Abstract
In the light of recent data, a way is described between mutations in TAD anchors and stimulation of tumor growth driven by chromosome instability. At the end of this way every tumor sacrifices by a portion of its cells, dying necrotically, to stimulate remaining cells to proliferate. Necrosis (cell puncture and leakage of chemokine CXCL12) launches the mechanism of wound healing that stimulates cells to divide. Necrosis in cancer cells is induced by chromosome aberrations hindering anaphase cleavage furrow ingression and leading to membrane rupture. Inherited chromosome instability arises, because some of DNA loops (gene blocks, also called TADs) are torn off chromatid axes at their attachment points (anchors) because of mutations at some of these points. Namely, CTCF target sites (CCXXXAGGGGG) at the basements of TAD loops acquire mutations in central Adenine and in 3–5 nucleotides just beyond the borders of this 11 bp sequence. The sequence itself is degenerate between different TADs mainly at the X nucleotides, rarely at some others. Interstitial satellite DNA (SAT) adjacent to TADs anchors begins to behave such as telomeric satellite DNA. This launches transcription of such erupted satellites not leaned against TADs and production of their DNA copies due to the action of TERT reverse transcriptase just like in telomeres and leads to insertion of telomere sequences into such SATs. Some sticky ends in satellites also add to chromosome instability.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Change history
03 December 2021
A Correction to this paper has been published: https://doi.org/10.1007/s42764-021-00054-x
References
Aksenova, A. Y., & Mirkin, S. M. (2019). At the beginning of the end and in the middle of the beginning: Structure and maintenance of telomeric DNA repeats and interstitial telomeric sequences. Genes, 10, 118. https://doi.org/10.3390/genes10020118
Altemose, N., Miga, K. H., Miggioni, M., & Willard, H. F. (2014). Genomic characterization of Large heterochromatic gaps in the human genome assembly. PLoS Computational Biology, 10(5), e1003628. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1003628
Amaral, N., Ryu, T., & Chiolo, I. (2017). Nuclear dynamics of heterochromatin repair. Trends in Genetics, 33, 86–100. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tig.2016.12.004
Barnard, S., Bouffler, S., & Rothkamm, K. (2013). The shape of the radiation dose response for DNA double-strand break induction and repair. Genome Integrity, 4, 1. https://doi.org/10.1186/2041-9414-4-1
Bersani, F., Lee, E., Kharchenko, P. V., Xu, A. W., Liu, M., Xega, K., et al. (2015). Pericentromeric satellite repeat expansions through RNA-derived DNA intermediates in cancer. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 112, 15148–15153. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1518008112
Bianchi, M. E., & Mezzapelle, R. (2020). The chemokine receptor CXCR4 in cell proliferation and tissue regeneration. Frontiers in Immunology, 11, 2109. https://doi.org/10.3389/fimmu.2020.02109
Biehs, R., Steinlage, M., Barton, O., Juhasz, S., Kunzel, J., Spies, J., et al. (2017). DNA double-strand break resection occurs during non-homologous end joining in G1 but is distinct from resection during homologous recombination. Molecular Cell, 65, 671–684. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.molcel.2016.12.016
Billen, D. (1990). Spontaneous DNA damage and its significance for the “negligible dose” controvercy in radiation protection. Radiation Research, 124, 242–245. https://doi.org/10.2307/3577872
Brandt, S., Samartzis, E. P., Zimmermann, A.-K., Fink, D., Moch, H., Noske, A., & Dedes, K. (2017). Lack of MRE11-RAD50-NBS1 (MRN) complex detection occurs frequently in low-grade epithelial ovarian cancer. BMC Cancer, 17, 44. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12885-016-3026-2
Brouwer, I., Sitters, G., Candelli, A., Heerema, S. J., Heller, I., de Mello, A. J., et al. (2016). Sliding sleeves of XRCC4-XLF bridge DNA and connect fragments of broken DNA. Nature, 235, 566–569. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature18643
