Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22914294›Full record

ReviewNature reviews. Molecular cell biology2012

DNA damage checkpoints in stem cells, ageing and cancer.

Tobias Sperka, Jianwei Wang, K Lenhard Rudolph

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Nature reviews. Molecular cell biology, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 238 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
238citing papers in PubMed
21.7field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

238 citing papers in PubMed, 393 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

178 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

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Tobias SperkaLeibniz Institute for Age Research - Fritz Lipmann Institute, Beutenbergstr. 11, 07745 Jena, Germany.
Jianwei Wang
K Lenhard Rudolph
Leibniz Institute on Aging - Fritz Lipmann Institute (FLI) · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

DNA damage induces cell-intrinsic checkpoints, including p53 and retinoblastoma (RB), as well as upstream regulators (exonuclease 1 (EXO1), ataxia telangiectasia mutated (ATM), ATR, p16(INK4a) and p19(ARF)) and downstream targets (p21, PUMA (p53 upregulated modulator of apoptosis) and sestrins). Clearance of damaged cells by cell-intrinsic checkpoints suppresses carcinogenesis but as a downside may impair stem cell and tissue maintenance during ageing. Modulating the activity of DNA damage checkpoints can either accelerate or decelerate tissue ageing and age-related carcinogenesis. The outcome depends on cell-intrinsic and cell-extrinsic mechanisms that regulate the clearance of damaged cells and on the molecular context in ageing tissues, including the level of DNA damage accumulation itself.

Indexed as

DNA DamageAnimalsCell Cycle CheckpointsCell Cycle ProteinsCell Transformation, NeoplasticCellular SenescenceHumansModels, GeneticStem CellsTelomereCell Cycle Proteins

Identifiers

PMID22914294
OpenAlexW1991327249

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.