The development of cancer is a multi-step process which involves a series of events, including activation of oncogenes and loss of tumor suppressor function, leading to cell immortalization and misregulated proliferation. In the last few years, the importance of epigenetic defects in cancer development has become increasingly recognized. While most epigenetic studies focus on silencing of tumor suppressors, this thesis addresses defects in the maintenance of silenced heterochromatin in cancer, particularly breast cancer. Breast cancer is a leading cause of cancer in women and many familial cases have been linked to mutations in the breast cancer susceptibility genes, BRCA1 and BRCA2. BRCA1 has been linked to DNA repair as well as multiple other cellular processes, including cell cycle checkpoints, ubiquitination, centrosome function, and meiotic silencing of the XY body. This work began with a particular interest in the report that BRCA1 was linked to the failed maintenance of random X-inactivation in female somatic cells, via a role in supporting XIST RNA localization to the inactive X chromosome (Xi). XIST RNA is a non-coding RNA that fully coats or “paints” the Xi and induces its silencing. Work presented in Chapter II substantially clarifies the relationship of BRCA1 to XIST RNA, based on several lines of experimentation. Loss of BRCA1 does not lead to loss of XIST RNA in these studies, nor did reconstitution of HCC1937 BRCA1-/- tumor cells with BRCA1 lead to XIST RNA localization on Xi, although an effect on XIST RNA transcription is possible. Studies of BRCA1 localization with Xi showed that BRCA1 has a limited association with the Xi in ~3-10% of cells, it rarely colocalizes with XIST RNA to a significant extent, but rather is in close apposition to a small part of the XIST RNA/Xi territory. Additionally, analysis of several breast cancer cell lines revealed mislocalization of XIST RNA in some breast cancer cell lines. Many studies have examined BRCA1 foci that form following DNA damage and demonstrated that these are sites of repair. However, whether the numerous large foci consistently present in normal S-phase nuclei were storage sites or had any function was unknown. In Chapter III, I demonstrate that the BRCA1 foci in normal S-phase nuclei associate overwhelmingly with specific heterochromatic regions of the genome. More specifically, BRCA1 foci often associate with centromeric or pericentromeric regions in both human and mouse cells. In human cells BRCA1 foci often appear juxtaposed to centromeric signal, whereas in mouse, BRCA1 often rings or paints the large chromocenters, clusters of DAPI-dense pericentric and centric heterochromatin. Using PCNA and BrdU as markers of replication, I demonstrate that BRCA1 preferentially associates with the chromocenters during their replication, although high-resolution analysis indicates that BRCA1 and PCNA foci rarely directly overlap. Interestingly, cells with defects in BRCA1 were found to have lagging chromosomes and DNA bridges which nearly always contained satellite DNA, which is consistent with the possibility that BRCA1 deficit contributes to failed separation of sister chromatids at the centromere. This is consistent with other recent reports that BRCA1 is necessary for DNA decatenation by topoisomerase II during routine replication and with my demonstration that topoisomerase II also accumulates on pericentric heterochromatin (PCH) during replication. Chapter IV presents recent work which reveals that RNA is commonly expressed from the centric/pericentric heterochromatin and appears to be linked to its replication. In mouse cells RNA from heterochromatic sequences is readily detected using a broad molecular cytological assay for repeat transcription (the COT-1 RNA assay). In addition to a more dispersed nucleoplasmic signal from euchromatic nuclear regions, distinct localized foci of repeat RNA are detected with COT1 probe or pancentromeric probe. Further analysis with