Anthony Fullam

High burden and pervasive positive selection of somatic mutations in normal human skin

Normal skins curiously abnormal genome Within every tumor, a battle is being waged. As individual tumor cells acquire new mutations that promote their survival and growth, they clonally expand at the expense of tumor cells that are “less fit.” Martincorena et al. sequenced 234 biopsies of sun-exposed but physiologically normal skin from four individuals (see the Perspective by Brash). They found a surprisingly high burden of mutations, higher than that of many tumors. Many of the mutations known to drive the growth of cutaneous squamous cell carcinomas were already under strong positive selection. More than a quarter of normal skin cells carried a driver mutation, and every square centimeter of skin contained hundreds of competing mutant clones. Science, this issue p. 880; see also p. 867 Sun-exposed but physiologically normal human skin harbors an unexpectedly high number of cancer-causing mutations. [Also see Perspective by Brash] How somatic mutations accumulate in normal cells is central to understanding cancer development but is poorly understood. We performed ultradeep sequencing of 74 cancer genes in small (0.8 to 4.7 square millimeters) biopsies of normal skin. Across 234 biopsies of sun-exposed eyelid epidermis from four individuals, the burden of somatic mutations averaged two to six mutations per megabase per cell, similar to that seen in many cancers, and exhibited characteristic signatures of exposure to ultraviolet light. Remarkably, multiple cancer genes are under strong positive selection even in physiologically normal skin, including most of the key drivers of cutaneous squamous cell carcinomas. Positively selected mutations were found in 18 to 32% of normal skin cells at a density of ~140 driver mutations per square centimeter. We observed variability in the driver landscape among individuals and variability in the sizes of clonal expansions across genes. Thus, aged sun-exposed skin is a patchwork of thousands of evolving clones with over a quarter of cells carrying cancer-causing mutations while maintaining the physiological functions of epidermis.

Extensive transduction of nonrepetitive DNA mediated by L1 retrotransposition in cancer genomes

