ReviewJournal of radiation research2021
Implications of the germline variants of DNA damage response genes detected by cancer precision medicine for radiological risk communication and cancer therapy decisions.
Review in Journal of radiation research, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Clonal Hematopoiesis and Solid Cancers.Cancer science · 2025Review
- Data Science Opportunities To Improve Radiotherapy Planning and Clinical Decision Making.Seminars in radiation oncology · 2024Review
- A genomic score to predict local control among patients with brain metastases managed with radiation.Neuro-oncology · 2023Article
- Targeted delivery of Dbait by an artificial extracellular vesicle for improved radiotherapy sensitivity of esophageal cancer.American journal of cancer research · 2023Article
- Meiotic chromosome organization and its role in recombination and cancer.Current topics in developmental biology · 2023Review
- Revisiting Secondary Information Related to Pharmacogenetic Testing.Frontiers in genetics · 2021Article
- Intramedullary Glioblastoma as One of Multiple Radiation-Induced Neoplasms.Case reports in oncologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Large-scale cancer-associated gene testing is now being rapidly incorporated into clinical settings, and is leading to incidental identification of the germline variants present in cancer patients. Because many cancer susceptibility genes are related to DNA damage response and repair, the variants may reflect not only the susceptibility to cancer but also the genetically defined radiation sensitivity of the patients and their relatives. When the presence of a certain germline variant increases the risk for developing radiation toxicity or radiation-induced secondary cancers, it will greatly influence the clinical decision-making. In order to achieve optimal radiological risk communication and to select the best cancer management for a given patient based on information from gene testing, healthcare professionals including genetic counselors, risk communicators and clinicians need to increase their knowledge of the health effects of various genetic variants. While germline loss-of-function mutations in both of the alleles of the DNA damage response genes cause rare hereditary diseases characterized by extreme hypersensitivity to radiation, the health effects of the carriers who have germline variants in one allele of such genes would be a matter of debate, especially when the significance of the variants is currently unknown. In this review, we describe the clinical significance of the genetic variants of the important DNA damage response genes, including ATM and TP53, and discuss how we can apply current knowledge to the management of cancer patients and their relatives from a radiological point of view.
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.