the minor satellite (centromere proper) and the major satellite (comprising the larger pericentric heterochromatin) reveals that the large RNA foci often contain these satellite sequences, long thought to be essentially silent. These foci generally associate with the PCH of chromocenters, and produce various patterns similar to BRCA1- including a larger signal partially painting or ringing the chromocenter in a fraction of cells. In conjunction again with PCNA staining, it was possible to determine that the major satellite RNAs associate with the chromocenters during replication. While the satellite RNA co-localizes precisely with PCNA, neither of these co-localizes at high resolution with BRCA1, although they all are present on replicating chromocenters contemporaneously. These findings show that satellite RNAs are more widely expressed in normal cells than previously thought and link their expression to replication of centromere-linked heterochromatin. Finally, Chapter V presents three lines of recent results to support a major concept forwarded in this manuscript: that loss of Xi heterochromatin may reflect defects in the broader heterochromatic compartment, which may be manifest at multiple levels. I provide evidence using two new assays that both the peripheral heterochromatic compartment and the expression and silencing of satellite repeats is commonly compromised in cancer, although this appears to vary among cancer lines or types. The final results connect back to the question with which I began: what maintains XIST RNA localization to the chromosome in normal cells. These results demonstrate for the first time that Aurora B Kinase activity, mediated by Protein Phosphatase 1 (PP1) during interphase, controls the interphase retention and mitotic release of XIST RNA from the chromosome, likely linked to chromatin modifications such as H3Ser10 phosphorylation. As Aurora B Kinase is commonly over-expressed in cancer and is linked to chromatin changes, this exemplifies one type of mechanism whereby broad epigenetic changes in cancer may impact XIST RNA localization and the maintenance of heterochromatin more generally. This thesis represents a melding of cancer biology with the study of X inactivation and heterochromatin, with findings of fundamental interest to both of these fields.

No description available.

No description available.

Mutations in the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes are known risk factors and drivers of breast and ovarian cancers. So far, few studies have been focused on understanding the differences in transcriptome and functional landscapes associated with the disease (breast vs. ovarian cancers), gene (BRCA1 vs. BRCA2), and mutation type (germline vs. somatic). In this study, we were aimed at systemic evaluation of the association of BRCA1 and BRCA2 germline and somatic mutations with gene expression, disease clinical features, outcome, and treatment. We performed BRCA1/2 mutation centered RNA-seq data analysis of breast and ovarian cancers from the TCGA repository using transcriptome and phenotype 'portrayal' with multi-layer self-organizing maps and functional annotation. The results revealed considerable differences in BRCA1- and BRCA2-dependent transcriptome landscapes in the studied cancers. Furthermore, our data indicated that somatic and germline mutations for both genes are characterized by deregulation of different biological functions and differential associations with phenotype characteristics and poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP)-inhibitor gene signatures. Overall, this study demonstrates considerable variation in transcriptomic landscapes of breast and ovarian cancers associated with the affected gene (BRCA1 vs. BRCA2), as well as the mutation type (somatic vs. germline). These results warrant further investigations with larger groups of mutation carriers aimed at refining the understanding of molecular mechanisms of breast and ovarian cancers.

