Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22184222›Full record

ArticleProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America2012

Evidence for formation of DNA repair centers and dose-response nonlinearity in human cells.

Teresa Neumaier, Joel Swenson, Christopher Pham, Aris Polyzos, Alvin T Lo, PoAn Yang, Jane Dyball, Aroumougame Asaithamby, David J Chen, Mina J Bissell and 2 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 123 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
123citing papers in PubMed
–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

123 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Misleading Model: Why the 5% Cancer Risk from Computed Tomography Scans Is Overstated.American journal of respiratory and critical care medicine · 2025
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Rectal Epithelial Stem Cell Kinetics in Acute Radiation Proctitis.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

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

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors.

Teresa NeumaierInstitute of Radiation Protection, German Research Center for Environmental Health (GmbH), Ingolstädter Landstrasse 1, 85764 Neuherberg, Germany.
Joel Swenson
Christopher Pham
Aris Polyzos
Alvin T Lo
PoAn Yang
Jane Dyball
Aroumougame Asaithamby
David J Chen
Mina J Bissell
Stefan Thalhammer
Sylvain V Costes

Funding

PREDOCTORAL TRAINING IN DEVELOPMENTAL BIOLOGYT32HD007470 · NICHD · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN FRANCISCO · PI Todd Nystul · 1994 to 2026
$7.7M
NICHD NIH HHS T32 HD007470
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The concept of DNA "repair centers" and the meaning of radiation-induced foci (RIF) in human cells have remained controversial. RIFs are characterized by the local recruitment of DNA damage sensing proteins such as p53 binding protein (53BP1). Here, we provide strong evidence for the existence of repair centers. We used live imaging and mathematical fitting of RIF kinetics to show that RIF induction rate increases with increasing radiation dose, whereas the rate at which RIFs disappear decreases. We show that multiple DNA double-strand breaks (DSBs) 1 to 2 μm apart can rapidly cluster into repair centers. Correcting mathematically for the dose dependence of induction/resolution rates, we observe an absolute RIF yield that is surprisingly much smaller at higher doses: 15 RIF/Gy after 2 Gy exposure compared to approximately 64 RIF/Gy after 0.1 Gy. Cumulative RIF counts from time lapse of 53BP1-GFP in human breast cells confirmed these results. The standard model currently in use applies a linear scale, extrapolating cancer risk from high doses to low doses of ionizing radiation. However, our discovery of DSB clustering over such large distances casts considerable doubts on the general assumption that risk to ionizing radiation is proportional to dose, and instead provides a mechanism that could more accurately address risk dose dependency of ionizing radiation.

Indexed as

Dose-Response Relationship, RadiationBreast NeoplasmsCells, CulturedDNA-Binding ProteinsDNA Breaks, Double-StrandedDNA RepairFemaleGreen Fluorescent ProteinsHumansIntracellular Signaling Peptides and ProteinsKineticsModels, BiologicalRisk AssessmentTumor Suppressor p53-Binding Protein 1DNA-Binding ProteinsGreen Fluorescent ProteinsIntracellular Signaling Peptides and ProteinsTP53BP1 protein, humanTumor Suppressor p53-Binding Protein 1

Identifiers

PMID22184222
PMCPMC3258602

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.