ArticleDNA repair2008
MEN1 and FANCD2 mediate distinct mechanisms of DNA crosslink repair.
Article in DNA repair, 2008. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Well-differentiated G1 and G2 pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors: a meta-analysis of published expanded DNA sequencing data.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2024Pooled it
- Ovarian cancer: in search of better marker systems based on DNA repair defects.International journal of molecular sciences · 2013Review
- Article
- Article
- Characterization of DNA damage-dependent cell cycle checkpoints in a menin-deficient model.DNA repair · 2009Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Cells mutant for multiple endocrine neoplasia type I (MEN1) or any of the Fanconi anemia (FA) genes are hypersensitive to the killing effects of crosslinking agents, but the precise roles of these genes in the response to interstrand crosslinks (ICLs) are unknown. To determine if MEN1 and the FA genes function cooperatively in the same repair process or in distinct repair processes, we exploited Drosophila genetics to compare the mutation frequency and spectra of MEN1 and FANCD2 mutants and to perform genetic interaction studies. We created a novel in vivo reporter system in Drosophila based on the supF gene and showed that MEN1 mutant flies were extremely prone to single base deletions within a homopolymeric tract. FANCD2 mutants, on the other hand, had a mutation frequency and spectrum similar to wild type using this assay. In contrast to the supF results, both MEN1 and FANCD2 mutants were hypermutable using a different assay based on the lats tumor suppressor gene. The lats assay showed that FANCD2 mutants had a high frequency of large deletions, which the supF assay was not able to detect, while large deletions were rare in MEN1 mutants. Genetic interaction studies showed that neither overexpression nor loss of MEN1 modified the ICL sensitivity of FANCD2 mutants. The strikingly different mutation spectra of MEN1 and FANCD2 mutants together with lack of evidence for genetic interaction between these genes indicate MEN1 plays an essential role in ICL repair distinct from the Fanconi anemia genes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.