Parmi les cancers du sein, 5 à 10% serait associé à une prédisposition génétique familiale. La prise en charge des patients prédisposés nécessite une bonne définition des risques de cancer. L’identification de l’altération moléculaire causale dans chacune de ces familles est donc un enjeu essentiel dans la prise en charge médicale. Deux gènes, BRCA1 et BRCA2, sont associés à une prédisposition majeure au cancer du sein et de l’ovaire depuis le milieu des années 1990, expliquant environ 15% des formes héréditaires. L’analyse moléculaire de ces deux gènes est désormais réalisée en routine pour la recherche de variations nucléotidiques et plus récemment de remaniements géniques ce qui a permis d’améliorer le taux de détection de mutations délétères. Cependant, pour près de 85% des familles avec une agrégation familiale ou un âge anormalement jeune de cancer du sein, aucune mutation délétère n’a pu être mise en évidence. Dans ce contexte, mon travail de thèse a eu pour objectif de tester plusieurs hypothèses permettant d’expliquer les risques de cancer du sein observés chez des familles montrant l’absence de mutation des gènes BRCA1 et BRCA2. Nous avons ainsi recherché des mécanismes d’altération rarement explorés pour les gènes BRCA1 et BRCA2, et enfin analysé d’autres gènes candidats dont le gène CDH1 et huit autres gènes impliqués dans la réparation de l’ADN. Nous avons pu mieux caractériser des remaniements sur les gènes BRCA1 et BRCA2. Enfin, nous avons pu évaluer l’impact de variants de signification inconnue et des réarrangements détectés par l’étude de leurs transcrits. Dans un premier temps, nous avons mis en place et validé de nouvelles approches techniques de détection et de caractérisation : la CGH-array dédiée, la qPCR-HRM et le peignage moléculaire. Ces techniques ont ensuite été utilisées pour étudier les remaniements géniques et leur fréquence pour onze gènes candidats à la prédisposition au cancer du sein à partir de 472 familles négatives aux mutations délétères BRCA1 et BRCA2. Parmi ces 11 gènes, nous pouvons conclure que les remaniements géniques détectés concernent principalement les gènes BRCA1 et BRCA2, et à un moindre degré le gène CHEK2. En appliquant ces techniques, nous avons pu décrire de nouveaux événements, deux larges délétions et une duplication intronique, pour les gènes CDH1 et BARD1, ouvrant de nouvelles perspectives sur l’étude des transcrits alternatifs. Nous avons en particulier pu décrire la grande diversité des réarrangements délétères en 5’ du gène BRCA1. L’enjeu est ensuite l’interprétation de ces événements. Notre étude des transcrits a permis de décrire un variant exonique d’épissage entraînant une délétion de l’exon 23 au niveau du transcrit BRCA1. Nous avons aussi validé la pathogénicité d’un réarrangement en phase de l’exon 3 de BRCA2 par une étude quantitative du transcrit et une évaluation de la coségrégation. Au final, moins de 1% de nouveaux remaniements ont été mis en évidence. Ce travail est riche d’enseignement pour les nouvelles investigations à mettre en place pour les familles prédisposées. En dehors de la technique d’identification, il est nécessaire de développer des stratégies de validation basées principalement sur la quantification des effets de ces altérations au niveau de l’ARN et des protéines. Cependant, il manque encore de nombreux chaînons pour expliquer l’héritabilité des cancers du sein. Les études sur les nouveaux gènes candidats et l’avènement des techniques de séquençage pangénome à haut débit, devraient permettre d’avoir une meilleure vision des phénomènes pathobiologiques liés à la prédisposition au cancer du sein. / Five to 10% of breast cancers are linked to a genetic predisposition. The management of patients at risk requires a good definition in the risk of cancer. The identification of causal molecular alterations in each of these families is a key issue in medical care. Two genes, BRCA1 and BRCA2, are related with the greatest susceptibility to breast cancer and ovarian cancer since the mid-1990s, accounting for about 15% of hereditary forms. Molecular analysis of these two genes is now routinely performed for the detection of nucleotide variations and more recently large rearrangements which have improved the detection rate of deleterious mutations. However, for more than 85% of families, no mutation explains familial aggregation or unusual young age of breast cancer onset. In this context, my thesis aimed at testing several hypotheses to explain the risks of breast cancer observed in families without any identified mutations in the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes. We investigated some mechanisms of genic rearrangements rarely explored for BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes, and finally investigated other candidate genes, especially CDH1 gene and eight other genes involved in double-strand DNA repair. We have better characterized some rearrangements in the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes. Finally, we applied RNA quantitative approaches to better assess the impact from variants of unknown significance and detected rearrangements. Initially, we developed and validated new technical approaches for detection and characterization such as dedicated CGH-array, qPCR-HRM and molecular combing. Rare large germline rearrangements and their frequency in eleven candidate genes for susceptibility to breast cancer were studied among 472 families negative by routine testing for BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes. Of these 11 genes, we conclude that genic rearrangements are found then mainly in the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes, and to a lesser extent in the CHEK2 gene. We were able to describe two large intronic deletions and one duplication for the CDH1 and BARD1 genes, opening new perspectives on the regulation of their alternative transcript. In particular, we described the wide diversity of new rearrangements involving the 5' region of the BRCA1 gene. Then, it is necessary to validate and interpret those new events. Our transcript analysis described a new exonic variant causing the splice deletion of exon 23 in BRCA1 gene. We have developed tools to validate an in-frame large rearrangement of BRCA2 exon 3 with some transcript quantitative approaches and disease cosegregation.Finally, less than 1% of new rearrangements have been identified. This work is instructive for further investigations to establish molecular etiology in those families with breast cancer predisposition. Not only by applying new technologies, it is necessary to develop other strategies based primarily on quantifying effects of these alterations on transcription and traduction. However, it still lacks many links to explain the heritability of breast cancer. The combination of new candidate genes studies and the advent of high-throughput sequencing are expected to give a better vision of pathobiological phenomena related to the breast cancer predisposition.

