ArticleThe Journal of biological chemistry2016
Transcription Factors and DNA Repair Enzymes Compete for Damaged Promoter Sites.
Article in The Journal of biological chemistry, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 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
15 citing papers in PubMed, 26 citations in OpenAlex.
- 8-Oxoguanine: A Lesion, an Epigenetic Mark, or a Molecular Signal?International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Review
- Article
- Individuals with intellectual disability have an increased burden ofmedRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2025Article
- Bioinformatic and clinical experimental assay uncovers resistance and susceptibility mechanisms of human glioblastomas to temozolomide and identifies new combined and individual survival biomarkers outperformingTherapeutic advances in medical oncology · 2024Article
- Quantification and Mapping of Alkylation in the Human Genome Reveal Single Nucleotide Resolution Precursors of Mutational Signatures.ACS central science · 2023Article
- Direct hOGG1-Myc interactions inhibit hOGG1 catalytic activity and recruit Myc to its promoters under oxidative stress.Nucleic acids research · 2022Article
- Review
- Regulation of GC box activity by 8-oxoguanine.Redox biology · 2021Article
- Preferential CEBP binding to T:G mismatches and increased C-to-T human somatic mutations.Nucleic acids research · 2021Article
- Ligand-induced gene activation is associated with oxidative genome damage whose repair is required for transcription.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2020Article
- HDAC1 modulates OGG1-initiated oxidative DNA damage repair in the aging brain and Alzheimer's disease.Nature communications · 2020Article
- AP endonuclease 1 (Apex1) influences brain development linking oxidative stress and DNA repair.Cell death & disease · 2019Article
- Roles of DNA repair enzyme OGG1 in innate immunity and its significance for lung cancer.Pharmacology & therapeutics · 2019Review
- 8-Oxoguanine DNA glycosylase 1: Beyond repair of the oxidatively modified base lesions.Redox biology · 2018Review
- Oxidized Guanine Base Lesions Function in 8-Oxoguanine DNA Glycosylase-1-mediated Epigenetic Regulation of Nuclear Factor κB-driven Gene Expression.The Journal of biological chemistry · 2016Article
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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Transcriptional regulation is a tightly regulated, vital process. The transcription factor cyclic AMP-response element-binding protein 1 (CREB1) controls ∼25% of the mammalian transcriptome by binding the CREB1 binding site consensus sequence (CRE) sequence (TGACGTCA). DNA lesions within CRE modulate CREB1 binding negatively and positively. Because appropriate DNA lesions also interact with base excision repair proteins, we investigated whether CREB1 and repair glycosylases compete with each other. We incubated 39-mer CRE-containing double-stranded oligonucleotides with recombinant CREB1 alone or with UNG2 or OGG1, followed by EMSA. The CpG islet within CRE was modified to contain a G/U or 8-oxoG (°G)/C mispair. OGG1 and CREB1 reversibly competed for CRE containing an °G/C pair. Also, OGG1 blocked CREB1 from dimerizing by 69%, even when total CREB1 binding was reduced only by 20-30%. In contrast, bound CREB1 completely prevented access to G/U-containing CRE by UNG2 and, therefore, to base excision repair, whereas UNG2 exposure prevented CREB1 binding. CREB1 dimerization was unaffected by UNG2 when CREB1 bound to CRE, but was greatly reduced by prior UNG2 exposure. To explore physiological relevance, we microinjected zebrafish embryos with the same oligonucleotides, as a sink for endogenous CREB1. As predicted, microinjection with unmodified or lesion-containing CRE, but not scrambled CRE or scrambled CRE with a G/U mispair, resulted in increased embryo death. However, only the G/U mispair in native CRE resulted in substantial developmental abnormalities, thus confirming the danger of unrepaired G/U mispairs in promoters. In summary, CREB1 and DNA glycosylases compete for damaged CRE in vitro and in vivo, thus blocking DNA repair and resulting in transcriptional misregulation leading to abnormal development.
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.