Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23804754›Full record

ReviewNucleic acids research2013

DNA double-strand-break complexity levels and their possible contributions to the probability for error-prone processing and repair pathway choice.

Agnes Schipler, George Iliakis

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Nucleic acids research, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 145 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
145citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

145 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Association between X-ray repair cross-complementing group 1 Arg194Trp polymorphism and prostate cancer risk.Tumour biology : the journal of the International Society for Oncodevelopmental Biology and Medicine · 2014
    Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review

85 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

2 authors.

Agnes SchiplerInstitute of Medical Radiation Biology, University of Duisburg-Essen Medical School, 45122 Essen, Germany.
George Iliakis

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Although the DNA double-strand break (DSB) is defined as a rupture in the double-stranded DNA molecule that can occur without chemical modification in any of the constituent building blocks, it is recognized that this form is restricted to enzyme-induced DSBs. DSBs generated by physical or chemical agents can include at the break site a spectrum of base alterations (lesions). The nature and number of such chemical alterations define the complexity of the DSB and are considered putative determinants for repair pathway choice and the probability that errors will occur during this processing. As the pathways engaged in DSB processing show distinct and frequently inherent propensities for errors, pathway choice also defines the error-levels cells opt to accept. Here, we present a classification of DSBs on the basis of increasing complexity and discuss how complexity may affect processing, as well as how it may cause lethal or carcinogenic processing errors. By critically analyzing the characteristics of DSB repair pathways, we suggest that all repair pathways can in principle remove lesions clustering at the DSB but are likely to fail when they encounter clusters of DSBs that cause a local form of chromothripsis. In the same framework, we also analyze the rational of DSB repair pathway choice.

Indexed as

DNA Breaks, Double-StrandedDNA RepairModels, Molecular

Identifiers

PMID23804754
PMCPMC3763544

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.