Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33279816›Full record

ReviewCurrent opinion in genetics & development2021

Structure-forming repeats and their impact on genome stability.

Rebecca E Brown, Catherine H Freudenreich

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Current opinion in genetics & development, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 42 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
42citing 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

42 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Disruption of RNA metabolism and its impact on protein homeostasis.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2026
    Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Two Species of Wild Long-Fruited Jute (International journal of molecular sciences · 2026
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Emerging drivers of DNA repeat expansions.Biochemical Society transactions · 2025
    Review
  19. Review
  20. Article
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.

Rebecca E BrownProgram in Genetics, Tufts University Graduate School of Biomedical Sciences, Boston, MA 02111, USA.
Catherine H FreudenreichDepartment of Biology, Tufts University, Medford, MA 02155, USA; Program in Genetics, Tufts University Graduate School of Biomedical Sciences, Boston, MA 02111, USA. Electronic address: catherine.freudenreich@tufts.edu.

Funding

Fork Restart at Replication Barriers and Effects on Genome StabilityR01GM122880 · NIGMS · TUFTS UNIVERSITY MEDFORD · PI FREUDENREICH, CATHERINE H · 2017 to 2020
$1.4M
NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM122880
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Repetitive sequences throughout the genome are a major source of endogenous DNA damage, due to the propensity of many of them to form alternative non-B DNA structures that can interfere with replication, transcription, and DNA repair. These repetitive sequences are prone to breakage (fragility) and instability (changes in repeat number). Repeat fragility and expansions are linked to several diseases, including many cancers and neurodegenerative diseases, hence the importance of understanding the mechanisms that cause genome instability and contribute to these diseases. This review focuses on recent findings of mechanisms causing repeat fragility and instability, new associations between repeat expansions and genetic diseases, and potential therapeutic options to target repeat expansions.

Indexed as

Transcription, GeneticDNADNA DamageDNA RepairDNA ReplicationGenomeGenomic InstabilityHumansNucleic Acid ConformationRepetitive Sequences, Nucleic AcidDNA

Identifiers

PMID33279816
PMCPMC8084909

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.