BRCA1 est un suppresseur de tumeur majeur jouant un rôle dans la transcription, la réparation de l’ADN et le maintien de la stabilité génomique. En effet, des mutations dans le gène BRCA1 augmentent considerablement le risque de cancers du sein et de l’ovaire. BRCA1 a été en majorité caractérisé pour son rôle dans la réparation de l’ADN par la voie de recombinaison homologue (HR) en présence de bris double brins, par example, induits par l’irradiation gamma (IR). Cependant, la fonction de BRCA1 dans d’autres voies de réparation de l’ADN, comme la réparation par excision de nucléotides (NER) ou par excision de base (BER), demeurent toutefois obscures. Il est donc important de comprendre la régulation de BRCA1 en présence d’agents génotoxiques comme le méthyle méthanesulfonate (MMS) ou l’UV, qui promouvoient le BER et le NER respectivement. Nos observations suggèrent que BRCA1 est dégradée par le protéasome après traitement avec le MMS ou les UV, et non avec l’IR. Par ailleurs, cette dégradation semble compromettre le recrutement de Rad51, suggérant que la voie de HR est inhibée. Nos résultats suggèrent que la HR est inhibée afin d’éviter l’activation simultanée de multiples voies de réparation. Nous avons aussi observé que la dégradation BRCA1 est réversible et que la restauration des niveaux de BRCA1 coïncide avec le recrutement de Rad51 aux sites de dommages. Cela suggère que la HR est réactivée tardivement par les bris double brins générés suite à l’effondrement des fourches de réplication. Ayant observé que BRCA1 est hautement régulé par l’ubiquitination et est ciblé par le protéasome pour dégradation, nous avons émis une hypothèse que BRCA1 est régulé par des déubiquitinases. Cela amène à caractériser plus en profondeur par un criblage en déplétant les déubiquitinases individuellement par RNAi et en observant leur effet sur le recrutement de BRCA1 et des protéines reliées à cette voie. Un criblage préliminaire nous a permi d’identifié candidats potentiels tel que BAP1, CXORF53, DUB3, OTUB1 et USP36. / BRCA1 is a tumour suppressor involved in transcription, DNA repair and maintenance of genomic stability. Indeed, BRCA1 mutation carriers have an exceptionally higher risk of breast and ovarian cancers. BRCA1 is mainly known for its role in homologous recombination repair (HR) by recruiting HR proteins to chromatin upon double strand break (DSBs) formation, e.g., following treatment with ionizing irradiation (IR). However, the function of BRCA1 in other DNA repair pathways such as nucleotide excision repair (NER) or base excision repair (BER) is still obscure. It is thus of fundamental and clinical importance to investigate BRCA1 function following exposure to diverse genotoxic agents. Using human cultured cell, we observed that BRCA1 is downregulated by the proteasome upon treatment with MMS or UV, but not with IR. Moreover, this downregulation prevents Rad51 recruitment to chromatin following exposure to MMS. Given that DNA damage induced by UV and MMS trigger NER and BER pathways respectively, this implies that HR could be inhibited in order to prevent competition between independent DNA repair pathways. We also found that BRCA1 downregulation is reversible and the recovery of BRCA1 levels correlates with the reappearance of BRCA1 and Rad51 on chromatin. This implies that the HR has been reactivated at the late stage of DNA damage for the repair of double strand breaks generated by replication fork collapse. Since BRCA1 stability is highly regulated by ubiquitination and is downregulated following MMS treatment, one would expect that a deubiquitinase is responsible for relieving this downregulation to promote the reactivation of the HR pathway. To characterize this aspect further, we conducted DUB RNAi screens in which a particular DUB is depleted and the localization of BRCA1 and other related proteins were observed. According to a preliminary screen, a few DUBs (BAP1, CXORF53, DUB3, OTUB1, and USP36) were identified as potential regulators of the stability and localization of BRCA1 and proteins involved in homologous recombination.

