The DOI matches its Crossref record; 160 of the 162 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; none of the 120 sources its claims cite is checked for support yet.
Neuronal DNA double-strand breaks lead to genome structural variations and 3D genome disruption in neurodegeneration
Open accessAbstract
Persistent DNA double-strand breaks (DSBs) in neurons are an early pathological hallmark of neurodegenerative diseases including Alzheimer's disease (AD), with the potential to disrupt genome integrity. We used single-nucleus RNA-seq in human postmortem prefrontal cortex samples and found that excitatory neurons in AD were enriched for somatic mosaic gene fusions. Gene fusions were particularly enriched in excitatory neurons with DNA damage repair and senescence gene signatures. In addition, somatic genome structural variations and gene fusions were enriched in neurons burdened with DSBs in the CK-p25 mouse model of neurodegeneration. Neurons enriched for DSBs also had elevated levels of cohesin along with progressive multiscale disruption of the 3D genome organization aligned with transcriptional changes in synaptic, neuronal development, and histone genes. Overall, this study demonstrates the disruption of genome stability and the 3D genome organization by DSBs in neurons as pathological steps in the progression of neurodegenerative diseases.
Overview
AI snapshot
Written from the paper’s full text.
TL;DR
Persistent neuronal DNA double-strand breaks are linked to mosaic gene fusions, genome structural variations, and progressive 3D genome disruption in Alzheimer’s disease and mouse neurodegeneration models. These changes are enriched in excitatory neurons with DNA damage/senescence signatures and align with transcriptional changes in synaptic, neuronal development, and histone genes.
Key findings
- In human postmortem prefrontal cortex snRNA-seq (47 ROSMAP participants; 6,180 cells, 5,421 after QC), gene fusions were enriched in AD pathology (adj. p=0.046) and late AD/Braak 5–6 (adj. p=0.00031), particularly in excitatory neurons; this was validated in 10x snRNA-seq of over 2 million cells from 380 individuals (adj. p<0.001).
- In CK-p25 mice, Step 2 neurons were enriched for gene fusions (p=5.8e−16); mate-pair sequencing showed structural variation increases of 22% in γH2AX-high neurons, 241% in Step 2 neurons, and 201% after persistent etoposide-induced DSBs, while acute etoposide did not increase structural variations.
- DSBs were enriched at highly expressed and long genes and at fusion junctions; 25 of 27 recurrent DSB cluster genes appeared in human excitatory neuron fusion calls, and AD GWAS genes were longer and enriched among fusion genes.
- Hi-C showed reduced long-range interactions, ~8.5% of the genome shifting A/B compartments, decreased TAD inclusion ratios, and reduced loop intensities in Step 1/Step 2 neurons; loop loss correlated with downregulated synaptic and neuronal development genes, while histone gene clusters gained de novo loops alongside histone upregulation.
Methods
- Human postmortem prefrontal cortex from ROSMAP: Smart-seq2 snRNA-seq in 47 individuals and 10x snRNA-seq in 2,026,710 cells from 380 individuals; gene fusions called with STAR-Fusion and analyzed by negative binomial regression with cell- and individual-level covariates.
- Mouse and primary neuron models: CK-p25 dox-off induction with FANS gates for NeuN/γH2AX, etoposide-treated primary cortical neurons (acute vs persistent DSBs), and Tau P301S mice; assays included mate-pair sequencing, BLISS, in situ Hi-C, Oxford Nanopore cDNA sequencing, and immunofluorescence/immunohistochemistry.
- Hi-C analyzed with HOMER/Juicer for compartments, TADs, and loops; gene ontology with GOrilla; human RAD21 staining analyzed with linear mixed-effects models.
Limitations
- Stated: gene fusions represent only a subset of genome structural variations; scRNA-seq is sparse and likely underestimates fusions per cell; PCR artifacts and random ligations are difficult to distinguish from true mosaic fusions, with the assumption that AD/control classification and expression enrichments do not modify these artifacts; the study cannot resolve whether 3D genome disruption is caused directly by unresolved DSBs or by structural variations.
