1 Richardson, C. & Jasin, M. Frequent chromosomal translocations induced by DNA double-strand breaks. Nature 405, 697-700 (2000). https://doi.org:10.1038/35015097
2 Marnef, A. & Legube, G. Organizing DNA repair in the nucleus: DSBs hit the road. Curr Opin Cell Biol 46, 1-8 (2017). https://doi.org:10.1016/j.ceb.2016.12.003
3 Lamm, N., Rogers, S. & Cesare, A. J. Chromatin mobility and relocation in DNA repair. Trends Cell Biol 31, 843-855 (2021). https://doi.org:10.1016/j.tcb.2021.06.002
4 Gasser, S. M. & Stutz, F. SUMO in the regulation of DNA repair and transcription at nuclear pores. FEBS Lett 597, 2833-2850 (2023). https://doi.org:10.1002/1873-3468.14751
5 Pinzaru, A. M. et al. Replication stress conferred by POT1 dysfunction promotes telomere relocalization to the nuclear pore. Genes Dev 34, 1619-1636 (2020). https://doi.org:10.1101/gad.337287.120
6 Marnef, A. et al. A cohesin/HUSH- and LINC-dependent pathway controls ribosomal DNA double-strand break repair. Genes Dev 33, 1175-1190 (2019). https://doi.org:10.1101/gad.324012.119
7 Shokrollahi, M. et al. DNA double-strand break-capturing nuclear envelope tubules drive DNA repair. Nat Struct Mol Biol (2024). https://doi.org:10.1038/s41594-024-01286-7
8 Shanbhag, N. M., Rafalska-Metcalf, I. U., Balane-Bolivar, C., Janicki, S. M. & Greenberg, R. A. ATM-dependent chromatin changes silence transcription in cis to DNA double-strand breaks. Cell 141, 970-981 (2010). https://doi.org:10.1016/j.cell.2010.04.038
9 Meisenberg, C. et al. Repression of Transcription at DNA Breaks Requires Cohesin throughout Interphase and Prevents Genome Instability. Mol Cell 73, 212-223 e217 (2019). https://doi.org:10.1016/j.molcel.2018.11.001
10 Rona, G. et al. PARP1-dependent recruitment of the FBXL10-RNF68-RNF2 ubiquitin ligase to sites of DNA damage controls H2A.Z loading. Elife 7 (2018). https://doi.org:10.7554/eLife.38771
11 Ui, A., Nagaura, Y. & Yasui, A. Transcriptional elongation factor ENL phosphorylated by ATM recruits polycomb and switches off transcription for DSB repair. Mol Cell 58, 468-482 (2015). https://doi.org:10.1016/j.molcel.2015.03.023
12 Kakarougkas, A. et al. Requirement for PBAF in transcriptional repression and repair at DNA breaks in actively transcribed regions of chromatin. Mol Cell 55, 723-732 (2014). https://doi.org:10.1016/j.molcel.2014.06.028
13 Hu, K. et al. ATM-Dependent Recruitment of BRD7 is required for Transcriptional Repression and DNA Repair at DNA Breaks Flanking Transcriptional Active Regions. Adv Sci (Weinh) 7, 2000157 (2020). https://doi.org:10.1002/advs.202000157
14 Gong, F. et al. Screen identifies bromodomain protein ZMYND8 in chromatin recognition of transcription-associated DNA damage that promotes homologous recombination. Genes Dev 29, 197-211 (2015). https://doi.org:10.1101/gad.252189.114
15 Awwad, S. W., Abu-Zhayia, E. R., Guttmann-Raviv, N. & Ayoub, N. NELF-E is recruited to DNA double-strand break sites to promote transcriptional repression and repair. EMBO Rep 18, 745-764 (2017). https://doi.org:10.15252/embr.201643191
16 Dong, C. et al. Screen identifies DYRK1B network as mediator of transcription repression on damaged chromatin. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 117, 17019-17030 (2020). https://doi.org:10.1073/pnas.2002193117
17 de Vivo, A. et al. The OTUD5-UBR5 complex regulates FACT-mediated transcription at damaged chromatin. Nucleic Acids Res 47, 729-746 (2019). https://doi.org:10.1093/nar/gky1219
18 Min, S. et al. The chromatin remodeler RSF1 coordinates epigenetic marks for transcriptional repression and DSB repair. Nucleic Acids Res 49, 12268-12283 (2021). https://doi.org:10.1093/nar/gkab1093
19 Isono, K. et al. SAM domain polymerization links subnuclear clustering of PRC1 to gene silencing. Dev Cell 26, 565-577 (2013). https://doi.org:10.1016/j.devcel.2013.08.016
20 Cukras, S. et al. The USP1-UAF1 complex interacts with RAD51AP1 to promote homologous recombination repair. Cell Cycle 15, 2636-2646 (2016). https://doi.org:10.1080/15384101.2016.1209613
