Evidence map›Paper›PMID 16283517›Full record

ArticleMolecular and cellular biochemistry2005

Nucleotide excision repair functions in the removal of chromium-induced DNA damage in mammalian cells.

Travis J O'Brien, Bradford R Brooks, Steven R Patierno

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Molecular and cellular biochemistry, 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 25% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

21 citing papers in PubMed, 49 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Chemical mechanisms of DNA damage by carcinogenic chromium(VI).Advances in pharmacology (San Diego, Calif.) · 2023
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. The impact of environmental metals in young urbanites' brains.Experimental and toxicologic pathology : official journal of the Gesellschaft fur Toxikologische Pathologie · 2013
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Travis J O'BrienDepartment of Pharmacology and Physiology, The George Washington University Medical Center, Washington, DC 20037, USA. phmtjo@gwumc.edu
Bradford R Brooks
Steven R Patierno
Georgetown University Medical Center · USGeorge Washington University · USWashington University Medical Center · US

Funding

NIEHS NIH HHS ES05304
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Some hexavalent chromium (Cr(VI))-containing compounds are human lung carcinogens. While ample information is available on the genetic lesions produced by Cr, surprisingly little is known regarding the cellular mechanisms involved in the removal of Cr-DNA adducts. Nucleotide excision repair (NER) is a highly versatile pathway that is responsive to a variety of DNA helix-distorting lesions. Binary Cr-DNA monoadducts do not produce a significant degree of helical distortion. However, these lesions are unstable due to the propensity of Cr(III) to form DNA adducts (DNA interstrand crosslinks, DNA-protein/amino acid ternary adducts) which may serve as substrates for NER. Therefore, the focus of this study was to determine the role of NER in the processing of Cr-DNA damage using normal (CHO-AA8) and NER-deficient [UV-5 (XP-D); UV-41 (ERCC4/XP-F)] hamster cells. We found that both UV-5 and UV-41 cells exhibited an increased sensitivity towards Cr(VI)-induced clonogenic lethality relative to AA8 cells and were completely deficient in the removal of Cr-DNA adducts. In contrast, repair-complemented UV-5 (expressing hamster XPD) and UV-41 (expressing human ERCC4) cells exhibited similar clonogenic survival and removed Cr-DNA adducts to a similar extent as AA8 cells. In order to extend these findings to the molecular level, we examined the ability of Cr(III)-damaged DNA to induce DNA repair synthesis in cell extracts. Repair synthesis was observed in reactions using extracts derived from AA8, or repair-complemented, but not NER-deficient cells. Cr(III)-induced repair resynthesis was sensitive to inhibition by the DNA polymerase delta/epsilon inhibitor, aphidicolin, but not 2',3'-dideoxythymidine triphosphate (ddTTP), a polymerase beta inhibitor. These results collectively suggest that NER functions in the protection of cells from Cr(VI) lethality and is essential for the removal of Cr(III)-DNA adducts. Consequently, NER may represent an important mechanism for preventing Cr(VI)-induced mutagenesis and neoplastic transformation.

Indexed as

DNA DamageDNA RepairAnimalsAphidicolinCell SurvivalChloridesCHO CellsChromiumChromium CompoundsCricetinaeCricetulusDNA AdductsDNA-Binding ProteinsEnzyme InhibitorsHeLa CellsHumansAphidicolinChlorideschromic chlorideChromiumChromium Compoundschromium hexavalent ionDNA AdductsDNA-Binding ProteinsEnzyme InhibitorsMutagensNucleic Acid Synthesis InhibitorsXeroderma Pigmentosum Group D Proteinxeroderma pigmentosum group F protein

Identifiers

PMID16283517
OpenAlexW1985877547

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.