit
numbers)
lung,
(Fan
Turner
Deshpande
Bailey
2020;
Koche
Key
MYC,
MYCN,
EGFR,
PDGFRA,
MET,
HER2,
DHFR,
CDK4
MDM2
ecDNAs,
ecDNA-mediated
Gu
proliferation,
invasion
metastatisation
negatively
correlate
overall
elimination
decrease
affect
(Shimizu
1998;
Nathanson
Clarke
Oobatake
Shimizu,
enable
adaptation
response
conditions
Decarvalho
2020),
though
represents
cancer-specific
vulnerability
(Nathanson
Neutral
based
Motoo
Kimura's
genetics
postulated
vast
majority
molecular
rather
fixation
selectively
drift
(Kimura,
cancer-driving
selected
accumulate
prior
initiation,
carcinogenic
insults.
Those
development,
little
no
contribution
course
Therefore,
entirely
(nearly)
study,
multi-region
>
300
regions
indicated
there
particular
clone
allele
frequencies
TCGA
cohorts
used
conclude
up
one-third
do
indications
(Williams
results
overestimation
low
resolution
data
suffer
bias
modelling,
since
abundance
distributions
enough
information
exclude
(Tarabichi
Bozic
theory
essentially
states
neutral,
especially
sizes
purifying
Most
variants
effect,
ones
predominantly
deleterious,
predicted
mathematical
modelling
(Cannataro
Kimura
never
excluded
occasional
positive
applying
changes,
metastatisation,
therapeutic
intervention)
taken
consideration.
treatment-naïve
its
progression,
emergence
forces,
pressure,
still
previously
(Almendro
worth
noting
non-cell-autonomous
give
false
impression
(Marusyk
Polyak's
group
subclone
does
higher
fitness,
instead
stimulates
scenario,
misleading
absence
predominant
relevant
frames
simultaneously
fuelling
Non-genetic
There
non-genetic—often
non-heritable—determinants,
(TME)
(Caiado
Ramón
y
Cajal
Cell
notion
dynamically
switch
state
stresses
without
gaining
recognition
(discussed
reviews
series
Milan
phenomenon,
plasticity,
characterised
fundamental
biological
properties
reversible
epigenetic
(in
sharp
contrast
binary
largely
effects)
(Calabrese
advantages
ability
swiftly
react
finely
tuned
graded
adaptive
responses
stressors
inflammation
(Rambow
classic
example
epithelial–mesenchymal
transition
(EMT)
(Nieto
(extensively
covered
Brabletz
(2021)
series).
genome,
plethora
phenotypes,
promoted
intervention
(Kemper
Gunnarsson
Marine
extensively
escape
pressure.
identification
drug-tolerant
persisters
(DTPs)
emerging
drug-sensitive
NSCLC
exposure
EGFR
tyrosine
kinase
inhibitor
(Sharma
2010).
phenotype
transiently
lost
thereby
demonstrating
reversibly
non-genetic
switch.
phenotypically
distinct—yet
interdependent—drug-tolerant
populations
recently
emerge
melanoma
PDX
MAPKi
although
resistant
phenotypes
non-heritable,
protect
eradication
permanent
melanoma,
initially
transient
converted
stably
(Shaffer
healthy
tissues
display
genes,
suggests
malignant
transformation
(Martincorena
2015,
Teixeira
Yizhak
Yoshida
noted
t
Language: Английский
Enhancer hijacking determines extrachromosomal circular MYCN amplicon architecture in neuroblastoma
Nature Communications,
Journal Year:
2020,
Volume and Issue:
11(1)
Published: Nov. 16, 2020
Abstract
MYCN
amplification
drives
one
in
six
cases
of
neuroblastoma.
The
supernumerary
gene
copies
are
commonly
found
on
highly
rearranged,
extrachromosomal
circular
DNA
(ecDNA).
exact
amplicon
structure
has
not
been
described
thus
far
and
the
functional
relevance
its
rearrangements
is
unknown.
Here,
we
analyze
using
short-read
Nanopore
sequencing
chromatin
landscape
ChIP-seq,
ATAC-seq
Hi-C.
This
reveals
two
distinct
classes
amplicons
which
explain
regulatory
requirements
for
overexpression.
first
class
always
co-amplifies
a
proximal
enhancer
driven
by
noradrenergic
core
circuit
(CRC).
second
characterized
high
structural
complexity,
lacks
key
local
enhancers,
instead
contains
distal
chromosomal
fragments
harboring
CRC-driven
enhancers.
Thus,
ectopic
hijacking
can
compensate
loss
elements
explains
large
component
diversity
observed
amplification.
Language: Английский