Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24453986›Full record

ReviewPLoS genetics2014

Is non-homologous end-joining really an inherently error-prone process?

Mireille Bétermier, Pascale Bertrand, Bernard S Lopez

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in PLoS genetics, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 251 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
251citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
25.7field-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

251 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 422 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Biosecurity Primitive: Polymerase X-based Genetic Physical Unclonable Functions.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2025
    Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Article

191 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 2 institutions in 1 country.

Mireille BétermierCNRS, Centre de Génétique Moléculaire, UPR3404, Gif-sur-Yvette, France ; CNRS, Centre de Recherches de Gif-sur-Yvette, FRC3115, Gif-sur-Yvette, France ; Université Paris-Sud, Département de Biologie, Orsay, France.
Pascale BertrandCEA, DSV, Institut de Radiobiologie Moléculaire et Cellulaire, Laboratoire Réparation et Vieillissement, Fontenay-aux-Roses, France ; UMR 8200 CNRS, Villejuif, France.
Bernard S LopezUniversité Paris-Sud, Département de Biologie, Orsay, France ; UMR 8200 CNRS, Villejuif, France ; Institut de Cancérologie, Gustave Roussy, Villejuif, France.
Université Paris-Sud · FRCentre National de la Recherche Scientifique · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

DNA double-strand breaks (DSBs) are harmful lesions leading to genomic instability or diversity. Non-homologous end-joining (NHEJ) is a prominent DSB repair pathway, which has long been considered to be error-prone. However, recent data have pointed to the intrinsic precision of NHEJ. Three reasons can account for the apparent fallibility of NHEJ: 1) the existence of a highly error-prone alternative end-joining process; 2) the adaptability of canonical C-NHEJ (Ku- and Xrcc4/ligase IV-dependent) to imperfect complementary ends; and 3) the requirement to first process chemically incompatible DNA ends that cannot be ligated directly. Thus, C-NHEJ is conservative but adaptable, and the accuracy of the repair is dictated by the structure of the DNA ends rather than by the C-NHEJ machinery. We present data from different organisms that describe the conservative/versatile properties of C-NHEJ. The advantages of the adaptability/versatility of C-NHEJ are discussed for the development of the immune repertoire and the resistance to ionizing radiation, especially at low doses, and for targeted genome manipulation.

Indexed as

Genomic InstabilityDNA-Binding ProteinsDNA Breaks, Double-StrandedDNA DamageDNA End-Joining RepairDNA LigasesDNA RepairRadiation, IonizingRecombination, GeneticDNA-Binding ProteinsDNA LigasesXRCC4 protein, human

Identifiers

PMID24453986
PMCPMC3894167
OpenAlexW2056406429

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.