ArticleNature communications2026
Asymmetric attrition and secondary chromosome destabilization after double-strand breaks in human embryonic development.
Article in Nature communications, 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
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
DNA repair in human embryos is poorly understood, and double-strand breaks (DSBs) can cause chromosome loss. We show that chromosomal alterations relative to an induced DSB are asymmetric: acentric arms show complementary gains and losses, while centric arms are biased toward losses. Centromeric to the cut site secondary breakage and attrition is extensive. In contrast, break sites at acentric arms are conserved with no secondary breakage. These differences reflect differential forces at the mitotic spindle. Telomeric arms detach from the pro-metaphase spindle while centric truncated chromosomes lag during anaphase, suggesting that the DSB impedes sister chromatid separation. Secondary breakage near the centromere concordant with extensive attrition at the DSB site indicates a DSB can destabilize a chromosome without end-joining of sister chromatids. These results highlight the risks of chromosomal-scale changes in CRISPR-Cas9 genome editing and show that a single DSB can destabilize a human embryo chromosome independent of fusion-breakage cycles.
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.