ArticleLife science alliance2024
The type of DNA damage response after decitabine treatment depends on the level of DNMT activity.
Article in Life science alliance, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- DNA methyltransferase inhibitors in oncology: clinical progress, limitations and future directions.Epigenomics · 2026Review
- Advances and Applications of Spatial Proteomics: From Organellar Maps to Clinical Translation.Chembiochem : a European journal of chemical biology · 2026Review
- DNA methyltransferase 1 correlates with immune modulation in pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Probiotics and the Gut-Brain Axis: Emerging Therapeutic Strategies for Epilepsy and Depression Comorbidity.Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Decitabine and azacytidine are considered as epigenetic drugs that induce DNA methyltransferase (DNMT)-DNA crosslinks, resulting in DNA hypomethylation and damage. Although they are already applied against myeloid cancers, important aspects of their mode of action remain unknown, highly limiting their clinical potential. Using a combinatorial approach, we reveal that the efficacy profile of both compounds primarily depends on the level of induced DNA damage. Under low DNMT activity, only decitabine has a substantial impact. Conversely, when DNMT activity is high, toxicity and cellular response to both compounds are dramatically increased, but do not primarily depend on DNA hypomethylation or RNA-associated processes. By investigating proteome dynamics on chromatin, we show that decitabine induces a strictly DNMT-dependent multifaceted DNA damage response based on chromatin recruitment, but not expression-level changes of repair-associated proteins. The choice of DNA repair pathway hereby depends on the severity of decitabine-induced DNA lesions. Although under moderate DNMT activity, mismatch (MMR), base excision (BER), and Fanconi anaemia-dependent DNA repair combined with homologous recombination are activated in response to decitabine, high DNMT activity and therefore immense replication stress induce activation of MMR and BER followed by non-homologous end joining.
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.