An individual with Muir-Torre syndrome found to have a pathogenic MSH6 gene mutation.

Mutations reported to cause Muir-Torre syndrome (MTS) have previously been reported in the mismatch repair genes MLH1 and MSH2 and more recently, in MYH [1]. We report siblings, one of whom has a clinical diagnosis of MTS, who have a pathogenic MSH6 gene mutation. This finding demonstrates that MSH6 gene analysis should be considered in MTS families where no MSH2 or MLH1 gene mutations have been found.

DNA-damage-responsive acetylation of pRb regulates binding to E2F-1.

The pRb (retinoblastoma protein) tumour suppressor protein has a crucial role in regulating the G1- to S-phase transition, and its phosphorylation by cyclin-dependent kinases is an established and important mechanism in controlling pRb activity. In addition, the targeted acetylation of lysine (K) residues 873/874 in the carboxy-terminal region of pRb located within a cyclin-dependent kinase-docking site hinders pRb phosphorylation and thereby retains pRb in an active state of growth suppression. Here, we report that the acetylation of pRb K873/874 occurs in response to DNA damage and that acetylation regulates the interaction between the C-terminal E2F-1-specific domain of pRb and E2F-1. These results define a new role for pRb acetylation in the DNA damage signalling pathway, and suggest that the interaction between pRb and E2F-1 is controlled by DNA-damage-dependent acetylation of pRb.

Myotonic dystrophy associated expanded CUG repeat muscleblind positive ribonuclear foci are not toxic to Drosophila.

Myotonic dystrophy type 1 is an autosomal dominant disorder associated with the expansion of a CTG repeat in the 3' untranslated region (UTR) of the DMPK gene. Recent data suggest that pathogenesis is predominantly mediated by a gain of function of the mutant transcript. In patients, these expanded CUG repeat-containing transcripts are sequestered into ribonuclear foci that also contain the muscleblind-like proteins. To provide further insights into muscleblind function and the pathogenesis of myotonic dystrophy, we generated Drosophila incorporating CTG repeats in the 3'-UTR of a reporter gene. As in patients, expanded CUG repeats form discrete ribonuclear foci in Drosophila muscle cells that co-localize with muscleblind. Unexpectedly, however, foci are not observed in all cell types and muscleblind is neither necessary nor sufficient for their formation. The foci are dynamic transient structures with short half-lifes that do not co-localize with the proteasome, suggesting they are unlikely to contain mis-folded proteins. However, they do co-localize with non-A, the human orthologs of which are implicated in both RNA splicing and attachment of dsRNA to the nuclear matrix. Muscleblind is also revealed as having a previously unrecognized role in stabilizing CUG transcripts. Most interestingly, Drosophila expressing (CUG)162 repeats has no detectable pathological phenotype suggesting that in contrast to expanded polyglutamine-containing proteins, neither the expanded CUG repeat RNA nor the ribonuclear foci are directly toxic.

Mechanisms regulating the copy numbers of six LTR retrotransposons in the genome of Drosophila melanogaster.

There has been debate over the mechanisms that control the copy number of transposable elements in the genome of Drosophila melanogaster. Target sites in D. melanogaster populations are occupied at low frequencies, suggesting that there is some form of selection acting against transposable elements. Three main theories have been proposed to explain how selection acts against transposable elements: insertions of a copy of a transposable element are selected against; chromosomal rearrangements caused by ectopic exchange between element copies are selected against; or the process of transposition itself is selected against. The three theories give different predictions for the pattern of transposable element insertions in the chromosomes of D. melanogaster. We analysed the abundance of six LTR (long terminal repeat) retrotransposons on the X and fourth chromosomes of multiple strains of D. melanogaster, which we compare with the predictions of each theory. The data suggest that no one theory can account for the insertion patterns of all six retrotransposons. Comparing our results with earlier work using these transposable element families, we find a significant correlation between studies in the particular model of copy number regulation supported by the proportion of elements on the X for the different transposable element families. This suggests that different retrotransposon families are regulated by different mechanisms.