Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19575778›Full record

ArticleCell division2009

Regulation of DNA replication by the S-phase DNA damage checkpoint.

Nicholas Willis, Nicholas Rhind

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cell division, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 43 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
43citing papers in PubMed
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 16% 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

43 citing papers in PubMed, 93 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Lidocaine enhances antitumor effects of sorafenib and GW5074 in colorectal cancer cells.Journal of enzyme inhibition and medicinal chemistry · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Cell Cycle Synchrony Methods for Fission Yeast, Schizosaccharomyces pombe.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2022
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. The repair geneOncology reviews · 2021
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Targeting DNA Repair Pathways in Hematological Malignancies.International journal of molecular sciences · 2020
    Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
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.

Nicholas WillisBiochemistry and Molecular Pharmacology, University on Massachusetts Medical School, Worcester MA 01605, USA. nick.rhind@umassmed.edu.
Nicholas Rhind
University of Massachusetts Chan Medical School · US

Funding

The Role of MRN in the S-Phase DNA Damage CheckpointR01GM069957 · NIGMS · UNIV OF MASSACHUSETTS MED SCH WORCESTER · PI RHIND, NICHOLAS R · 2004 to 2013
$2.8M
NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM069957
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Cells slow replication in response to DNA damage. This slowing was the first DNA damage checkpoint response discovered and its study led to the discovery of the central checkpoint kinase, Ataxia Telangiectasia Mutated (ATM). Nonetheless, the manner by which the S-phase DNA damage checkpoint slows replication is still unclear. The checkpoint could slow bulk replication by inhibiting replication origin firing or slowing replication fork progression, and both mechanisms appear to be used. However, assays in various systems using different DNA damaging agents have produced conflicting results as to the relative importance of the two mechanisms. Furthermore, although progress has been made in elucidating the mechanism of origin regulation in vertebrates, the mechanism by which forks are slowed remains unknown. We review both past and present efforts towards determining how cells slow replication in response to damage and try to resolve apparent conflicts and discrepancies within the field. We propose that inhibition of origin firing is a global checkpoint mechanism that reduces overall DNA synthesis whenever the checkpoint is activated, whereas slowing of fork progression reflects a local checkpoint mechanism that only affects replisomes as they encounter DNA damage and therefore only affects overall replication rates in cases of high lesion density.

Identifiers

PMID19575778
PMCPMC2714077
OpenAlexW2150937729

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.