- Evident from the text: human findings are cross-sectional associations, and causal inference relies on mouse and etoposide models; the full extent of DNA damage-dependent structural variations would require single-cell long-read genome sequencing.
Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
63 Own result · 51 Not checked yet · 23 Own interpretation · 12 Own method · 3 No basis given
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“we found that gene fusions were significantly enriched in cells from individuals with AD pathology as ascertained by the NIA-Reagan score (pathology diagnosis, AD=1–2 and non-AD=3–4) relative to cells from non-AD individuals (adj. p-value=0.046).”
§ Neuronal DNA double-strand breaks lead to genome structural variations and 3D genome disruption in neurodegeneration > Results > DSB-bearing neurons have mosaic genome structural variations in neurodegeneration
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- The authors state this as an assumption: Gene fusions detected from snRNA-seq reads are a valid proxy for genome structural variations in neurons.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“excitatory neurons with higher expression of genes associated with neuronal identity and synaptic function were depleted for gene fusions in both datasets”
§ Neuronal DNA double-strand breaks lead to genome structural variations and 3D genome disruption in neurodegeneration > Results > DSB-bearing neurons have mosaic genome structural variations in neurodegeneration
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- The authors state this as an assumption: Gene fusions detected from snRNA-seq reads are a valid proxy for genome structural variations in neurons.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“we observed significantly increased gene fusion events (adjusted p-value<0.001) in cells from AD individuals compared to non-AD individuals as ascertained by NIA-Reagan and Braak stage (late-AD versus non/early-AD)”
§ Neuronal DNA double-strand breaks lead to genome structural variations and 3D genome disruption in neurodegeneration > Results > DSB-bearing neurons have mosaic genome structural variations in neurodegeneration
plaincorrelationaln = 380- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- The authors state this as an assumption: Gene fusions detected from snRNA-seq reads are a valid proxy for genome structural variations in neurons.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We identified several gene fusions which also included RDC genes (e.g. CADM2, CTNND2)”
§ Neuronal DNA double-strand breaks lead to genome structural variations and 3D genome disruption in neurodegeneration > Results > Highly expressed genes and long genes are vulnerable sites of genome structural variations.
plainn = 2- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We found that fusion genes from Control, Step 1, and Step 2 neurons had significantly higher expression (from bulk RNA-seq) than expressed genes in neurons”
§ Neuronal DNA double-strand breaks lead to genome structural variations and 3D genome disruption in neurodegeneration > Results > Highly expressed genes and long genes are vulnerable sites of genome structural variations.
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We also found that gene fusions were significantly enriched in cells from late-AD individuals, as defined by the presence of neurofibrillary tangles (NFTs) in their prefrontal cortex (Braak stages 5–6 versus non/early-AD stages 1–4, adj. p-value=0.00031)”
§ Neuronal DNA double-strand breaks lead to genome structural variations and 3D genome disruption in neurodegeneration > Results > DSB-bearing neurons have mosaic genome structural variations in neurodegeneration
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- The authors state this as an assumption: Gene fusions detected from snRNA-seq reads are a valid proxy for genome structural variations in neurons.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“the level of enrichment of DSBs at highly transcribed genes was lower in Step 1 and Step 2 neurons compared to Control”
§ Neuronal DNA double-strand breaks lead to genome structural variations and 3D genome disruption in neurodegeneration > Results > Highly expressed genes and long genes are vulnerable sites of genome structural variations.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We saw a modest increase (22% increase) in the frequency of structural variations in yH2AXhigh neurons compared to neurons with baseline levels of yH2AX”
§ Neuronal DNA double-strand breaks lead to genome structural variations and 3D genome disruption in neurodegeneration > Results > DSB-bearing neurons have mosaic genome structural variations in neurodegeneration
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Analyzing all cells jointly showed significant effects in the same directions but with reduced effect sizes (in the 10x data) for the enrichment of fusions in repair, DNA damage, and senescence-associated cells”
§ Neuronal DNA double-strand breaks lead to genome structural variations and 3D genome disruption in neurodegeneration > Results > DSB-bearing neurons have mosaic genome structural variations in neurodegeneration
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- The authors state this as an assumption: Gene fusions detected from snRNA-seq reads are a valid proxy for genome structural variations in neurons.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Excitatory neurons with higher expression of DNA damage, repair, and senescence-associated gene sets (Table S2, page 5) showed a significant increase in their gene fusion burden in the 10x dataset”
§ Neuronal DNA double-strand breaks lead to genome structural variations and 3D genome disruption in neurodegeneration > Results > DSB-bearing neurons have mosaic genome structural variations in neurodegeneration
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- The authors state this as an assumption: Gene fusions detected from snRNA-seq reads are a valid proxy for genome structural variations in neurons.
