ArticleNucleic acids research2024
Towards the genomic sequence code of DNA fragility for machine learning.
Article in Nucleic acids research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Prior knowledge on context-driven DNA fragmentation probabilities can improve de novo genome assembly algorithms.BMC bioinformatics · 2025Article
- Towards the genomic sequence code of DNA fragility for machine learning.Nucleic acids research · 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Genomic DNA breakages and the subsequent insertion and deletion mutations are important contributors to genome instability and linked diseases. Unlike the research in point mutations, the relationship between DNA sequence context and the propensity for strand breaks remains elusive. Here, by analyzing the differences and commonalities across myriads of genomic breakage datasets, we extract the sequence-linked rules and patterns behind DNA fragility. We show the overall deconvolution of the sequence influence into short-, mid- and long-range effects, and the stressor-dependent differences in defining the range and compositional effects on DNA fragility. We summarize and release our feature compendium as a library that can be seamlessly incorporated into genomic machine learning procedures, where DNA fragility is of concern, and train a generalized DNA fragility model on cancer-associated breakages. Structural variants (SVs) tend to stabilize regions in which they emerge, with the effect most pronounced for pathogenic SVs. In contrast, the effects of chromothripsis are seen across regions less prone to breakages. We find that viral integration may bring genome fragility, particularly for cancer-associated viruses. Overall, this work offers novel insights into the genomic sequence basis of DNA fragility and presents a powerful machine learning resource to further enhance our understanding of genome (in)stability and evolution.
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.