Ongoing research in the fields of genetics and biotechnology hold the promise of improved diagnosis and treatment of genetic diseases, and potentially the development of individually tailored pharmaceuticals and gene therapies. Difficulty, however, arises in determining how these services are to be evaluated and integrated equitably into public health care systems such as Canada's. The current context is one of increasing fiscal restraint on the part of governments, limited financial resources being dedicated to health care, and rising costs for new health care services and technologies. This has led to increasing public debate in the last few years about how to reform public health care, and whether we should prohibit, permit or perhaps even encourage private purchase of health care services. In Canada, some of these concerns have crystallized around the issue of gene patents and commercial genetic testing, in particular as illustrated by the case of Myriad Genetics' patented BRACAnalysis test for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer. While most Canadians who currently access genetic services do so through the public health care system, for those with the means, private purchase is becoming an option. This situation raises serious concerns - about justice in access to health care; about continued access to safe and reliable genetic testing supported by unbiased patient information; and about the broader effects of commercialization for ongoing research and the Canadian public health care system. Commercial genetic testing presents a challenge to health care professionals, policy analysts, and academics concerned with the social, ethical and policy implications of new genetic technologies. Using the Myriad case as an exemplar, tools from moral philosophy, the social sciences, and health policy and law will be brought to bear on the larger issues of how as a society we should regulate commercial research and product development, and more coherently decide which services to cover under public health insurance and which to leave to private purchase. Generally, the thesis is concerned with the question of "how best to bring capital, morality, and knowledge into a productive and ethical relationship" (Rabinow 1999, 20).

Nous avons étudié le transcriptome de neuf échantillons d'ARN extraits de cultures primaires de cellules non tumorales de l’épithélium de surface de l’ovaire (NOSE) provenant de quatre donneuses non porteuses de mutation, deux mutées sur BRCA1 et trois sur BRCA2, ainsi que de quatre échantillons d’ARN extraits de cultures primaires de cellules tumorales de l’ovaire (TOV) provenant de trois donneuses porteuses de mutation sur BRCA1 et une sur BRCA2. Nous avons identifié, pour la première fois, les signatures moléculaires associées à la présence d’une mutation de BRCA1 et BRCA2 dans les cellules NOSEs ainsi que la signature associée à la transformation tumorale des cellules NOSEs en TOVs chez les porteuses de mutation de BRCA1. Nous avons également localisé les domaines chromosomiques comportant des gènes corégulés en association avec la présence d’une mutation de BRCA1 dans les cellules NOSEs. Les allèles sauvage et muté de BRCA2 étaient exprimés dans les cellules TOVs provenant des porteuses de la mutation 8765delAG sur BRCA2. Nous avons observé que le niveau d’expression des transcrits de BRCA2 était plus élevé dans les cellules provenant des tumeurs ovariennes les plus agressives chez les femmes porteuses de la mutation 8765delAG sur BRCA2, les transcrits correspondants à l’allèle muté contribuant avec un pourcentage élevé du niveau d’expression total du gène. Le phénotype tumoral observé chez les Canadiennes Françaises porteuses de cette mutation pourrait résulter d’un effet de dosage de l’allèle muté. / We analyzed the transcriptome of nine primary cultures of non-tumor ovarian surface epithelium cells (NOSE) from four non-carriers, two BRCA1 and three BRCA2 carriers, and four