ArticleOncotarget2016
Expression of MLL-AF4 or AF4-MLL fusions does not impact the efficiency of DNA damage repair.
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.
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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 26 citations in OpenAlex.
- Genetic and Epigenetic Biomarkers Associated with Early Relapse in Pediatric Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia: A Focused Bioinformatics Study on DNA-Repair Genes.Biomedicines · 2024Article
- PCR-Based Strategy for Introducing CRISPR/Cas9 Machinery into Hematopoietic Cell Lines.Cancers · 2023Article
- Application of CRISPR/Cas9 Technology in Cancer Treatment: A Future Direction.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2023Review
- Applications of CRISPR-Cas9 as an Advanced Genome Editing System in Life Sciences.Biotech (Basel (Switzerland)) · 2021Review
- Integrative methylome-transcriptome analysis unravels cancer cell vulnerabilities in infant MLL-rearranged B cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia.The Journal of clinical investigation · 2021Article
- CRISPR to fix bad blood: a new tool in basic and clinical hematology.Haematologica · 2019Review
- Nucleotide excision repair is a predictor of early relapse in pediatric acute lymphoblastic leukemia.BMC medical genomics · 2018Article
- Targeted genome editing in acute lymphoblastic leukemia: a review.BMC biotechnology · 2018Review
- Heterozygous carriers of germline c.657_661del5 founder mutation inHaematologica · 2018Article
- Molecular processes involved in B cell acute lymphoblastic leukaemia.Cellular and molecular life sciences : CMLS · 2018Review
- The AF4-MLL fusion transiently augments multilineage hematopoietic engraftment but is not sufficient to initiate leukemia in cord blood CD34Oncotarget · 2017Article
- Efficient Recreation of t(11;22) EWSR1-FLI1Stem cell reports · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
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
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.