ArticleDNA repair2021
Impact of DNA sequences on DNA 'opening' by the Rad4/XPC nucleotide excision repair complex.
Article in DNA repair, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evidence for intrinsic DNA dynamics and deformability in damage sensing by the Rad4/XPC nucleotide excision repair complex.Nucleic acids research · 2025Article
- Utilizing biological experimental data and molecular dynamics for the classification of mutational hotspots through machine learning.Bioinformatics advances · 2024Article
- Structural modeling and analyses of genetic variations in the human XPC nucleotide excision repair protein.Journal of biomolecular structure & dynamics · 2023Article
- "Flexible hinge" dynamics in mismatched DNA revealed by fluorescence correlation spectroscopy.Journal of biological physics · 2022Article
- The DNA damage-sensing NER repair factor XPC-RAD23B does not recognize bulky DNA lesions with a missing nucleotide opposite the lesion.DNA repair · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Rad4/XPC recognizes diverse DNA lesions to initiate nucleotide excision repair (NER). However, NER propensities among lesions vary widely and repair-resistant lesions are persistent and thus highly mutagenic. Rad4 recognizes repair-proficient lesions by unwinding ('opening') the damaged DNA site. Such 'opening' is also observed on a normal DNA sequence containing consecutive C/G's (CCC/GGG) when tethered to Rad4 to prevent protein diffusion. However, it was unknown if such tethering-facilitated DNA 'opening' could occur on any DNA or if certain structures/sequences would resist being 'opened'. Here, we report that DNA containing alternating C/G's (CGC/GCG) failed to be opened even when tethered; instead, Rad4 bound in a 180°-reversed manner, capping the DNA end. Fluorescence lifetime studies of DNA conformations in solution showed that CCC/GGG exhibits local pre-melting that is absent in CGC/GCG. In MD simulations, CGC/GCG failed to engage Rad4 to promote 'opening' contrary to CCC/GGG. Altogether, our study illustrates how local sequences can impact DNA recognition by Rad4/XPC and how certain DNA sites resist being 'opened' even with Rad4 held at that site indefinitely. The contrast between CCC/GGG and CGC/GCG sequences in Rad4-DNA recognition may help decipher a lesion's mutagenicity in various genomic sequence contexts to explain lesion-determined mutational hot and cold spots.
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.