primary cultures of tumor ovarian cells (TOV) from three BRCA1 and one BRCA2 carriers. We identified the first molecular signatures associated with the presence of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations in NOSEs and the first molecular signature associated with the transformation from NOSEs to TOVs in French Canadian women carriers of BRCA1 mutation. Moreover, we localized some co-regulated chromosomal domains associated with the presence of a BRCA1 mutation in NOSE cells. Wild-type and mutated BRCA2 allelic transcripts were expressed in tumor cells from 8765delAG BRCA2 mutation carriers, with the highest level of BRCA2 transcript expression and the highest contribution of the mutated allele in cells originating from the most aggressive ovarian tumors. The observed phenotype in BRCA2-mutated cells as well as the aggressiveness of the tumor could result from a dosage effect of the BRCA2 mutated allele.

BRCA1 est un suppresseur de tumeur majeur jouant un rôle dans la transcription, la réparation de l’ADN et le maintien de la stabilité génomique. En effet, des mutations dans le gène BRCA1 augmentent considerablement le risque de cancers du sein et de l’ovaire. BRCA1 a été en majorité caractérisé pour son rôle dans la réparation de l’ADN par la voie de recombinaison homologue (HR) en présence de bris double brins, par example, induits par l’irradiation gamma (IR). Cependant, la fonction de BRCA1 dans d’autres voies de réparation de l’ADN, comme la réparation par excision de nucléotides (NER) ou par excision de base (BER), demeurent toutefois obscures. Il est donc important de comprendre la régulation de BRCA1 en présence d’agents génotoxiques comme le méthyle méthanesulfonate (MMS) ou l’UV, qui promouvoient le BER et le NER respectivement. Nos observations suggèrent que BRCA1 est dégradée par le protéasome après traitement avec le MMS ou les UV, et non avec l’IR. Par ailleurs, cette dégradation semble compromettre le recrutement de Rad51, suggérant que la voie de HR est inhibée. Nos résultats suggèrent que la HR est inhibée afin d’éviter l’activation simultanée de multiples voies de réparation. Nous avons aussi observé que la dégradation BRCA1 est réversible et que la restauration des niveaux de BRCA1 coïncide avec le recrutement de Rad51 aux sites de dommages. Cela suggère que la HR est réactivée tardivement par les bris double brins générés suite à l’effondrement des fourches de réplication. Ayant observé que BRCA1 est hautement régulé par l’ubiquitination et est ciblé par le protéasome pour dégradation, nous avons émis une hypothèse que BRCA1 est régulé par des déubiquitinases. Cela amène à caractériser plus en profondeur par un criblage en déplétant les déubiquitinases individuellement par RNAi et en observant leur effet sur le recrutement de BRCA1 et des protéines reliées à cette voie. Un criblage préliminaire nous a permi d’identifié candidats potentiels tel que BAP1, CXORF53, DUB3, OTUB1 et USP36. / BRCA1 is a tumour suppressor involved in transcription, DNA repair and maintenance of genomic stability. Indeed, BRCA1 mutation carriers have an exceptionally higher risk of breast and ovarian cancers. BRCA1 is mainly known for its role in homologous recombination repair (HR) by recruiting HR proteins to chromatin upon double strand break (DSBs) formation, e.g., following treatment with ionizing irradiation (IR). However, the function of BRCA1 in other DNA repair pathways such as nucleotide excision repair (NER) or base excision repair (BER) is still obscure. It is thus of fundamental and clinical importance to investigate BRCA1 function following exposure to diverse genotoxic agents. Using human cultured cell, we observed that BRCA1 is downregulated by the proteasome upon treatment with MMS or UV, but not with IR. Moreover, this downregulation prevents Rad51 recruitment to chromatin following exposure to MMS. Given that DNA damage induced by UV and MMS trigger NER and BER pathways respectively, this