Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28187286›Full record

ReviewCell2017

Endogenous DNA Damage as a Source of Genomic Instability in Cancer.

Anthony Tubbs, André Nussenzweig

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Cell, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 875 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
875citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

875 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. DNA Repair Mechanisms.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2027
    Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Genome stability disrupted by the circRBM39(4,5,6)-RPA2 axis represses breast tumorigenesis.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2026
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. TALAVE in Breast Cancer:bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026
    Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review

815 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.

Anthony TubbsLaboratory of Genome Integrity, NIH, Bethesda, MD 20892, USA.
André NussenzweigLaboratory of Genome Integrity, NIH, Bethesda, MD 20892, USA. Electronic address: andre_nussenzweig@nih.gov.

Funding

DNA RepairZIABC010283 · NCI · DIVISION OF BASIC SCIENCES - NCI · PI NUSSENZWEIG, ANDRE A. · 2009 to 2025
$27.0M
Relationship between DNA damage detection and signalingZIABC010959 · NCI · DIVISION OF BASIC SCIENCES - NCI · PI NUSSENZWEIG, ANDRE A. · 2009 to 2025
$27.0M
Intramural NIH HHS ZIA BC010283Intramural NIH HHS ZIA BC010959
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Genome instability, defined as higher than normal rates of mutation, is a double-edged sword. As a source of genetic diversity and natural selection, mutations are beneficial for evolution. On the other hand, genomic instability can have catastrophic consequences for age-related diseases such as cancer. Mutations arise either from inactivation of DNA repair pathways or in a repair-competent background due to genotoxic stress from celluar processes such as transcription and replication that overwhelm high-fidelity DNA repair. Here, we review recent studies that shed light on endogenous sources of mutation and epigenomic features that promote genomic instability during cancer evolution.

Indexed as

DNA DamageGenomic InstabilityChromatinDNA RepairDNA ReplicationHumansMutationNeoplasmsTranscriptional ActivationChromatincancerDNA damageDNA repairDNA replicationGenome instabilitymutagenesistranscription

Identifiers

PMID28187286
PMCPMC6591730

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.