Evidence map›Paper›PMID 17401409›Full record

ReviewEMBO reports2007

Replication fork barriers: pausing for a break or stalling for time?

Karim Labib, Ben Hodgson

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in EMBO reports, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 98 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
98citing papers in PubMed
7.0field-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

98 citing papers in PubMed, 153 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Deletions of DNA in cancer and their possible uses for therapy.BioEssays : news and reviews in molecular, cellular and developmental biology · 2023
    Article
  8. Characterization of Unidirectional Replication Forks in the Mouse Genome.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023
    Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

38 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 2 institutions in 1 country.

Karim LabibCancer Research UK, Paterson Institute for Cancer Research, University of Manchester, Wilmslow Road, Manchester M20 4BX, UK. klabib@picr.man.ac.uk
Ben Hodgson
Cancer Research UK Manchester Institute · GBUniversity of Manchester · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Defects in chromosome replication can lead to translocations that are thought to result from recombination events at stalled DNA replication forks. The progression of forks is controlled by an essential DNA helicase, which unwinds the parental duplex and can stall on encountering tight protein-DNA complexes. Such pause sites are hotspots for recombination and it has been proposed that stalled replisomes disassemble, leading to fork collapse. However, in both prokaryotes and eukaryotes it now seems that paused forks are surprisingly stable, so that DNA synthesis can resume without recombination if the barrier protein is removed. Recombination at stalled forks might require other events that occur after pausing, or might be dependent on features of the surrounding DNA sequence. These findings have important implications for our understanding of the regulation of genome stability in eukaryotic cells, in which pausing of forks is mediated by specific proteins that are associated with the replicative helicase.

Indexed as

Recombination, GeneticAnimalsChromosomesDNA ReplicationEscherichia coliSaccharomycetalesSchizosaccharomyces

Identifiers

PMID17401409
PMCPMC1852754
OpenAlexW2043257897

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.