- It may state two separate claims as one. 43
- Borderline: one of the tests for a substantial claim is unclear. 1
- The quote only partly states this claim. 3
- Probably not a substantial claim. 39
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“we identified a significant elevation in cohesin complex expression along with a coordinated increase in DNA damage response in excitatory neurons from subjects with high AD pathology in the large-scale snRNA-seq across 427 AD and control individuals”
§ Neuronal DNA double-strand breaks lead to genome structural variations and 3D genome disruption in neurodegeneration > Results > Neurons burdened with DSBs are associated with the disruption of 3D genome organization
plaincorrelationaln = 427- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Across all genes, both higher transcription levels and increased gene length were significantly associated with increased gene fusions”
§ Neuronal DNA double-strand breaks lead to genome structural variations and 3D genome disruption in neurodegeneration > Results > Highly expressed genes and long genes are vulnerable sites of genome structural variations.
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“genes linked to AD by genome-wide association studies (GWAS) were significantly longer than expected (Figure S3F) and were significantly enriched within fusion genes”
§ Neuronal DNA double-strand breaks lead to genome structural variations and 3D genome disruption in neurodegeneration > Results > Highly expressed genes and long genes are vulnerable sites of genome structural variations.
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“in this study we report an increased burden of mosaic gene fusions in excitatory neurons in individuals with AD pathology by calling fusion events in single-cell RNA-seq in human post-mortem samples in each cell independently”
§ Neuronal DNA double-strand breaks lead to genome structural variations and 3D genome disruption in neurodegeneration > Discussion
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
Borderline substantial claim. It is unclear why the paper says it holds. It may state two separate claims as one. The quote only partly states this claim.
- The authors state this as an assumption: Gene fusions detected from snRNA-seq reads are a valid proxy for genome structural variations in neurons.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“neurons with acute DSBs had similar levels of structural variations compared to DMSO-treated baseline neurons, whereas neurons with persistent DSBs had a markedly higher frequency of structural variation (201% increase) similar to that of the increase observed in Step 2 neurons”
§ Neuronal DNA double-strand breaks lead to genome structural variations and 3D genome disruption in neurodegeneration > Results > DSB-bearing neurons have mosaic genome structural variations in neurodegeneration
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Step 2 neurons were significantly enriched for gene fusion calls (p-value=5.8e−16) whereas Step 1 neurons showed a modest increase in gene fusions (p-value > 0.05)”
§ Neuronal DNA double-strand breaks lead to genome structural variations and 3D genome disruption in neurodegeneration > Results > DSB-bearing neurons have mosaic genome structural variations in neurodegeneration
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- The authors state this as an assumption: Gene fusions detected from snRNA-seq reads are a valid proxy for genome structural variations in neurons.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“we observed enrichment of DSBs at the gene fusion junctions with the highest enrichment in Control cells, indicating gene-fusion junctions are frequent DSB locations”
§ Neuronal DNA double-strand breaks lead to genome structural variations and 3D genome disruption in neurodegeneration > Results > Highly expressed genes and long genes are vulnerable sites of genome structural variations.
