Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26490958›Full record

ArticleNucleic acids research2016

Slx4 and Rtt107 control checkpoint signalling and DNA resection at double-strand breaks.

Diego Dibitetto, Matteo Ferrari, Chetan C Rawal, Attila Balint, TaeHyung Kim, Zhaolei Zhang, Marcus B Smolka, Grant W Brown, Federica Marini, Achille Pellicioli

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Nucleic acids research, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
28citing papers in PubMed
3.5field-weighted citation impact, top 7% 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

28 citing papers in PubMed, 46 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Checkpoint Responses to DNA Double-Strand Breaks.Annual review of biochemistry · 2020
    Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Sae2 antagonizes Rad9 accumulation at DNA double-strand breaks to attenuate checkpoint signaling and facilitate end resection.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2018
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. TOPBP1The Journal of cell biology · 2017
    Article
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

10 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

Diego DibitettoDepartment of Biosciences, University of Milan, 20133, Milano, Italy.
Matteo FerrariDepartment of Biosciences, University of Milan, 20133, Milano, Italy.
Chetan C RawalDepartment of Biosciences, University of Milan, 20133, Milano, Italy.
Attila BalintDepartment of Biochemistry, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, M5S3E1, Canada Donnelly Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, M5S3E1, Canada.
TaeHyung KimDonnelly Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, M5S3E1, Canada Department of Computer Science, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, M5S3E1, Canada.
Zhaolei ZhangDonnelly Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, M5S3E1, Canada Department of Computer Science, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, M5S3E1, Canada.
Marcus B SmolkaDepartment of Molecular Biology and Genetics, Weill Institute for Cell and Molecular Biology, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853, USA.
Grant W BrownDepartment of Biochemistry, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, M5S3E1, Canada Donnelly Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, M5S3E1, Canada.
Federica MariniDepartment of Biosciences, University of Milan, 20133, Milano, Italy.
Achille PellicioliDepartment of Biosciences, University of Milan, 20133, Milano, Italy achille.pellicioli@unimi.it.
University of Milan · ITUniversity of Toronto · CACornell University · US

Funding

Cellular Responses to DNA Replication StressR01GM097272 · NIGMS · CORNELL UNIVERSITY · PI SMOLKA, MARCUS · 2011 to 2020
$2.7M
NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM097272
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The DNA damage checkpoint pathway is activated in response to DNA lesions and replication stress to preserve genome integrity. However, hyper-activation of this surveillance system is detrimental to the cell, because it might prevent cell cycle re-start after repair, which may also lead to senescence. Here we show that the scaffold proteins Slx4 and Rtt107 limit checkpoint signalling at a persistent double-strand DNA break (DSB) and at uncapped telomeres. We found that Slx4 is recruited within a few kilobases of an irreparable DSB, through the interaction with Rtt107 and the multi-BRCT domain scaffold Dpb11. In the absence of Slx4 or Rtt107, Rad9 binding near the irreparable DSB is increased, leading to robust checkpoint signalling and slower nucleolytic degradation of the 5' strand. Importantly, in slx4Δ sae2Δ double mutant cells these phenotypes are exacerbated, causing a severe Rad9-dependent defect in DSB repair. Our study sheds new light on the molecular mechanism that coordinates the processing and repair of DSBs with DNA damage checkpoint signalling, preserving genome integrity.

Indexed as

DNA Breaks, Double-StrandedCamptothecinCell Cycle ProteinsDNA-Binding ProteinsDNA Repair EnzymesEndodeoxyribonucleasesEndonucleasesMethyl MethanesulfonateMutationNuclear ProteinsSaccharomyces cerevisiaeSaccharomyces cerevisiae ProteinsSignal TransductionTelomereTopoisomerase I InhibitorsCamptothecinCell Cycle ProteinsDNA-Binding ProteinsDNA Repair EnzymesEndodeoxyribonucleasesEndonucleasesMethyl MethanesulfonateMUS81 protein, S cerevisiaeNuclear ProteinsRAD1 protein, S cerevisiaerad9 proteinRTT107 protein, S cerevisiaeSaccharomyces cerevisiae ProteinsSAE2 protein, S cerevisiaeSLX1 protein, S cerevisiaeSLX4 protein, S cerevisiaeTopoisomerase I Inhibitors

Identifiers

PMID26490958
PMCPMC4737138
OpenAlexW2235069458

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.