Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31481797›Full record

ReviewNature cell biology2019

Nuclear actin filaments in DNA repair dynamics.

Christopher Patrick Caridi, Matthias Plessner, Robert Grosse, Irene Chiolo

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Nature cell biology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 79 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
79citing papers in PubMed
–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

79 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Alterations of actin in aging.Journal of cell science · 2026
    Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Recent advances in nuclear actin research.Nucleus (Austin, Tex.) · 2025
    Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Exploring Shootin1's oncogenic role withinTurkish journal of biology = Turk biyoloji dergisi · 2025
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review

19 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

4 authors.

Christopher Patrick CaridiMolecular and Computational Biology Department, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Matthias PlessnerInstitute of Experimental and Clinical Pharmacology and Toxicology, University of Freiburg, Freiburg im Breisgau, Germany.
Robert GrosseInstitute of Experimental and Clinical Pharmacology and Toxicology, University of Freiburg, Freiburg im Breisgau, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3380-5273
Irene ChioloMolecular and Computational Biology Department, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA. chiolo@usc.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3080-550X

Funding

Roles of nuclear architecture and phase separation in heterochromatin repair dynamicsR01GM117376 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA · PI CHIOLO, IRENE E · 2015 to 2023
$3.3M
NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM117376
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Recent development of innovative tools for live imaging of actin filaments (F-actin) enabled the detection of surprising nuclear structures responding to various stimuli, challenging previous models that actin is substantially monomeric in the nucleus. We review these discoveries, focusing on double-strand break (DSB) repair responses. These studies revealed a remarkable network of nuclear filaments and regulatory mechanisms coordinating chromatin dynamics with repair progression and led to a paradigm shift by uncovering the directed movement of repair sites.

Indexed as

Actin CytoskeletonActinsAnimalsCell NucleusChromatinDNA Breaks, Double-StrandedDNA RepairHumansActinsChromatin

Identifiers

PMID31481797
PMCPMC6736642

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.