Canela, A., Maman, Y., Jung, S., Wong, N., Callen, E., Day, A., et al. (2017). Genome organization drives chromosome fragility. Cell, 170, 507–521. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2017.06.034
Caridi, P. C., Delabaere, L., Zapotoczny, G., & Chiolo, I. (2017). And yet, it moves: Nuclear and chromatin dynamics of a heterochromatic double-strand break. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society b: Biological Sciences, 372, 20160291. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2016.0291
Chen, L., Trujillo, K., Ramos, W., Sang, P., & Tomkinson, A. E. (2001). Promotion of Dnl4-catalyzed DNA end-joining by the Rad50/Mre11/Xrs2 and Hdf1/Hdf2 complexes. Molecular Cell, 8, 1105–1115. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1097-2765(01)00388-4
Countryman, P., Fan, Y., Gorthi, A., Pan, H., Strickland, J., Kaur, P., et al. (2018). Cohesin SA2 is a sequence-independent DNA-binding protein that recognizes DNA replication and repair intermediates. Journal of Biological Chemistry, 293, 1054–1069. https://doi.org/10.1074/jbc.M117.806406
Danilowicz, C., Lee, C. E., Kim, K., Hatch, K., Coljee, V. W., Kleckner, N., & Prentiss, M. (2009). Single molecule detection of direct, homologous, DNA/DNA pairing. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 106, 19824–19829. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0911214106
Deiss, K., Lockwood, N., Howell, M., Segeren, H. A., Saunders, R. E., Chakravarty, P., et al. (2019). A genome-wide RNAi screen identifies the SMC5/6 complex as a non-redundant regulator of a Topo2a-dependent G2 arrest. Nucleic Acids Research, 47, 2906–2921. https://doi.org/10.1093/narlgky1295
Diaz, M., & Pecinka, A. (2018). Scaffolding for repair: Understanding molecular functions of the SMC5/6 complex. Genes, 9, 36. https://doi.org/10.3390/genes9010036
Dixon, J. R., Selvaraj, S., Yue, F., Kim, A., Li, Y., Shen, Y., et al. (2012). Topological domains in mammalian genomes identified by analysis of chromatin interactions. Nature, 485, 376–380. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature11082
Guo, F., Wang, Y., Liu, J., Mok, S. C., Xue, F., & Zhang, W. (2016). CXCL12/CXCR4: A symbiotic bridge linking cancer cells and their stromal neighbors in oncogenic communication networks. Oncogene, 35, 816–826. https://doi.org/10.1038/onc.2015.139
Guo, Y. A., Chang, M. M., Huang, W., Ooi, W. F., Xing, M., Tan, P., et al. (2018). Mutation hotspots at CTCF binding sites coupled to chromosomal instability in gastrointestinal cancers. Nature Com, 9, 1520. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-018-03828-2
Hill, V. K., Kim, J.-S., & Waldman, T. (2016). Cohesin mutations in human cancer. Biochimica Et Biophysica Acta, 1866, 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbcan.2016.05.002
Hnisz, D., Weintraub, A. S., Day, D. S., Valton, A.-L., Bak, R. O., Li, C. H., et al. (2016). Activation of proto-oncogenes by disruption of chromosome neighborhoods. Science, 351(6280), 1454–1458. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aad9024
Huang, J., & Dynan, W. S. (2002). Reconstitution of the mammalian DNA double-strand break end-joining reaction reveals a requirement for an Mre11/Rad50/NBS1-containing fraction. Nucleic Acids Research, 30, 667–674. https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/30.3.667
Kaiser, V. B., Taylor, M. S., & Semple, C. A. (2016). Mutational biases drive elevated rates of substitution at regulatory sites across cancer types. PLoS Genetics, 12(8), e1006207. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pgen.1006207
Kanke, M., Tahara, E., Huis in’t Veld, P. J., & Nishiyama, T. (2016). (2016) Cohesin acetylation and Wapl-Pds5 oppositely regulate translocation of cohesin along DNA. The EMBO Journal, 35, 2686–2698. https://doi.org/10.15252/embj.201695756
Kanno, T., Berta, D. G., & Sjogren, C. (2015). The SMC5/6 complex is an ATP-dependent intermolecular DNA linker. Cell Reports, 12, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.celrep.2015.07.048