21 Plys, A. J. et al. Phase separation of Polycomb-repressive complex 1 is governed by a charged disordered region of CBX2. Genes Dev 33, 799-813 (2019). https://doi.org:10.1101/gad.326488.119
22 Sanchez, A. et al. BMI1-UBR5 axis regulates transcriptional repression at damaged chromatin. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 113, 11243-11248 (2016). https://doi.org:10.1073/pnas.1610735113
23 Tang, J. et al. Acetylation limits 53BP1 association with damaged chromatin to promote homologous recombination. Nat Struct Mol Biol 20, 317-325 (2013). https://doi.org:10.1038/nsmb.2499
24 Schaaf, C. A. et al. Cohesin and polycomb proteins functionally interact to control transcription at silenced and active genes. PLoS Genet 9, e1003560 (2013). https://doi.org:10.1371/journal.pgen.1003560
25 Gozalo, A. et al. Core Components of the Nuclear Pore Bind Distinct States of Chromatin and Contribute to Polycomb Repression. Mol Cell 77, 67-81 e67 (2020). https://doi.org:10.1016/j.molcel.2019.10.017
26 Freudenreich, C. H. & Su, X. A. Relocalization of DNA lesions to the nuclear pore complex. FEMS Yeast Res 16 (2016). https://doi.org:10.1093/femsyr/fow095
27 Gaillard, H., Santos-Pereira, J. M. & Aguilera, A. The Nup84 complex coordinates the DNA damage response to warrant genome integrity. Nucleic Acids Res 47, 4054-4067 (2019). https://doi.org:10.1093/nar/gkz066
28 Chung, D. K. et al. Perinuclear tethers license telomeric DSBs for a broad kinesin- and NPC-dependent DNA repair process. Nat Commun 6, 7742 (2015). https://doi.org:10.1038/ncomms8742
29 Nagai, S. et al. Functional targeting of DNA damage to a nuclear pore-associated SUMO-dependent ubiquitin ligase. Science 322, 597-602 (2008). https://doi.org:10.1126/science.1162790
30 Horigome, C. et al. SWR1 and INO80 chromatin remodelers contribute to DNA double-strand break perinuclear anchorage site choice. Mol Cell 55, 626-639 (2014). https://doi.org:10.1016/j.molcel.2014.06.027
31 Ryu, T. et al. Heterochromatic breaks move to the nuclear periphery to continue recombinational repair. Nat Cell Biol 17, 1401-1411 (2015). https://doi.org:10.1038/ncb3258
32 Vollmer, B. et al. Nup153 Recruits the Nup107-160 Complex to the Inner Nuclear Membrane for Interphasic Nuclear Pore Complex Assembly. Dev Cell 33, 717-728 (2015). https://doi.org:10.1016/j.devcel.2015.04.027
33 Ginjala, V. et al. BMI1 is recruited to DNA breaks and contributes to DNA damage-induced H2A ubiquitination and repair. Mol Cell Biol 31, 1972-1982 (2011). https://doi.org:10.1128/MCB.00981-10
34 Fitieh, A. et al. BMI-1 regulates DNA end resection and homologous recombination repair. Cell Rep 38, 110536 (2022). https://doi.org:10.1016/j.celrep.2022.110536
35 Ouyang, J. et al. RNA transcripts stimulate homologous recombination by forming DR-loops. Nature 594, 283-288 (2021). https://doi.org:10.1038/s41586-021-03538-8
36 de Vivo, A. et al. OTUD5 limits replication fork instability by organizing chromatin remodelers. Nucleic Acids Res 51, 10467-10483 (2023). https://doi.org:10.1093/nar/gkad732
37 Matsuoka, S. et al. ATM and ATR substrate analysis reveals extensive protein networks responsive to DNA damage. Science 316, 1160-1166 (2007). https://doi.org:10.1126/science.1140321
38 Miyake, N. et al. Biallelic Mutations in Nuclear Pore Complex Subunit NUP107 Cause Early-Childhood-Onset Steroid-Resistant Nephrotic Syndrome. Am J Hum Genet 97, 555-566 (2015). https://doi.org:10.1016/j.ajhg.2015.08.013
39 Braun, D. A. et al. Mutations in multiple components of the nuclear pore complex cause nephrotic syndrome. J Clin Invest 128, 4313-4328 (2018). https://doi.org:10.1172/JCI98688
40 Boehmer, T., Jeudy, S., Berke, I. C. & Schwartz, T. U. Structural and functional studies of Nup107/Nup133 interaction and its implications for the architecture of the nuclear pore complex. Mol Cell 30, 721-731 (2008). https://doi.org:10.1016/j.molcel.2008.04.022
41 Chagraoui, J., Hebert, J., Girard, S. & Sauvageau, G. An anticlastogenic function for the Polycomb Group gene Bmi1. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 108, 5284-5289 (2011). https://doi.org:10.1073/pnas.1014263108
