Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25675367›Full record

ArticleNucleus (Austin, Tex.)2015

DNA double strand break repair pathway choice: a chromatin based decision?

T Clouaire, G Legube

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Nucleus (Austin, Tex.), 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 64 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
64citing papers in PubMed
5.1field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

64 citing papers in PubMed, 101 citations in OpenAlex.

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

4 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 at 1 institution in 1 country.

T Clouairea Université de Toulouse; UPS; LBCMCP ; Toulouse , France.
G Legube
Université Fédérale de Toulouse Midi-Pyrénées · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

DNA double-strand breaks (DSBs) are highly toxic lesions that can be rapidly repaired by 2 main pathways, namely Homologous Recombination (HR) and Non Homologous End Joining (NHEJ). The choice between these pathways is a critical, yet not completely understood, aspect of DSB repair. We recently found that distinct DSBs induced across the genome are not repaired by the same pathway. Indeed, DSBs induced in active genes, naturally enriched in the trimethyl form of histone H3 lysine 36 (H3K36me3), are channeled to repair by HR, in a manner depending on SETD2, the major H3K36 trimethyltransferase. Here, we propose that these findings may be generalized to other types of histone modifications and repair machineries thus defining a "DSB repair choice histone code". This "decision making" function of preexisting chromatin structure in DSB repair could connect the repair pathway used to the type and function of the damaged region, not only contributing to genome stability but also to its diversity.

Indexed as

DNA Breaks, Double-StrandedDNA RepairChromatinGenomic InstabilityHistonesHomologous RecombinationLysineMethylationModels, BiologicalChromatinHistonesLysinechromatin, trimethyl H3K36DNA double strand breaksDSB pathway choicehomologous recombination

Identifiers

PMID25675367
PMCPMC4615830
OpenAlexW1958856311

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.