Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32635505›Full record

ReviewCancers2020

Autophagy Roles in Genome Maintenance.

Susanna Ambrosio, Barbara Majello

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Cancers, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing 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

23 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Autophagy in Melanoma: Molecular Mechanisms and Therapeutic Perspectives.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026
    Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Targeting Lysosomes for Enhanced Anti-Cancer Therapeutics and Immune Response.International journal of biological sciences · 2026
    Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Autophagy and tumorigenesis.The FEBS journal · 2022
    Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Autophagy and the hallmarks of aging.Ageing research reviews · 2021
    Review
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.

Susanna AmbrosioTelethon Institute of Genetics and Medicine (TIGEM), 80078 Pozzuoli, Naples, Italy.
Barbara MajelloDepartment of Biology, University of Naples 'Federico II', 80138 Naples, Italy.ORCID 0000-0003-2789-3585

Funding

Associazione Italiana per la Ricerca sul Cancro I.G. 23066
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In recent years, a considerable correlation has emerged between autophagy and genome integrity. A range of mechanisms appear to be involved where autophagy participates in preventing genomic instability, as well as in DNA damage response and cell fate decision. These initial findings have attracted particular attention in the context of malignancy; however, the crosstalk between autophagy and DNA damage response is just beginning to be explored and key questions remain that need to be addressed, to move this area of research forward and illuminate the overall consequence of targeting this process in human therapies. Here we present current knowledge on the complex crosstalk between autophagy and genome integrity and discuss its implications for cancer cell survival and response to therapy.

Indexed as

autophagycancer therapyDNA damage repairDNA damage response

Identifiers

PMID32635505
PMCPMC7407194

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.