ReviewCurrent issues in molecular biology2026
Functional DNA Repair Profiling in Translational Medicine: Benchmarking Comet, γH2AX, and NGS Assays Against Clinical Constraints.
Review in Current issues in molecular biology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Quantifying DNA repair capacity (DRC) is pivotal for stratifying patients in oncology and autoimmune disorders, yet methodological heterogeneity compromises data reproducibility. While basic research relies on genetically encoded reporters, translational settings demand robust assays compatible with biobanked material, particularly Peripheral Blood Mononuclear Cells (PBMCs). This review benchmarks functional DNA repair assays-ranging from alkaline/neutral comet variants and high-content foci imaging (γH2AX/53BP1) to emerging Next-generation sequencing (NGS)-based break mapping-against the rigors of clinical application. We critically evaluate sensitivity, specificity, and throughput, identifying artifacts introduced by cryopreservation, steroid therapy, and oxidative stress. Furthermore, we propose a "Minimum Reporting Standard" checklist to harmonize DRC quantification. By distinguishing established validation tools from experimental artifacts, this framework aligns assay selection with specific biological endpoints and clinical feasibility.
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.