ReviewMethods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.)2015
Modeling the study of DNA damage responses in mice.
Review in Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.), 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Unraveling DNA Repair Processes In Vivo: Insights from Zebrafish Studies.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Review
- Ablating putative Ku70 phosphorylation sites results in defective DNA damage repair and spontaneous induction of hepatocellular carcinoma.Nucleic acids research · 2021Article
- Stem Cells of the Aging Brain.Frontiers in aging neuroscience · 2020Review
- Inactive Atm abrogates DSB repair in mouse cerebellum more than does Atm loss, without causing a neurological phenotype.DNA repair · 2018Article
- DNA mismatch repair and the DNA damage response.DNA repair · 2016Review
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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Damaged DNA has a profound impact on mammalian health and overall survival. In addition to being the source of mutations that initiate cancer, the accumulation of toxic amounts of DNA damage can cause severe developmental diseases and accelerate aging. Therefore, understanding how cells respond to DNA damage has become one of the most intense areas of biomedical research in the recent years. However, whereas most mechanistic studies derive from in vitro or in cellulo work, the impact of a given mutation on a living organism is largely unpredictable. For instance, why BRCA1 mutations preferentially lead to breast cancer whereas mutations compromising mismatch repair drive colon cancer is still not understood. In this context, evaluating the specific physiological impact of mutations that compromise genome integrity has become crucial for a better dimensioning of our knowledge. We here describe the various technologies that can be used for modeling mutations in mice and provide a review of the genes and pathways that have been modeled so far in the context of DNA damage responses.
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.