implies that HR could be inhibited in order to prevent competition between independent DNA repair pathways. We also found that BRCA1 downregulation is reversible and the recovery of BRCA1 levels correlates with the reappearance of BRCA1 and Rad51 on chromatin. This implies that the HR has been reactivated at the late stage of DNA damage for the repair of double strand breaks generated by replication fork collapse. Since BRCA1 stability is highly regulated by ubiquitination and is downregulated following MMS treatment, one would expect that a deubiquitinase is responsible for relieving this downregulation to promote the reactivation of the HR pathway. To characterize this aspect further, we conducted DUB RNAi screens in which a particular DUB is depleted and the localization of BRCA1 and other related proteins were observed. According to a preliminary screen, a few DUBs (BAP1, CXORF53, DUB3, OTUB1, and USP36) were identified as potential regulators of the stability and localization of BRCA1 and proteins involved in homologous recombination.

DNA damage response pathways are a complicated network of proteins that function to remove and/or reverse DNA damage. Following genetic insult, a signal cascade is generated, which alerts the cell to the presence of damaged DNA. Once recognized, the damage is either removed or the damaged region is excised, and the original genetic sequence is restored. However, when these pathways are defective the cell is unable to effectively mediate the DNA damage response and the damage persists unrepaired. Thus, the proteins that maintain the DNA damage response pathway are critical in preserving genomic stability. One essential DNA repair protein is the Breast Cancer Associated gene, BRCA1. BRCA1 is essential for mediating the DNA damage response, facilitating DNA damage repair, and activating key cell cycle checkpoints. Moreover, mutations in BRCA1 lead to a higher incidence of breast and ovarian cancer, highlighting the importance of BRCA1 as a tumor suppressor. In an effort to better understand how BRCA1 carried out these functions, researchers sought to identify additional BRCA1 interacting proteins. This led to the identification of several proteins including the BRCA1 Associated C-terminal Helicase, BACH1. Due to the direct interaction of BACH1 with a region of BRCA1 essential for DNA repair and tumor suppression, it was speculated that BACH1 may help support these BRCA1 function(s). In fact, initial genetic screenings confirmed that mutations in BACH1 correlated not only with hereditary breast cancer, but also with defects in DNA damage repair processes. The initial correlation between BACH1 and cancer predisposition was further confirmed when mutations in BACH1 were identified in the cancer syndrome Fanconi anemia (FA) (complementation group FA-J), thus giving BACH1 its new name FANCJ. These findings supported a previously established link between the FA and BRCA pathways and between FA and DNA repair. In particular, we demonstrated that similar to other FA/BRCA proteins, suppression of FANCJ lead to a substantial decrease in homologous recombination and enhanced both the cellular sensitivity to DNA interstrand cross-linking agents and chromosomal instability. What remained unknown was specifically how FANCJ functioned and whether these functions were dependent on its interaction with BRCA1 or other associated partners. In fact, we identified that FANCJ interacted directly with the MMR protein MLH1. Moreover, we found that the FANCJ/BRCA1 interaction was not required to correct the cellular defects in FA-J cells, but rather that the FANCJ/MLH1 interaction was required. Although both the FA/BRCA and MMR pathways undoubtedly mediate the DNA damage response, there was no evidence to suggest that these pathways were linked, until recently. Our findings not only indicate a physical link between these pathways by protein-protein interaction, but also demonstrated a functional link.