Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22456607›Full record

ArticleGenome research2012

A genome-wide analysis of common fragile sites: what features determine chromosomal instability in the human genome?

Arkarachai Fungtammasan, Erin Walsh, Francesca Chiaromonte, Kristin A Eckert, Kateryna D Makova

Erratum issuedAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Genome research, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 99 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
99citing 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

99 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Structural Variation Evolution at the 15q11-q13 Disease-Associated Locus.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Different classes of genomic inserts contribute to human antibody diversity.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2022
    Article
  10. Review
  11. Extrachromosomal DNA in Cancer.Annual review of genomics and human genetics · 2022
    Review
  12. Article
  13. Integrated genome and transcriptome analyses reveal the mechanism of genome instability in ataxia with oculomotor apraxia 2.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2022
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Review

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

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Arkarachai FungtammasanThe Integrative Biosciences Graduate Program, Bioinformatics and Genomics Option, Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA 16802, USA.
Erin Walsh
Francesca Chiaromonte
Kristin A Eckert
Kateryna D Makova

Funding

Computational and Biochemical Analysis of Microsatellite Life CycleR01GM087472 · NIGMS · PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIVERSITY, THE · PI ECKERT, KRISTIN A, MAKOVA, KATERYNA · 2009 to 2012
$1.4M
NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM087472NIGMS NIH HHS R01-GM087472
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Chromosomal common fragile sites (CFSs) are unstable genomic regions that break under replication stress and are involved in structural variation. They frequently are sites of chromosomal rearrangements in cancer and of viral integration. However, CFSs are undercharacterized at the molecular level and thus difficult to predict computationally. Newly available genome-wide profiling studies provide us with an unprecedented opportunity to associate CFSs with features of their local genomic contexts. Here, we contrasted the genomic landscape of cytogenetically defined aphidicolin-induced CFSs (aCFSs) to that of nonfragile sites, using multiple logistic regression. We also analyzed aCFS breakage frequencies as a function of their genomic landscape, using standard multiple regression. We show that local genomic features are effective predictors both of regions harboring aCFSs (explaining ∼77% of the deviance in logistic regression models) and of aCFS breakage frequencies (explaining ∼45% of the variance in standard regression models). In our optimal models (having highest explanatory power), aCFSs are predominantly located in G-negative chromosomal bands and away from centromeres, are enriched in Alu repeats, and have high DNA flexibility. In alternative models, CpG island density, transcription start site density, H3K4me1 coverage, and mononucleotide microsatellite coverage are significant predictors. Also, aCFSs have high fragility when colocated with evolutionarily conserved chromosomal breakpoints. Our models are predictive of the fragility of aCFSs mapped at a higher resolution. Importantly, the genomic features we identified here as significant predictors of fragility allow us to draw valuable inferences on the molecular mechanisms underlying aCFSs.

Indexed as

Chromosomal InstabilityChromosome Fragile SitesGenome, HumanModels, GeneticAlu ElementsAnimalsAphidicolinCentromereChromosome BreakageChromosomes, HumanCpG IslandsCytogenetic AnalysisHumansLogistic ModelsMiceMicrosatellite RepeatsAphidicolin

Identifiers

PMID22456607
PMCPMC3371707

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.