Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27119507›Full record

ArticleOncotarget2016

Expression of MLL-AF4 or AF4-MLL fusions does not impact the efficiency of DNA damage repair.

Julio Castaño, Ana B Herrero, Aldeheid Bursen, Federico González, Rolf Marschalek, Norma C Gutiérrez, Pablo Menendez

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Oncotarget, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
2.1field-weighted citation impact, top 13% 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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 26 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Molecular processes involved in B cell acute lymphoblastic leukaemia.Cellular and molecular life sciences : CMLS · 2018
    Review
  11. Article
  12. 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

7 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.

Julio CastañoJosep Carreras Leukemia Research Institute, Department of Biomedicine, School of Medicine, University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.
Ana B HerreroHematology Department, University Hospital of Salamanca, IBSAL, IBMCC (USAL-CSIC), Salamanca, Spain.
Aldeheid BursenInstitute Pharmaceutical Biology, Goethe-University, Frankfurt/Main, Germany.
Federico GonzálezIBEC - Institute for Bioengineering of Catalonia, Barcelona, Spain.
Rolf MarschalekInstitute Pharmaceutical Biology, Goethe-University, Frankfurt/Main, Germany.
Norma C GutiérrezHematology Department, University Hospital of Salamanca, IBSAL, IBMCC (USAL-CSIC), Salamanca, Spain.
Pablo MenendezJosep Carreras Leukemia Research Institute, Department of Biomedicine, School of Medicine, University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.
Goethe University Frankfurt · DEInstituto de Investigación Biomédica de Salamanca · ESInstitute for Bioengineering of Catalonia · ESJosep Carreras Leukaemia Research Institute · ESUniversitat de Barcelona · ES

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The most frequent rearrangement of the human MLL gene fuses MLL to AF4 resulting in high-risk infant B-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia (B-ALL). MLL fusions are also hallmark oncogenic events in secondary acute myeloid leukemia. They are a direct consequence of mis-repaired DNA double strand breaks (DNA-DSBs) due to defects in the DNA damage response associated with exposure to topoisomerase-II poisons such as etoposide. It has been suggested that MLL fusions render cells susceptible to additional chromosomal damage upon exposure to etoposide. Conversely, the genome-wide mutational landscape in MLL-rearranged infant B-ALL has been reported silent. Thus, whether MLL fusions compromise the recognition and/or repair of DNA damage remains unanswered. Here, the fusion proteins MLL-AF4 (MA4) and AF4-MLL (A4M) were CRISPR/Cas9-genome edited in the AAVS1 locus of HEK293 cells as a model to study MLL fusion-mediated DNA-DSB formation/repair. Repair kinetics of etoposide- and ionizing radiation-induced DSBs was identical in WT, MA4- and A4M-expressing cells, as revealed by flow cytometry, by immunoblot for γH2AX and by comet assay. Accordingly, no differences were observed between WT, MA4- and A4M-expressing cells in the presence of master proteins involved in non-homologous end-joining (NHEJ; i.e.KU86, KU70), alternative-NHEJ (Alt-NHEJ; i.e.LigIIIa, WRN and PARP1), and homologous recombination (HR, i.e.RAD51). Moreover, functional assays revealed identical NHEJ and HR efficiency irrespective of the genotype. Treatment with etoposide consistently induced cell cycle arrest in S/G2/M independent of MA4/A4M expression, revealing a proper activation of the DNA damage checkpoints. Collectively, expression of MA4 or A4M does neither influence DNA signaling nor DNA-DSB repair.

Indexed as

DNA DamageDNA End-Joining RepairCell Cycle CheckpointsComet AssayDNA Breaks, Double-StrandedEtoposideGene ExpressionHEK293 CellsHistonesHomologous RecombinationHumansInfantMyeloid-Lymphoid Leukemia ProteinOncogene Proteins, FusionPrecursor Cell Lymphoblastic Leukemia-LymphomaRadiation, IonizingEtoposideH2AX protein, humanHistonesMLL-AF4 fusion protein, humanMyeloid-Lymphoid Leukemia ProteinOncogene Proteins, FusionAF4.MLLDSBMLL.AF4t(4;11)

Identifiers

PMID27119507
PMCPMC5058691
OpenAlexW2341509152

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.