Introduction The human genome is peppered with mobile repetitive elements called long interspersed nuclear element–1 (L1) retrotransposons. Propagating through RNA and cDNA intermediates, these molecular parasites copy and insert themselves throughout the genome, with potentially disruptive effects on neighboring genes or regulatory sequences. In the germ line, unique sequence downstream of L1 elements can also be retrotransposed if transcription continues beyond the repeat, a process known as 3′ transduction. There has been growing interest in retrotransposition and 3′ transduction as a possible source of somatic mutations during tumorigenesis. The activity of individual L1 elements fluctuates during tumor evolution. In a lung tumor, hundreds of 3′ transductions arose from a small number of active L1 source elements (colored circles on outer rim of circle). As the tumor evolved from the preinvasive common ancestor to invasive cancer, individual elements exhibited variable activity over time. Rationale To explore whether 3′ transductions are frequent in cancer, we developed a bioinformatic algorithm for identifying somatically acquired retrotranspositions in cancer genomes. We applied our algorithm to 290 cancer samples from 244 patients across 12 tumor types. The unique downstream sequence mobilized with 3′ transductions effectively fingerprints the L1 source element, providing insights into the activity of individual L1 loci across the genome. Results Across the 290 samples, we identified 2756 somatic L1 retrotranspositions. Tumors from 53% of patients had at least one such event, with colorectal and lung cancers being most frequently affected (93% and 75% of patients, respectively). Somatic 3′ transductions comprised 24% of events, half of which represented mobilizations of unique sequence alone, without any accompanying L1 sequence. Overall, 95% of 3′ transductions identified derived from only 72 germline L1 source elements, with as few as four loci accounting for 50% of events. In a given sample, the same source element could generate 50 or more somatic transductions, scattered extensively across the genome. About 5% of somatic transductions arose from L1 source elements that were themselves somatic retrotranspositions. In three of the cases in which we sequenced more than one sample from a patient’s tumor, we were able to place 3′ transductions on the phylogenetic tree. We found that the activity of individual source elements fluctuated during tumor evolution, with different subclones exhibiting much variability in which elements were “on” and which were “off.” The ability to identify the individual L1 source elements active in a given tumor enabled us to study the promoter methylation of those elements specifically. We found that 3′ transduction activity in a patient’s tumor was always associated with hypomethylation of that element. Overall, 2.3% of transductions distributed exons or entire genes to other sites in the genome, and many more mobilized deoxyribonuclease I (DNAse-I) hypersensitive sites or transcription factor binding sites identified by the ENCODE project. Occasionally, somatic L1 insertions inserted near coding sequence and redistributed these exons elsewhere in the genome. However, we found no general effects of retrotranspositions on transcription levels of genes at the insertion points and no evidence for aberrant RNA species resulting from somatically acquired transposable elements. Indeed, as with germline retrotranspositions, somatic insertions exhibited a strong enrichment in heterochromatic, gene-poor regions of the genome. Conclusion Somatic 3′ transduction occurs frequently in human tumors, and in some cases transduction events can scatter exons, genes, and regulatory elements widely across the genome. Dissemination of these sequences appears to be due to a small number of highly active L1 elements, whose activity can wax and wane during tumor evolution. The majority of the retrotransposition events are likely to be harmless “passenger” mutations. Hitchhiking through the tumor genome Retrotransposons are DNA repeat sequences that are constantly on the move. By poaching certain cellular enzymes, they copy and insert themselves at new sites in the genome. Sometimes they carry along adjacent DNA sequences, a process called 3′ transduction. Tubio et al. found that 3′ transduction is a common event in human tumors. Because this process can scatter genes and regulatory sequences across the genome, it may represent yet another mechanism by which tumor cells acquire new mutations that help them survive and grow. Science, this issue p. 10.1126/science.1251343 Tumor genomes are peppered with mobile repeat sequences that carry along adjacent DNA when they insert into new genomic sites. Long interspersed nuclear element–1 (L1) retrotransposons are mobile repetitive elements that are abundant in the human genome. L1 elements propagate through RNA intermediates. In the germ line, neighboring, nonrepetitive sequences are occasionally mobilized by the L1 machinery, a process called 3′ transduction. Because 3′ transductions are potentially mutagenic, we explored the extent to which they occur somatically during tumorigenesis. Studying cancer genomes from 244 patients, we found that tumors from 53% of the patients had somatic retrotranspositions, of which 24% were 3′ transductions. Fingerprinting of donor L1s revealed that a handful of source L1 elements in a tumor can spawn from tens to hundreds of 3′ transductions, which can themselves seed further retrotranspositions. The activity of individual L1 elements fluctuated during tumor evolution and correlated with L1 promoter hypomethylation. The 3′ transductions disseminated genes, exons, and regulatory elements to new locations, most often to heterochromatic regions of the genome.

Somatic mutations reveal asymmetric cellular dynamics in the early human embryo

Somatic cells acquire mutations throughout the course of an individual’s life. Mutations occurring early in embryogenesis are often present in a substantial proportion of, but not all, cells in postnatal humans and thus have particular characteristics and effects. Depending on their location in the genome and the proportion of cells they are present in, these mosaic mutations can cause a wide range of genetic disease syndromes and predispose carriers to cancer. They have a high chance of being transmitted to offspring as de novo germline mutations and, in principle, can provide insights into early human embryonic cell lineages and their contributions to adult tissues. Although it is known that gross chromosomal abnormalities are remarkably common in early human embryos, our understanding of early embryonic somatic mutations is very limited. Here we use whole-genome sequences of normal blood from 241 adults to identify 163 early embryonic mutations. We estimate that approximately three base substitution mutations occur per cell per cell-doubling event in early human embryogenesis and these are mainly attributable to two known mutational signatures. We used the mutations to reconstruct developmental lineages of adult cells and demonstrate that the two daughter cells of many early embryonic cell-doubling events contribute asymmetrically to adult blood at an approximately 2:1 ratio. This study therefore provides insights into the mutation rates, mutational processes and developmental outcomes of cell dynamics that operate during early human embryogenesis.

