ReviewMutation research2013
Spatiotemporal dynamics of DNA repair proteins following laser microbeam induced DNA damage - when is a DSB not a DSB?
Review in Mutation research, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers.
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
23 citing papers in PubMed, 37 citations in OpenAlex.
- TRIP12's role in the governance of DNA polymerase β involvement in DNA damage response and repair.Nucleic acids research · 2025Article
- Involvement of the splicing factor SART1 in the BRCA1-dependent homologous recombination repair of DNA double-strand breaks.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Cell-Type-Dependent Recruitment Dynamics of FUS Protein at Laser-Induced DNA Damage Sites.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024Article
- ZEB1 promotes non-homologous end joining double-strand break repair.Nucleic acids research · 2023Article
- Recruitment Kinetics of XRCC1 and RNF8 Following MeV Proton and α-Particle Micro-Irradiation.Biology · 2023Article
- DNA damage in cancer development: special implications in viral oncogenesis.American journal of cancer research · 2021Article
- Complex Chromatin Motions for DNA Repair.Frontiers in genetics · 2020Review
- In Situ Analysis of DNA-Protein Complex Formation upon Radiation-Induced DNA Damage.International journal of molecular sciences · 2019Review
- Glu-108 in Saccharomyces cerevisiae Rad51 Is Critical for DNA Damage-Induced Nuclear Function.mSphere · 2019Article
- The role of R-loops in transcription-associated DNA double-strand break repair.Molecular & cellular oncology · 2019Article
- Simultaneous dual-channel imaging to quantify interdependent protein recruitment to laser-induced DNA damage sites.Nucleus (Austin, Tex.) · 2018Article
- DNA damage causes rapid accumulation of phosphoinositides for ATR signaling.Nature communications · 2017Article
- Single Molecule Analysis of Laser Localized Psoralen Adducts.Journal of visualized experiments : JoVE · 2017Article
- Independent mechanisms recruit the cohesin loader protein NIPBL to sites of DNA damage.Journal of cell science · 2017Article
- Cloning, localization and focus formation at DNA damage sites of canine XRCC4.The Journal of veterinary medical science · 2017Article
- Systematic analysis of DNA damage induction and DNA repair pathway activation by continuous wave visible light laser micro-irradiation.AIMS genetics · 2017Article
- Nuclear localization of mouse Ku70 in interphase cells and focus formation of mouse Ku70 at DNA damage sites immediately after irradiation.The Journal of veterinary medical science · 2015Article
- Micro-irradiation tools to visualize base excision repair and single-strand break repair.DNA repair · 2015Review
- Disruption of PARP1 function inhibits base excision repair of a sub-set of DNA lesions.Nucleic acids research · 2015Article
- DNA damage to a single chromosome end delays anaphase onset.The Journal of biological chemistry · 2014Article
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 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
The formation of DNA lesions poses a constant threat to cellular stability. Repair of endogenously and exogenously produced lesions has therefore been extensively studied, although the spatiotemporal dynamics of the repair processes has yet to be fully understood. One of the most recent advances to study the kinetics of DNA repair has been the development of laser microbeams to induce and visualize recruitment and loss of repair proteins to base damage in live mammalian cells. However, a number of studies have produced contradictory results that are likely caused by the different laser systems used reflecting in part the wavelength dependence of the damage induced. Additionally, the repair kinetics of laser microbeam induced DNA lesions have generally lacked consideration of the structural and chemical complexity of the DNA damage sites, which are known to greatly influence their reparability. In this review, we highlight the key considerations when embarking on laser microbeam experiments and interpreting the real time data from laser microbeam irradiations. We compare the repair kinetics from live cell imaging with biochemical and direct quantitative cellular measurements for DNA repair.
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.