Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28655905›Full record

ReviewNature reviews. Molecular cell biology2017

Mechanisms of DNA-protein crosslink repair.

Julian Stingele, Roberto Bellelli, Simon J Boulton

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Nature reviews. Molecular cell biology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 164 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
164citing papers in PubMed
13.0field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

164 citing papers in PubMed, 294 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Cross-species incompatibilities offer new insights into the functional consequences of satellite DNA evolution.Chromosome research : an international journal on the molecular, supramolecular and evolutionary aspects of chromosome biology · 2026
    Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Article

104 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

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Julian StingeleThe Francis Crick Institute, 1 Midland Road, London NW1 1AT, UK.
Roberto BellelliThe Francis Crick Institute, 1 Midland Road, London NW1 1AT, UK.
Simon J BoultonThe Francis Crick Institute, 1 Midland Road, London NW1 1AT, UK.
The Francis Crick Institute · GB

Funding

Cancer Research UK 11581
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Covalent DNA-protein crosslinks (DPCs, also known as protein adducts) of topoisomerases and other proteins with DNA are highly toxic DNA lesions. Of note, chemical agents that induce DPCs include widely used classes of chemotherapeutics. Their bulkiness blocks virtually every chromatin-based process and makes them intractable for repair by canonical repair pathways. Distinct DPC repair pathways employ unique points of attack and are crucial for the maintenance of genome stability. Tyrosyl-DNA phosphodiesterases (TDPs) directly hydrolyse the covalent linkage between protein and DNA. The MRE11-RAD50-NBS1 (MRN) nuclease complex targets the DNA component of DPCs, excising the fragment affected by the lesion, whereas proteases of the spartan (SPRTN)/weak suppressor of SMT3 protein 1 (Wss1) family target the protein component. Loss of these pathways renders cells sensitive to DPC-inducing chemotherapeutics, and DPC repair pathways are thus attractive targets for combination cancer therapy.

Indexed as

DNA DamageDNA RepairAnimalsAntineoplastic AgentsDNA AdductsDNA-Binding ProteinsGenomic InstabilityHumansNeoplasmsAntineoplastic AgentsDNA AdductsDNA-Binding Proteins

Identifiers

PMID28655905
OpenAlexW2731454206

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.