Evidence map›Paper›PMID 18066085›Full record

ReviewOncogene2007

Non-homologous end-joining, a sticky affair.

D C van Gent, M van der Burg

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Oncogene, 2007. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 73 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
73citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

73 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Current trends in gene therapy to treat inherited disorders of the brain.Molecular therapy : the journal of the American Society of Gene Therapy · 2025
    Review
  3. Article
  4. The Evolutionary Potential of Chromoanagenesis.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2025
    Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. In vivo somatic cell base editing and prime editing.Molecular therapy : the journal of the American Society of Gene Therapy · 2021
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Copy Number Variation Disorders.Current genetic medicine reports · 2017
    Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article

13 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.

D C van GentDepartment of Cell Biology and Genetics, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands. d.vangent@erasmusmc.nl
M van der Burg

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Rejoining of broken chromosomes is crucial for cell survival and prevention of malignant transformation. Most mammalian cells rely primarily on the non-homologous end-joining pathway of DNA double-strand break (DSB) repair to accomplish this task. This review focuses both on the core non-homologous end-joining machinery, which consists of DNA-dependent protein kinase and the ligase IV/XRCC4 complex, and on accessory factors that facilitate rejoining of a subset of the DSBs. We discuss how the ATM protein kinase and the Mre11/Rad50/Nbs1 complex might function in DSB repair and what role ionizing radiation-induced foci may play in this process.

Indexed as

DNA DamageDNA RepairRecombination, GeneticHumansNuclear ProteinsNuclear Proteins

Identifiers

PMID18066085

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.