Katainen, R., Dave, K., Pitkanen, E., Palin, K., Kivioja, T., Valimaki, N., et al. (2015). CTCF/cohesin-binding sites are frequently mutated in cancer. Nature Genetics, 47, 818–821. https://doi.org/10.1038/ng.3335
Krepel, D., Davtyan, A., Schafer, N. P., Wolynes, P. G., & Onuchic, J. N. (2020). Braiding topology and the energy landscape of chromosome organization proteins. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 117, 1468–1477. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1917750117
Lee, D. J., Danilowicz, C., Rochester, C., Kornyshev, A. A., & Prentiss, M. (2016). Evidence for protein-free homology recognition in magnetic dead force-extension experiments. Proceedings of the Royal Society a: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences, 472, 20160186. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspa.2016.0186
Lengauer, C., Kinzler, K. W., & Vogelstein, B. (1998). Genetic instabilities in human cancers. Nature, 396, 643–649. https://doi.org/10.1038/25292
Leylek, T. R., Jeusset, L. M., Lichtensztein, Z., & McManus, K. J. (2020). Reduced expression of genes regulating cohesion induces chromosome instability that may promote cancer and impact patient outcomes. Science and Reports, 10, 592. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-57530-9
Li, H., Vogel, H., Holcomb, V. B., Gu, Y., & Hasty, P. (2007). Deletion of Ku70, Ku80, or both causes early aging without substantially increased cancer. Molecular and Cellular Biology, 27, 8205–8214. https://doi.org/10.1128/MCB.00785-07
Li, Y., Muir, K. W., Bowler, M. W., Metz, J., Haering, C. H., & Panne, D. (2018). Structural basis for Scc3-dependent cohesin recruitment to chromatin. eLife, 7, e38356. https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.38356
Liang, S., Chaplin, A. K., Stavridi, A. K., Appleby, R., & Hnizda, A. (2020). Stages, scaffolds and strings in the spatial organization of non-homologous end joining: Insights from X-ray diffraction and Cryo-EM. Progress in Biophysics and Molecular Biology. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pbiomolbio.11.008
Lieberman-Aiden, E., van Berkum, N. L., Williams, L., Imakaev, M., Ragoczy, T., Telling, A., et al. (2009). Comprehensive mapping of long-range interactions reveals folding principles of the human genome. Science, 326, 289–293. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1181369
Lindahl, T., & Barnes, D. E. (2000). Repair of endogenous DNA damage. Cold Spring Harbor Symposia on Quantitative Biology, 65, 127–133. https://doi.org/10.1101/sqb.2000.65.127
Lobanenkov, V., & Zentner, G. (2018). Discovering a binary CTFC code with a little help from BORIS. Nucleus, 9, 33–41. https://doi.org/10.1080/19491034.2017.1394536
Lopez-Gil, J. C., Martin-Hijano, L., Hermann, P. C., & Sainz, B., Jr. (2021). The CXCL12 crossroads in cancer stem cells and their niche. Cancers, 13, 469. https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers13030469
Loukinov, D. (2018). Targeting CTCFL/BORIS for the immunotherapy of cancer. Cancer Immunology, Immunotherapy, 67(12), 1955–1965. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00262-018-2251-8
Luchnik, A. N. (1982). Eukaryote chromosome structure: Foundation of the bineme model. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 99, 135–157. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-5193(82)90395-2
Luchnik, A. N. (2003). A model of self-maintenance of in vivo malignant growth not dependent on tumor type or origin. Syndrome of everlasting wound healing. Cancer Biology & Therapy, 2, 343–346. https://doi.org/10.4161/cbt2.4.476
Luchnik, A. N., Glaser, V. M., & Shestakov, S. V. (1977). Repair of DNA double-strand breaks requires two homologous DNA duplexes. Molecular Biology Reports, 3, 437–442. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00808385
Luchnik, A. N., Slesinger, M., & Vetrova, L. N. (1995). Experimental evidence for the binemic structure of human chromosomes. Biochemistry and Molecular Biology International, 36, 723–732. PMID: 8528135.