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“gene fusion frequency increased as a function of pseudo time, along with genes associated with senescence, similar to the Step 2 signature”
§ Neuronal DNA double-strand breaks lead to genome structural variations and 3D genome disruption in neurodegeneration > Results > DSB-bearing neurons have mosaic genome structural variations in neurodegeneration
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- The authors state this as an assumption: Gene fusions detected from snRNA-seq reads are a valid proxy for genome structural variations in neurons.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Step 2 neurons had a much higher frequency of structural variation events (241% increase), whereas the structural variation frequency of Step 1 neurons was similar to that of Control neurons”
§ Neuronal DNA double-strand breaks lead to genome structural variations and 3D genome disruption in neurodegeneration > Results > DSB-bearing neurons have mosaic genome structural variations in neurodegeneration
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“snRNA-seq revealed increased gene expression of another nuclear architectural protein Lamin B1 (Lmnb1) in Step 1 neurons and a subsequent decrease in expression from Step 1 to Step 2”
§ Neuronal DNA double-strand breaks lead to genome structural variations and 3D genome disruption in neurodegeneration > Results > Neurons burdened with DSBs are associated with the disruption of 3D genome organization
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Overall, more loops showed a reduction than a gain in intensity, and loop loss was much more pronounced in Step 2 than in Step 1 neurons”
§ Neuronal DNA double-strand breaks lead to genome structural variations and 3D genome disruption in neurodegeneration > Results > Neurons burdened with DSBs are associated with the disruption of 3D genome organization
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Thereafter, Lamin B1 intensity decreased after 6 weeks of induction, consistent with the snRNA-seq”
§ Neuronal DNA double-strand breaks lead to genome structural variations and 3D genome disruption in neurodegeneration > Results > Neurons burdened with DSBs are associated with the disruption of 3D genome organization
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This analysis revealed an overall significant decrease in the TAD definitions in Step 1 that was exacerbated in Step 2”
§ Neuronal DNA double-strand breaks lead to genome structural variations and 3D genome disruption in neurodegeneration > Results > Neurons burdened with DSBs are associated with the disruption of 3D genome organization
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Reduction in loop intensity was strongly associated with higher percentages of down-regulated genes in both Step 1 and Step 2 neurons and with lower percentages of up-regulated genes”
§ Neuronal DNA double-strand breaks lead to genome structural variations and 3D genome disruption in neurodegeneration > Results > Disruption of the 3D genome organization by DSBs is associated with differential gene regulation.
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The enrichment of DSBs at loop boundaries was lowest in Step 1, followed by Step 2”
§ Neuronal DNA double-strand breaks lead to genome structural variations and 3D genome disruption in neurodegeneration > Results > Neurons burdened with DSBs are associated with the disruption of 3D genome organization
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Hi-C in P301S neurons showed a decreased number of chromatin loops and a significant decrease in TAD integrity as measured by inclusion ratio”
§ Neuronal DNA double-strand breaks lead to genome structural variations and 3D genome disruption in neurodegeneration > Results > Induction of DSBs in neurons is sufficient to disrupt the 3D genome organization
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Overall, there was a net decrease in the intensity of long-range interactions above 1 Mb, in Step 1 neurons. This was even more pronounced in Step 2 neurons with the intensity of long-range interactions decreasing from 0.5 Mb”
§ Neuronal DNA double-strand breaks lead to genome structural variations and 3D genome disruption in neurodegeneration > Results > Neurons burdened with DSBs are associated with the disruption of 3D genome organization
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Immunohistochemistry of Lamin B1 in CK-p25 mice induced for 2 weeks revealed increased Lamin B1 and abnormalities in the structure of Lamin B1 in neurons bearing DSBs.”
§ Neuronal DNA double-strand breaks lead to genome structural variations and 3D genome disruption in neurodegeneration > Results > Neurons burdened with DSBs are associated with the disruption of 3D genome organization
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“approximately 8.5% of the genome shifted compartments and these changes were generally progressive from Step 1 to Step 2”
§ Neuronal DNA double-strand breaks lead to genome structural variations and 3D genome disruption in neurodegeneration > Results > Neurons burdened with DSBs are associated with the disruption of 3D genome organization
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Another upregulated histone gene, H2AFV, codes for H2A.Z, whose increase is associated with persistent DNA damage, brain aging, and is negatively associated with memory formation”
§ Neuronal DNA double-strand breaks lead to genome structural variations and 3D genome disruption in neurodegeneration > Results > Disruption of the 3D genome organization by DSBs is associated with differential gene regulation.
