Evidence map›Paper›PMID 17157332›Full record

ReviewMutation research2007

Inviting instability: Transposable elements, double-strand breaks, and the maintenance of genome integrity.

D J Hedges, P L Deininger

Open access · greenAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Mutation research, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 177 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
177citing papers in PubMed
10.4field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

177 citing papers in PubMed, 324 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Transposons disrupt genomic stability and trigger cancers.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2025
    Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Article

117 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

D J HedgesTulane Cancer Center, SL66 and Department of Epidemiology, Tulane University Health Sciences Center, 1430 Tulane Avenue, New Orleans, LA 70112, USA.
P L Deininger
Tulane University · US

Funding

UNCOVERING THE MECHANISMS OF OSTEOSARCOMA METASTASIS SUPPRESSION BY MTBPP20RR020152 · NCRR · TULANE UNIVERSITY OF LOUISIANA · PI YOU, ZONGBING · 2004 to 2011
$17.0M
Sine RetrotranspositionR01GM045668 · NIGMS · TULANE UNIVERSITY OF LOUISIANA · PI DEININGER, PRESCOTT L. · 1993 to 2014
$4.2M
NCRR NIH HHS P20 RR020152NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM045668NIGMS NIH HHS R01GM45668
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The ubiquity of mobile elements in mammalian genomes poses considerable challenges for the maintenance of genome integrity. The predisposition of mobile elements towards participation in genomic rearrangements is largely a consequence of their interspersed homologous nature. As tracts of nonallelic sequence homology, they have the potential to interact in a disruptive manner during both meiotic recombination and DNA repair processes, resulting in genomic alterations ranging from deletions and duplications to large-scale chromosomal rearrangements. Although the deleterious effects of transposable element (TE) insertion events have been extensively documented, it is arguably through post-insertion genomic instability that they pose the greatest hazard to their host genomes. Despite the periodic generation of important evolutionary innovations, genomic alterations involving TE sequences are far more frequently neutral or deleterious in nature. The potentially negative consequences of this instability are perhaps best illustrated by the >25 human genetic diseases that are attributable to TE-mediated rearrangements. Some of these rearrangements, such as those involving the MLL locus in leukemia and the LDL receptor in familial hypercholesterolemia, represent recurrent mutations that have independently arisen multiple times in human populations. While TE-instability has been a potent force in shaping eukaryotic genomes and a significant source of genetic disease, much concerning the mechanisms governing the frequency and variety of these events remains to be clarified. Here we survey the current state of knowledge regarding the mechanisms underlying mobile element-based genetic instability in mammals. Compared to simpler eukaryotic systems, mammalian cells appear to have several modifications to their DNA-repair ensemble that allow them to better cope with the large amount of interspersed homology that has been generated by TEs. In addition to the disruptive potential of nonallelic sequence homology, we also consider recent evidence suggesting that the endonuclease products of TEs may also play a key role in instigating mammalian genomic instability.

Indexed as

DNA Breaks, Double-StrandedDNA Transposable ElementsGenomic InstabilityAnimalsBase SequenceDNA RepairEndonucleasesHumansInterspersed Repetitive SequencesModels, GeneticMolecular Sequence DataMutagensRecombination, GeneticSequence DeletionTranscription, GeneticDNA Transposable ElementsEndonucleasesMutagens

Identifiers

PMID17157332
PMCPMC1850990
OpenAlexW2038288403

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.