ReviewSeminars in cell & developmental biology2021
Making Choices: DNA Replication Fork Recovery Mechanisms.
Review in Seminars in cell & developmental biology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 45 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
45 citing papers in PubMed, 78 citations in OpenAlex.
- Sex and base excision repair as key susceptibility factors for alkylation-induced mutations, toxicity and hepatic cancer.DNA repair · 2026Article
- Oxidative base damage to telomeres sensitizes cancer cells to ATR inhibition.Communications biology · 2026Article
- Article
- Multiomics profiling reveals the adaptive responses of largemouth bass to high temperature stress.Genome biology · 2026Article
- Long-term exposure to the ethanol-derived metabolite acetaldehyde elevates structural genomic alterations but not base substitutions.Communications biology · 2026Article
- Reactive Oxygen Species: Molecular Mechanisms, Cellular Targets, and Implications for Genomic Stability.BioMed research international · 2026Review
- Overcoming natural replication barriers formed by DNA structures and the role of repositioning to the nuclear periphery.DNA repair · 2025Review
- The INO80 chromatin remodeller facilitates DNA damage bypass via postreplicative gap repair.The EMBO journal · 2025Article
- Human TLS DNA polymerase: saviors or threats under replication stress?Molecular and cellular biochemistry · 2025Review
- Sex and Alkyladenine DNA Glycosylase Expression are Key Susceptibility Factors for NDMA-induced Mutations, Toxicity, and Cancer.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025Article
- Article
- Article
- Review
- DNA polymerase zeta can efficiently replicate structures formed by AT/TA repeat sequences and prevent their deletion.Nucleic acids research · 2025Article
- Combined inhibition of RAD51 and CHK1 causes synergistic toxicity in cisplatin resistant cancer cells by triggering replication fork collapse.International journal of cancer · 2025Article
- Review
- An integrative structural study of the human full-length RAD52 at 2.2 Å resolution.Communications biology · 2024Article
- Helicase HELQ: Molecular Characters Fit for DSB Repair Function.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024Review
- Functional characterization of single nucleotide polymorphic variants of DNA repair enzyme NEIL1 in South Asian populations.DNA repair · 2024Article
- Microsatellite break-induced replication generates highly mutagenized extrachromosomal circular DNAs.NAR cancer · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
DNA replication is laden with obstacles that slow, stall, collapse, and break DNA replication forks. At each obstacle, there is a decision to be made whether to bypass the lesion, repair or restart the damaged fork, or to protect stalled forks from further demise. Each "decision" draws upon multitude of proteins participating in various mechanisms that allow repair and restart of replication forks. Specific functions for many of these proteins have been described and an understanding of how they come together in supporting replication forks is starting to emerge. Many questions, however, remain regarding selection of the mechanisms that enable faithful genome duplication and how "normal" intermediates in these mechanisms are sometimes funneled into "rogue" processes that destabilize the genome and lead to cancer, cell death, and emergence of chemotherapeutic resistance. In this review we will discuss molecular mechanisms of DNA damage bypass and replication fork protection and repair. We will specifically focus on the key players that define which mechanism is employed including: PCNA and its control by posttranslational modifications, translesion synthesis DNA polymerases, molecular motors that catalyze reversal of stalled replication forks, proteins that antagonize fork reversal and protect reversed forks from nucleolytic degradation, and the machinery of homologous recombination that helps to reestablish broken forks. We will also discuss risks to genome integrity inherent in each of these mechanisms.
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.