Luchnik, N. V. (1971). The chromosome cycle of DNA. Studia Biophys, 27, 157–164.
Menolfi, D., & Zha, S. (2020). ATM, DNA-PKcs and ATR: Shaping development through the regulation of the DNA damage responses. Genome Instability Disease, 1, 47–68. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42764-019-00003-9
Miyaji, M., Furuta, R., Hosoya, O., Sano, K., Hara, N., Kuwano, R., Kang, J., Teteno, M., et al. (2020). Topoisomerase IIb targets DNA crossovers formed between distant homologous sites to induce chromatin opening. Science and Reports, 10, 18550. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-75004-w
Mondal, G., Stevers, M., Goode, B., Ashworth, A., & Solomon, D. A. (2019). A requirement for STAG2 in replication fork progression creates a targetable synthetic lethality in cohesin-mutant cancers. Nature Communications, 10, 1686. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-019-09659-z
Moore, J. K., & Haber, J. E. (1996). Cell cycle and genetic requirements of two pathways of nonhomologous end joining repair of double-strand breaks in Saccharomices cerevisiae. Molecular and Cellular Biology, 16, 2164–2173. https://doi.org/10.1128/MCB.16.5.2164
Mortezaee, K. (2020). CXCL12/CXCR4 axis in microenvironment of solid tumors: A critical mediator of metastases. Life Sciences, 249, 117534. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lfs.2020.117534
Nakahashi, H., Kiefer Kwon, K.-R., Resch, W., Vian, L., Dose, M., Stavreva, D., et al. (2013). A genome-wide map of CTCF multivalency redefines the CTCF code. Cell Reports, 3, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.celrep.2013.04024
Naughton, C., Avlonitis, N., Corless, S., Prendergast, J., Mati, I. K., Eijk, P. P., et al. (2013). Transcription forms and remodels supercoiling domains unfolding large-scale chromatin structures. Nature Structural & Molecular Biology, 20, 387–397. https://doi.org/10.1038/nsmb.25609
Neumaier, T., Swenson, J., Pham, C., Polyzos, A., Lo, A. T., Yang, P. A., et al. (2012). Evidence for formation of DNA repair centers and dose-response nonlinearity in human cells. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 109, 443–448. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1117849108
Nirmala, J. G., & Lopus, M. (2020). Cell death mechanisms in eukaryotes. Cell Biology and Toxicology, 36, 145–164. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10565-019-09496-2
Nora, E. P., Lajoie, B. R., Schulz, E. G., Giorgetti, L., Okamoto, I., Servant, N., et al. (2012). Spatial partitioning of the regulatory landscape of the X-inactivation centre. Nature, 485, 381–385. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature11049
Oliveri, M., Cho, T., Alvarez-Quilon, A., Li, K., Schellenberg, M., Zimmermann, M., et al. (2020). A genetic map of the response to DNA damage in human cells. Cell, 182, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2020.05.040
Pinoli, P., Stamoulakatou, E., Nguyen, A.-P., Martinez, M. R., & Ceri, S. (2020). Pan-cancer analysis of somatic mutations and epigenetic alterations in insulated neighbourhood boundaries. PLoS ONE, 15(1), e0227180. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0227180
Pugacheva, E. M., Rivero-Hinojsa, S., Espinosa, C. A., Mendes-Catala, C. F., Kang, S., Susuki, T., et al. (2015). Comparative analyses of CTCF and BORIS occupancies uncover two distinct classes of CTCF binding genomic regions. Genome Biology, 16, 1–24. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13059-015-0736-8
Pustovalova, M., Grekhova, A., Astrelina, T., Nikitina, V., Dobrovolskaya, E., Suchkova, Y., et al. (2016). Accumulation of spontaneous gH2AX foci in long-term cultured mesenchymal stromal cells. Aging, 8, 3498–3506. https://doi.org/10.18632/aging.101142
