ArticleGenome biology2019
Modeling double strand break susceptibility to interrogate structural variation in cancer.
Article in Genome biology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 28 citations in OpenAlex.
- Using the DNA language model, GROVER, to parse effects of sequence, chromatin and regulatory features on genome stability.Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) · 2026Article
- DNA shape and epigenomics distinguish the mechanistic origin of human genomic structural variations.Nucleic acids research · 2025Article
- ChromInSight: Revealing DNA Double-Strand Breaks Through Chromatin Structural Insights With an Interpretable Graph Neural Network Framework.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2025Article
- Towards the genomic sequence code of DNA fragility for machine learning.Nucleic acids research · 2024Article
- A graph neural network-based interpretable framework reveals a novel DNA fragility-associated chromatin structural unit.Genome biology · 2023Article
- G-Quadruplex Structures Are Key Modulators of Somatic Structural Variants in Cancers.Cancer research · 2023Article
- Long-read sequencing unveils high-resolution HPV integration and its oncogenic progression in cervical cancer.Nature communications · 2022Article
- Breaking the paradigm: early insights from mammalian DNA breakomes.The FEBS journal · 2022Review
- Article
- Genome-wide detection of DNA double-strand breaks by in-suspension BLISS.Nature protocols · 2020Article
- Review
- Vitamin D in Triple-Negative and BRCA1-Deficient Breast Cancer-Implications for Pathogenesis and Therapy.International journal of molecular sciences · 2020Review
- Modeling double strand break susceptibility to interrogate structural variation in cancer.Genome biology · 2019Article
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundStructural variants (SVs) are known to play important roles in a variety of cancers, but their origins and functional consequences are still poorly understood. Many SVs are thought to emerge from errors in the repair processes following DNA double strand breaks (DSBs).
resultsWe used experimentally quantified DSB frequencies in cell lines with matched chromatin and sequence features to derive the first quantitative genome-wide models of DSB susceptibility. These models are accurate and provide novel insights into the mutational mechanisms generating DSBs. Models trained in one cell type can be successfully applied to others, but a substantial proportion of DSBs appear to reflect cell type-specific processes. Using model predictions as a proxy for susceptibility to DSBs in tumors, many SV-enriched regions appear to be poorly explained by selectively neutral mutational bias alone. A substantial number of these regions show unexpectedly high SV breakpoint frequencies given their predicted susceptibility to mutation and are therefore credible targets of positive selection in tumors. These putatively positively selected SV hotspots are enriched for genes previously shown to be oncogenic. In contrast, several hundred regions across the genome show unexpectedly low levels of SVs, given their relatively high susceptibility to mutation. These novel coldspot regions appear to be subject to purifying selection in tumors and are enriched for active promoters and enhancers.
conclusionsWe conclude that models of DSB susceptibility offer a rigorous approach to the inference of SVs putatively subject to selection in tumors.
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.