Frequent somatic transfer of mitochondrial DNA into the nuclear genome of human cancer cells

Mitochondrial genomes are separated from the nuclear genome for most of the cell cycle by the nuclear double membrane, intervening cytoplasm, and the mitochondrial double membrane. Despite these physical barriers, we show that somatically acquired mitochondrial-nuclear genome fusion sequences are present in cancer cells. Most occur in conjunction with intranuclear genomic rearrangements, and the features of the fusion fragments indicate that nonhomologous end joining and/or replication-dependent DNA double-strand break repair are the dominant mechanisms involved. Remarkably, mitochondrial-nuclear genome fusions occur at a similar rate per base pair of DNA as interchromosomal nuclear rearrangements, indicating the presence of a high frequency of contact between mitochondrial and nuclear DNA in some somatic cells. Transmission of mitochondrial DNA to the nuclear genome occurs in neoplastically transformed cells, but we do not exclude the possibility that some mitochondrial-nuclear DNA fusions observed in cancer occurred years earlier in normal somatic cells.

Biological and prognostic impact of APOBEC-induced mutations in the spectrum of plasma cell dyscrasias and multiple myeloma cell lines

Biological and prognostic impact of APOBEC-induced mutations in the spectrum of plasma cell dyscrasias and multiple myeloma cell lines

Rearrangement bursts generate canonical gene fusions in bone and soft tissue tumors