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“we found that several histones were upregulated in human AD in excitatory neurons along with the upregulation of the cohesin complex genes”
§ Neuronal DNA double-strand breaks lead to genome structural variations and 3D genome disruption in neurodegeneration > Results > Disruption of the 3D genome organization by DSBs is associated with differential gene regulation.
plaincorrelationaln = 427- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The 2 hours of treatment with Etoposide was sufficient to induce DSBs, as measured by yH2AX staining (Figure S2G), but not sufficient to accumulate structural variation”
§ Neuronal DNA double-strand breaks lead to genome structural variations and 3D genome disruption in neurodegeneration > Results > DSB-bearing neurons have mosaic genome structural variations in neurodegeneration
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We observed a general loss of TAD definition and loop intensities especially in Step 2 senescence-like neurons along with differential regulation of several genes associated with neuronal identity.”
§ Neuronal DNA double-strand breaks lead to genome structural variations and 3D genome disruption in neurodegeneration > Discussion
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Changes in the 3D genome aligned with transcriptional changes overall, with reduced loop intensities having a striking correlation with the down-regulation of genes.”
§ Neuronal DNA double-strand breaks lead to genome structural variations and 3D genome disruption in neurodegeneration > Discussion
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Overall, our work demonstrates that DNA double-strand breaks lead to mosaic genome structural variations and the disruption of 3D genome organization in neurons.”
§ Neuronal DNA double-strand breaks lead to genome structural variations and 3D genome disruption in neurodegeneration > Discussion
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“These results suggest that the persistent DSBs and delayed repair in Step 1 neurons may increase the chance of repair errors and cause them to transition into Step 2 neurons with increased genome structural variations.”
§ Neuronal DNA double-strand breaks lead to genome structural variations and 3D genome disruption in neurodegeneration > Results > DSB-bearing neurons have mosaic genome structural variations in neurodegeneration
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“loops with increased intensity did not have a consistent relationship with differential gene expression, suggesting that the association between loop gain and gene expression is context-dependent”
§ Neuronal DNA double-strand breaks lead to genome structural variations and 3D genome disruption in neurodegeneration > Results > Disruption of the 3D genome organization by DSBs is associated with differential gene regulation.
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Overall, this study demonstrates the disruption of genome stability and the 3D genome organization by DSBs in neurons as pathological steps in the progression of neurodegenerative diseases.”
- Also stated in: § Introduction · boosted
“Our results demonstrate the disruption of genome stability and the 3D genome organization mediated by DSBs as pathological steps in the progression of neurodegenerative diseases.”
§ Neuronal DNA double-strand breaks lead to genome structural variations and 3D genome disruption in neurodegeneration > Abstract
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- The authors state this as an assumption: Gene fusions detected from snRNA-seq reads are a valid proxy for genome structural variations in neurons.
- Also stated in: § Introduction · boosted
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We show increased gene fusions, genome structural variations, and changes in 3D genome organization in neurons harboring DSBs.”
