Manasa Ramakrishna

Signatures of mutational processes in human cancer

All cancers are caused by somatic mutations; however, understanding of the biological processes generating these mutations is limited. The catalogue of somatic mutations from a cancer genome bears the signatures of the mutational processes that have been operative. Here we analysed 4,938,362 mutations from 7,042 cancers and extracted more than 20 distinct mutational signatures. Some are present in many cancer types, notably a signature attributed to the APOBEC family of cytidine deaminases, whereas others are confined to a single cancer class. Certain signatures are associated with age of the patient at cancer diagnosis, known mutagenic exposures or defects in DNA maintenance, but many are of cryptic origin. In addition to these genome-wide mutational signatures, hypermutation localized to small genomic regions, ‘kataegis’, is found in many cancer types. The results reveal the diversity of mutational processes underlying the development of cancer, with potential implications for understanding of cancer aetiology, prevention and therapy.

Mutational processes molding the genomes of 21 breast cancers.

Summary All cancers carry somatic mutations. The patterns of mutation in cancer genomes reflect the DNA damage and repair processes to which cancer cells and their precursors have been exposed. To explore these mechanisms further, we generated catalogs of somatic mutation from 21 breast cancers and applied mathematical methods to extract mutational signatures of the underlying processes. Multiple distinct single- and double-nucleotide substitution signatures were discernible. Cancers with BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations exhibited a characteristic combination of substitution mutation signatures and a distinctive profile of deletions. Complex relationships between somatic mutation prevalence and transcription were detected. A remarkable phenomenon of localized hypermutation, termed “kataegis,” was observed. Regions of kataegis differed between cancers but usually colocalized with somatic rearrangements. Base substitutions in these regions were almost exclusively of cytosine at TpC dinucleotides. The mechanisms underlying most of these mutational signatures are unknown. However, a role for the APOBEC family of cytidine deaminases is proposed. PaperClip

The Life History of 21 Breast Cancers

Summary Cancer evolves dynamically as clonal expansions supersede one another driven by shifting selective pressures, mutational processes, and disrupted cancer genes. These processes mark the genome, such that a cancers life history is encrypted in the somatic mutations present. We developed algorithms to decipher this narrative and applied them to 21 breast cancers. Mutational processes evolve across a cancers lifespan, with many emerging late but contributing extensive genetic variation. Subclonal diversification is prominent, and most mutations are found in just a fraction of tumor cells. Every tumor has a dominant subclonal lineage, representing more than 50% of tumor cells. Minimal expansion of these subclones occurs until many hundreds to thousands of mutations have accumulated, implying the existence of long-lived, quiescent cell lineages capable of substantial proliferation upon acquisition of enabling genomic changes. Expansion of the dominant subclone to an appreciable mass may therefore represent the final rate-limiting step in a breast cancers development, triggering diagnosis. PaperClip

Landscape of somatic mutations in 560 breast cancer whole-genome sequences

We analysed whole genome sequences of 560 breast cancers to advance understanding of the driver mutations conferring clonal advantage and the mutational processes generating somatic mutations. 93 protein-coding cancer genes carried likely driver mutations. Some non-coding regions exhibited high mutation frequencies but most have distinctive structural features probably causing elevated mutation rates and do not harbour driver mutations. Mutational signature analysis was extended to genome rearrangements and revealed 12 base substitution and six rearrangement signatures. Three rearrangement signatures, characterised by tandem duplications or deletions, appear associated with defective homologous recombination based DNA repair: one with deficient BRCA1 function; another with deficient BRCA1 or BRCA2 function; the cause of the third is unknown. This analysis of all classes of somatic mutation across exons, introns and intergenic regions highlights the repertoire of cancer genes and mutational processes operative, and progresses towards a comprehensive account of the somatic genetic basis of breast cancer.

Analysis of the genetic phylogeny of multifocal prostate cancer identifies multiple independent clonal expansions in neoplastic and morphologically normal prostate tissue

Genome-wide DNA sequencing was used to decrypt the phylogeny of multiple samples from distinct areas of cancer and morphologically normal tissue taken from the prostates of three men. Mutations were present at high levels in morphologically normal tissue distant from the cancer, reflecting clonal expansions, and the underlying mutational processes at work in morphologically normal tissue were also at work in cancer. Our observations demonstrate the existence of ongoing abnormal mutational processes, consistent with field effects, underlying carcinogenesis. This mechanism gives rise to extensive branching evolution and cancer clone mixing, as exemplified by the coexistence of multiple cancer lineages harboring distinct ERG fusions within a single cancer nodule. Subsets of mutations were shared either by morphologically normal and malignant tissues or between different ERG lineages, indicating earlier or separate clonal cell expansions. Our observations inform on the origin of multifocal disease and have implications for prostate cancer therapy in individual cases.