Ramsden, D. A., & Gellert, M. (1998). Ku protein stimulates DNA end joining by mammalian DNA ligases: A direct role for Ku in repair of DNA double-strand breaks. The EMBO Journal, 17, 609–614. https://doi.org/10.1093/emboj/17.2.609
Rass, E., Grabarz, A., Plo, I., Gautier, J., Bertrand, P., & Lopez, B. S. (2009). Role of MRE11 in chromosomal nonhomologous end joining in mammalian cells. Nature Structural & Molecular Biology, 16, 819–824. https://doi.org/10.1038/nsmb.1641
Reginato, G., & Cejka, P. (2020). The MRE11 complex: A versatile toolkit for the repair of broken DNA. DNA Repair, 91–92, 102869. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dnarep.2020.102869
Ryu, T., Bonner, M. R., & Chiolo, I. (2016). Cervantes and Quijote protect heterochromatin from aberrant recombination and lead the way to the nuclear periphery. Nucleus, 7, 485–497. https://doi.org/10.1080/19491034.2016.1239683
Sasanuma, H., Yamada, S., Tsuda, M., & Takeda, S. (2020). Restoration of ligatable “clean” double-strand break ends is the rate-limiting step in the rejoining of ionizing-radiation-induced DNA breakage. DNA Repair, 93, 102913. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dnarep.2020.102913
Scild, D., Ananthaswamy, H. N., & Mortimer, R. K. (1981). An endomitotic effect of a cell cycle mutation of Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Genetics, 97, 551–562. PMID7028565.
Shi, D., Zhao, S., Zuo, M.-Q., Zhang, J., Hou, W., Dong, M.-Q., & Cao, Q. (2020). The acetyltransferase Eco1 elicits cohesin dimerization during S phase. Journal of Biological Chemistry, 295, 7554–7565. https://doi.org/10.1074/jbcRA120013102
Solomon, D. A., Kim, J. S., & Waldman, T. (2014). Cohesin gene mutations in tumorigenesis: from discovery to clinical significance. BMB Reports, 47, 299–310. https://doi.org/10.5483/BMBRep.2014.47.6.092
Soltanian, S., & Dehghani, H. (2018). BORIS: A key regulator of cancer stemness. Cancer Cell International, 18, 154. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12935-018-0650-8
Stigler, J., Camdere, G. O., Koshland, D. E., & Greene, E. C. (2016). Single-molecule imaging reveals a collapsed conformational state for DNA-bound cohesin. Cell Reports, 15, 988–998. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.celrep.2016.04.003
Sun, M., Nishino, T., & Marko, J. F. (2013). The SMC1-SMC3 cohesin heterodimer structures DNA through supercoiling-dependent loop formation. Nucleic Acids Research, 41, 6149–6160. https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gkt303
Tatebe, H., Lim, C. T., Konno, H., Shiozaki, K., Shinohara, A., Uchihashi, T., & Furukohri, A. (2020). Rad50 zinc hook functions as a constitutive dimerization module interchangeable with SMC hinge. Nature Communications, 11, 370. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-019-14025-0
Ting, D. T., Lipson, D., Paul, S., Brannigan, B. W., Akhavanfard, S., Coffman, E. J., et al. (2011). Aberrant overexpression of satellite repeats in pancreatic and other epithelial cancers. Science, 331, 593–596. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1200801
Uuskula-Reimand, L., Hou, H., Smavarchi-Tehrani, P., Rudan, M. V., Liang, M., Medina-Rivera, A., et al. (2016). Topoisomerase II beta interacts with cohesin and CTCF at topological domain borders. Genome Biology, 17, 182. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13059-016-1043-8
Verver, D. E., Zheng, Y., Speijer, D., Hoebe, R., Dekker, H. L., Repping, S., et al. (2016). Non-SMC element 2 (NSMCE2) of the SMC5/6 complex helps to resolve topological stress. International Journal of Molecular Sciences, 17, 1782. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms17111782
Vian, L., Pekowska, A., Rao, S. S. P., Kieffer-Kwon, K. R., Jung, S., Baranello, L., et al. (2018). The energetics and physiological impact of cohesin extrusion. Cell, 173, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2018.03.072