42 Gong, F., Clouaire, T., Aguirrebengoa, M., Legube, G. & Miller, K. M. Histone demethylase KDM5A regulates the ZMYND8-NuRD chromatin remodeler to promote DNA repair. J Cell Biol 216, 1959-1974 (2017). https://doi.org:10.1083/jcb.201611135
43 Su, X. A., Dion, V., Gasser, S. M. & Freudenreich, C. H. Regulation of recombination at yeast nuclear pores controls repair and triplet repeat stability. Genes Dev 29, 1006-1017 (2015). https://doi.org:10.1101/gad.256404.114
44 Chiolo, I. et al. Double-strand breaks in heterochromatin move outside of a dynamic HP1a domain to complete recombinational repair. Cell 144, 732-744 (2011). https://doi.org:10.1016/j.cell.2011.02.012
45 Ryu, T., Merigliano, C. & Chiolo, I. Nup153 is not required for anchoring heterochromatic DSBs to the nuclear periphery. MicroPubl Biol 2024 (2024). https://doi.org:10.17912/micropub.biology.001176
46 Schrank, B. R. et al. Nuclear ARP2/3 drives DNA break clustering for homology-directed repair. Nature 559, 61-66 (2018). https://doi.org:10.1038/s41586-018-0237-5
47 Lamm, N. et al. Nuclear F-actin counteracts nuclear deformation and promotes fork repair during replication stress. Nat Cell Biol 22, 1460-1470 (2020). https://doi.org:10.1038/s41556-020-00605-6
48 Aguilera, P. et al. The nuclear pore complex prevents sister chromatid recombination during replicative senescence. Nat Commun 11, 160 (2020). https://doi.org:10.1038/s41467-019-13979-5
49 Whalen, J. M., Dhingra, N., Wei, L., Zhao, X. & Freudenreich, C. H. Relocation of Collapsed Forks to the Nuclear Pore Complex Depends on Sumoylation of DNA Repair Proteins and Permits Rad51 Association. Cell Rep 31, 107635 (2020). https://doi.org:10.1016/j.celrep.2020.107635
50 Rivard, R. S. et al. Improved detection of DNA replication fork-associated proteins. Cell Rep 43, 114178 (2024). https://doi.org:10.1016/j.celrep.2024.114178
51 Soutoglou, E. et al. Positional stability of single double-strand breaks in mammalian cells. Nat Cell Biol 9, 675-682 (2007). https://doi.org:10.1038/ncb1591
52 Morchoisne-Bolhy, S. et al. Intranuclear dynamics of the Nup107-160 complex. Mol Biol Cell 26, 2343-2356 (2015). https://doi.org:10.1091/mbc.E15-02-0060
53 Jacinto, F. V., Benner, C. & Hetzer, M. W. The nucleoporin Nup153 regulates embryonic stem cell pluripotency through gene silencing. Genes Dev 29, 1224-1238 (2015). https://doi.org:10.1101/gad.260919.115
54 Kadota, S. et al. Nucleoporin 153 links nuclear pore complex to chromatin architecture by mediating CTCF and cohesin binding. Nat Commun 11, 2606 (2020). https://doi.org:10.1038/s41467-020-16394-3
55 Loeillet, S. et al. Genetic network interactions among replication, repair and nuclear pore deficiencies in yeast. DNA Repair (Amst) 4, 459-468 (2005). https://doi.org:10.1016/j.dnarep.2004.11.010
56 Palancade, B. et al. Nucleoporins prevent DNA damage accumulation by modulating Ulp1-dependent sumoylation processes. Mol Biol Cell 18, 2912-2923 (2007). https://doi.org:10.1091/mbc.e07-02-0123
57 Bennett, C. B. et al. Genes required for ionizing radiation resistance in yeast. Nat Genet 29, 426-434 (2001). https://doi.org:10.1038/ng778
58 Rodriguez-Berriguete, G. et al. Nucleoporin 54 contributes to homologous recombination repair and post-replicative DNA integrity. Nucleic Acids Res 46, 7731-7746 (2018). https://doi.org:10.1093/nar/gky569
59 Moudry, P. et al. Nucleoporin NUP153 guards genome integrity by promoting nuclear import of 53BP1. Cell Death Differ 19, 798-807 (2012). https://doi.org:10.1038/cdd.2011.150
60 Duheron, V., Nilles, N., Pecenko, S., Martinelli, V. & Fahrenkrog, B. Localisation of Nup153 and SENP1 to nuclear pore complexes is required for 53BP1-mediated DNA double-strand break repair. J Cell Sci 130, 2306-2316 (2017). https://doi.org:10.1242/jcs.198390
61 Mackay, D. R., Howa, A. C., Werner, T. L. & Ullman, K. S. Nup153 and Nup50 promote recruitment of 53BP1 to DNA repair foci by antagonizing BRCA1-dependent events. J Cell Sci 130, 3347-3359 (2017). https://doi.org:10.1242/jcs.203513