RAG-mediated recombination is the predominant driver of oncogenic rearrangement in ETV6-RUNX1 acute lymphoblastic leukemia

The ETV6-RUNX1 fusion gene, found in 25% of childhood acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) cases, is acquired in utero but requires additional somatic mutations for overt leukemia. We used exome and low-coverage whole-genome sequencing to characterize secondary events associated with leukemic transformation. RAG-mediated deletions emerge as the dominant mutational process, characterized by recombination signal sequence motifs near breakpoints, incorporation of non-templated sequence at junctions, ∼30-fold enrichment at promoters and enhancers of genes actively transcribed in B cell development and an unexpectedly high ratio of recurrent to non-recurrent structural variants. Single-cell tracking shows that this mechanism is active throughout leukemic evolution, with evidence of localized clustering and reiterated deletions. Integration of data on point mutations and rearrangements identifies ATF7IP and MGA as two new tumor-suppressor genes in ALL. Thus, a remarkably parsimonious mutational process transforms ETV6-RUNX1–positive lymphoblasts, targeting the promoters, enhancers and first exons of genes that normally regulate B cell differentiation.

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.

Origins and functional consequences of somatic mitochondrial DNA mutations in human cancer.

Recent sequencing studies have extensively explored the somatic alterations present in the nuclear genomes of cancers. Although mitochondria control energy metabolism and apoptosis, the origins and impact of cancer-associated mutations in mtDNA are unclear. In this study, we analyzed somatic alterations in mtDNA from 1675 tumors. We identified 1907 somatic substitutions, which exhibited dramatic replicative strand bias, predominantly C > T and A > G on the mitochondrial heavy strand. This strand-asymmetric signature differs from those found in nuclear cancer genomes but matches the inferred germline process shaping primate mtDNA sequence content. A number of mtDNA mutations showed considerable heterogeneity across tumor types. Missense mutations were selectively neutral and often gradually drifted towards homoplasmy over time. In contrast, mutations resulting in protein truncation undergo negative selection and were almost exclusively heteroplasmic. Our findings indicate that the endogenous mutational mechanism has far greater impact than any other external mutagens in mitochondria and is fundamentally linked to mtDNA replication. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.7554/eLife.02935.001

Combined hereditary and somatic mutations of replication error repair genes result in rapid onset of ultra-hypermutated cancers

DNA replication−associated mutations are repaired by two components: polymerase proofreading and mismatch repair. The mutation consequences of disruption to both repair components in humans are not well studied. We sequenced cancer genomes from children with inherited biallelic mismatch repair deficiency (bMMRD). High-grade bMMRD brain tumors exhibited massive numbers of substitution mutations (>250/Mb), which was greater than all childhood and most cancers (>7,000 analyzed). All ultra-hypermutated bMMRD cancers acquired early somatic driver mutations in DNA polymerase ɛ or δ. The ensuing mutation signatures and numbers are unique and diagnostic of childhood germ-line bMMRD (P < 10−13). Sequential tumor biopsy analysis revealed that bMMRD/polymerase-mutant cancers rapidly amass an excess of simultaneous mutations (∼600 mutations/cell division), reaching but not exceeding ∼20,000 exonic mutations in <6 months. This implies a threshold compatible with cancer-cell survival. We suggest a new mechanism of cancer progression in which mutations develop in a rapid burst after ablation of replication repair.

Association of a germline copy number polymorphism of APOBEC3A and APOBEC3B with burden of putative APOBEC-dependent mutations in breast cancer

The somatic mutations in a cancer genome are the aggregate outcome of one or more mutational processes operative through the lifetime of the individual with cancer. Each mutational process leaves a characteristic mutational signature determined by the mechanisms of DNA damage and repair that constitute it. A role was recently proposed for the APOBEC family of cytidine deaminases in generating particular genome-wide mutational signatures and a signature of localized hypermutation called kataegis. A germline copy number polymorphism involving APOBEC3A and APOBEC3B, which effectively deletes APOBEC3B, has been associated with modestly increased risk of breast cancer. Here we show that breast cancers in carriers of the deletion show more mutations of the putative APOBEC-dependent genome-wide signatures than cancers in non-carriers. The results suggest that the APOBEC3A-APOBEC3B germline deletion allele confers cancer susceptibility through increased activity of APOBEC-dependent mutational processes, although the mechanism by which this increase in activity occurs remains unknown.