Vickridge, E., Planchenaut, C., Cockram, C., Juceda, I. G., & Espeli, O. (2017). Management of E. coli sister chromatid cohesion in response to genotoxic stress. Nature Communications, 8, 14618. https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms14618
Vilenchik, M. M., & Knudson, A. G. (2003). Endogenous DNA double-strand breaks: Production, fidelity of repair, and induction of cancer. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 100, 12871–12876. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2135498100
Voutsadakis, I. A. (2018). Molecular lesions of insulator CTCF and its paralogue CTCFL (BORIS) in cancer: An analysis from published genomic studies. High-Throughput, 7, 30. https://doi.org/10.3390/ht7040030
Wu, Q. (2019). Structural mechanism of DNA-end synapsis in the non-homologous end joining pathway for repairing double-strand breaks: Bridge over troubled ends. Biochemical Society Transactions, 47, 1609–1619. https://doi.org/10.1042/bst20180518
Xie, A., Kwok, A., & Scully, R. (2009). Role of mammalian MRE11 in classical and alternative non-homologous end joining. Nature Structural & Molecular Biology, 16, 814–818. https://doi.org/10.1038/nsmb.1640
Xu, X., Kanai, R., Nakazawa, N., Wang, L., Toyoshima, C., & Yanagida, M. (2018). Suppressor mutation analysis combined with 3D modeling explains cohesin’s capacity to hold and release DNA. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 115, E4833–E4842. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1803564115
Xu, X., Zhu, F., Zhang, M., Zeng, D., Luo, D., Liu, G., et al. (2013). Stromal cell-derived factor-1 enhances wound healing through recruiting bone marrow-derived mesenchymal stem cells to the wound area and promoting neovascularization. Cells, Tissues, Organs, 197, 103–113. https://doi.org/10.1159/000342921
Zabolotnaya, E., Mela, I., Henderson, R. M., & Robinson, M. (2020). Turning the Mre11/Rad50 DNA repair complex on its head: Lessons from SMC protein hinges, dynamic coiled-coil movements and DNA loop-extrusion? Biochemical Society Transactions, 48, 2359–2376. https://doi.org/10.1042/BST20170168
Zabrady, K., Adamus, M., Vondrova, L., Liao, C., Skoupilova, H., Novakova, M., Jarcisinova, L., Alt, A., et al. (2016). Chromatin association of the SMC5/6 complex is dependent on binding of its NSE3 subunit to DNA. Nucleic Acids Research, 44, 1064–1079. https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gkv1021
Zhao, B., Watanabe, G., Morten, M. J., Reid, D. A., Rothenberg, E., & Lieber, M. R. (2019). The essential elements for the noncovalent association of two DNA ends during NHEJ synapsis. Nature Communications, 10, 3588. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-019-11507-z
Zhu, Q., Hoong, N., Aslanian, A., Hara, T., Benner, C., Heinz, S., et al. (2018). Heterochromatin-encoded satellite RNAs induce breast cancer. Molecular Cell, 70, 842–853. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.molcel.2018.04.023
Acknowledgements
(1) This paper is dedicated to the memory of my late father, Prof. N.V. Luchnik. (2) I am thankful to Yuri Safonov for help in preparation of figures.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The conflict of interests is absent in present paper.
Additional information
Due to a misunderstanding during proof correction, some references were cited in false positions in the article. In particular the sections "Inlaid genome“ and "SMC complexes“ were affected.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Luchnik, A.N. Chromosome instability induced by mutations in TAD anchors leads to tumors. GENOME INSTAB. DIS. 2, 309–329 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s42764-021-00050-1
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s42764-021-00050-1