Looping together genes in cancer A subset of human cancers are characterized by aberrant fusion of two specific genes. In some cases, the activity of the resultant fusion protein drives tumor growth. Most fusion genes in cancer appear to arise from simple reciprocal chromosomal translocations. Anderson et al. found that the characteristic fusion gene in a bone and soft tissue tumor called Ewing sarcoma is produced by a far more complicated mechanism (see the Perspective by Imielinski and Ladanyi). In nearly half of the tumors examined, the fusion gene was created by the formation of dramatic genomic loops that disrupt multiple genes. These complex rearrangements occur in early replicating and transcriptionally active regions of the genome and are associated with poor prognosis. Science, this issue p. eaam8419; see also p. 848 The gene fusions driving sarcoma growth often arise by the formation of dramatic genomic loops that rearrange many genes. INTRODUCTION Gene fusions are often disease-defining events in cancer. The mutational processes that give rise to fusions, their timing relative to initial diagnosis, and whether they change at relapse are largely unknown. Mutational processes leave distinct marks in the tumor genome, meaning that DNA sequencing can be used to reconstruct how fusions are generated. A prototypical fusion-driven tumor is Ewing sarcoma (ES), a bone cancer predominantly affecting children and young adults. ES is defined by fusions involving EWSR1, a gene encoding an RNA binding protein, and genes encoding E26 transformation-specific (ETS) transcription factors such as FLI1. We sought to reconstruct the genomic events that give rise to EWSR1-ETS fusions in ES and chart their evolution from diagnosis to relapse. RATIONALE We studied the processes underpinning gene fusions in ES using the whole-genome sequences of 124 primary tumors. We determined the timing of the emergence of EWSR1 fusions relative to other mutations. To measure ongoing mutation rates and evolutionary trajectories of ES, we studied the genomes of primary tumors, tumors at relapse, and metastatic tumors. RESULTS We found that EWSR1-ETS, the key ES fusion, arises in 42% of cases via complex, loop-like rearrangements called chromoplexy, rather than by simple reciprocal translocations. Similar loops forming canonical fusions were found in three other sarcoma types. Timing the emergence of loops revealed that they occur as bursts in early replicating DNA, as a primary event in ES development. Additional gene disruptions are generated concurrently with the fusions within the loops. Chromoplexy-generated EWSR1 fusions appear to be associated with an aggressive form of the disease and a higher chance of relapse. Numerous mutations present in every cell of the primary were absent at relapse, demonstrating that the primary and relapsed diseases evolved independently. This divergence occurs after formation of an ancestral clone harboring EWSR1 fusions. Importantly, we determined that divergence of the primary tumor and the future relapsed tumor occurs 1 to 2 years before initial diagnosis, as estimated from the number of cell division–associated mutations. CONCLUSION Our findings provide insights into the pathogenesis and natural history of human sarcomas. They reveal complex DNA rearrangements to be a mutational process underpinning gene fusions in a large proportion of ES. Similar observations in other fusion-defined sarcoma types indicate that this process operates more generally. Such complex rearrangements occur preferentially in early replicating and transcriptionally active genomic regions, as evidenced by the additional genes disrupted. EWSR1 fusions arising from chromoplexy correlated with worse clinical outcomes. Formation of the EWSR1 fusion genes is a primary event in the life history of ES. We found evidence of a latency period between this seeding event and diagnosis. This is in keeping with the often-indolent nature of symptoms before clinical disease presentation. Timing of mutations in a patient with ES. The schematic shows genetic alterations in tumors at prediagnosis, diagnosis, and relapse. In many cases, the fusion gene that drives tumorigenesis (EWSR1-FLI1 or EWSR1-ERG) emerges via a sudden burst of genomic rearrangements involving multiple chromosomes and genes. This event, called chromoplexy (indicated by the starburst), happens early in the evolution of the disease in a prediagnostic lesion. After this event, the diagnostic and relapsed tumors evolve in parallel. In this model, the clone that would ultimately become the relapsed tumor was already present at the time of initial diagnosis, although it was undetectable. Sarcomas are cancers of the bone and soft tissue often defined by gene fusions. Ewing sarcoma involves fusions between EWSR1, a gene encoding an RNA binding protein, and E26 transformation-specific (ETS) transcription factors. We explored how and when EWSR1-ETS fusions arise by studying the whole genomes of Ewing sarcomas. In 52 of 124 (42%) of tumors, the fusion gene arises by a sudden burst of complex, loop-like rearrangements, a process called chromoplexy, rather than by simple reciprocal translocations. These loops always contained the disease-defining fusion at the center, but they disrupted multiple additional genes. The loops occurred preferentially in early replicating and transcriptionally active genomic regions. Similar loops forming canonical fusions were found in three other sarcoma types. Chromoplexy-generated fusions appear to be associated with an aggressive form of Ewing sarcoma. These loops arise early, giving rise to both primary and relapse Ewing sarcoma tumors, which can continue to evolve in parallel.

Genomic landscape and chronological reconstruction of driver events in multiple myeloma

Multiple myeloma (MM) has a heterogeneous genome, evolving through both pre-clinical and post-diagnosis phases. Here, using sequences from 67 MM genomes serially collected from 30 patients together with public datasets, we establish a hierarchy of driver lesions. Point mutations, structural variants and copy number aberrations define at least 7 genomic subgroups of MM, each with distinct sets of co-operating driver mutations. Complex structural events are major drivers of MM, including chromothripsis, chromoplexy and a replication-based mechanism of templated insertions: these typically occur early. Hyperdiploidy also occurs early, with individual chromosomes often gained in more than one chronological epoch of MM evolution, showing a preferred order of acquisition. Positively selected point mutations frequently occur in later phases of disease development, as do structural variants involving MYC. Thus, initiating driver events of MM, drawn from a limited repertoire of structural and numerical chromosomal changes, shape preferred trajectories of subsequent evolution.

Corrigendum: Frequent somatic transfer of mitochondrial DNA into the nuclear genome of human cancer cells

Genome Research 25: 814–824 (2015) The names of two co-authors, Ola Myklebost and G. Steven Bova, were omitted from the authorship list of this article. Please note the corrected list above. The author and affiliation lists have already been corrected in both the PDF and full-text HTML files online. doi: 10.1101/gr.206557.116