§ Neuronal DNA double-strand breaks lead to genome structural variations and 3D genome disruption in neurodegeneration > Introduction
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- The authors state this as an assumption: Gene fusions detected from snRNA-seq reads are a valid proxy for genome structural variations in neurons.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“NEHJ is error-prone and can cause genome structural variations, potentially leading to gene fusions with pathological gain or loss of function”
§ Neuronal DNA double-strand breaks lead to genome structural variations and 3D genome disruption in neurodegeneration > Introduction
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [18] Richardson C, and Jasin M (2000). Frequent chromosomal translocations induced by DNA double-strand breaks. Nature 405, 697– 700. 10.1038/35015097. 10864328 source
- Not checked yetcites [19] Ferguson DO, and Alt FW (2001). DNA double strand break repair and chromosomal translocation: Lessons from animal models. Oncogene 20, 5572– 5579. 10.1038/sj.onc.1204767. 11607810 source
- Not checked yetcites [20] Lin C, Yang L, Tanasa B, Hutt K, Ju B. gun, Ohgi K, Zhang J, Rose DW, Fu XD, Glass CK, (2009). Nuclear Receptor-Induced Chromosomal Proximity and DNA Breaks Underlie Specific Translocations in Cancer. Cell 139, 1069– 1083. 10.1016/j.cell.2009.11.030. 19962179 PMC2812435 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“structural variations have the potential to rewire genes with ectopic regulatory elements”
§ Neuronal DNA double-strand breaks lead to genome structural variations and 3D genome disruption in neurodegeneration > Introduction
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [23] Dixon JR, Xu J, Dileep V, Zhan Y, Song F, Le VT, Yardımcı GG, Chakraborty A, Bann DV, Wang Y, (2018). Integrative detection and analysis of structural variation in cancer genomes. Nat. Genet. 10.1038/s41588-018-0195-8. PMC6301019 30202056 source
- Not checked yetcites [24] Xu J, Song F, Lyu H, Kobayashi M, Zhang B, Zhao Z, Hou Y, Wang X, Luan Y, Jia B, (2022). Subtype-specific 3D genome alteration in acute myeloid leukaemia. Nature 611. 10.1038/s41586-022-05365-x. PMC10060167 36289338 source
- Not checked yetcites [25] Botten GA, Zhang Y, Dudnyk K, Kim YJ, Liu X, Sanders JT, Imanci A, Droin N, Cao H, Kaphle P, (2023). Structural variation cooperates with permissive chromatin to control enhancer hijacking–mediated oncogenic transcription. Blood. 10.1182/blood.2022017555. PMC10447518 36947815
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Chromatin accessibility has also been shown to be disrupted in the AD brain”
§ Neuronal DNA double-strand breaks lead to genome structural variations and 3D genome disruption in neurodegeneration > Introduction
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [44] Lewis PN, Lukiw WJ, De Boni U, and Crapper McLachlan DR (1981). Changes in Chromatin Structure Associated with Alzheimer’s Disease. J. Neurochem. 10.1111/j.1471-4159.1981.tb04670.x. 7299396 source
- Not checked yetcites [45] Bendl J, Hauberg ME, Girdhar K, Im E, Vicari JM, Rahman S, Fernando MB, Townsley KG, Dong P, Misir R, (2022). The three-dimensional landscape of cortical chromatin accessibility in Alzheimer’s disease. Nat. Neurosci. 25. 10.1038/s41593-022-01166-7. PMC9581463 36171428 source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“There is now emerging evidence that the 3D genome is actively regulated during learning and memory formation”
§ Neuronal DNA double-strand breaks lead to genome structural variations and 3D genome disruption in neurodegeneration > Introduction
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [36] Yamada T, Yang Y, Valnegri P, Juric I, Abnousi A, Markwalter KH, Guthrie AN, Godec A, Oldenborg A, Hu M, (2019). Sensory experience remodels genome architecture in neural circuit to drive motor learning. Nature. 10.1038/s41586-019-1190-7. PMC6542709 31068695 source
- Not checked yetcites [37] Fernandez-Albert J, Lipinski M, Lopez-Cascales MT, Rowley MJ, Martin-Gonzalez AM, del Blanco B, Corces VG, and Barco A (2019). Immediate and deferred epigenomic signatures of in vivo neuronal activation in mouse hippocampus. Nat. Neurosci. 10.1038/s41593-019-0476-2. PMC6875776 31501571 source
- Not checked yetcites [38] Beagan JA, Pastuzyn ED, Fernandez LR, Guo MH, Feng K, Titus KR, Chandrashekar H, Shepherd JD, and Phillips-Cremins JE (2020). Three-dimensional genome restructuring across timescales of activity-induced neuronal gene expression. Nat. Neurosci. 10.1038/s41593-020-0634-6. PMC7558717 32451484 source
- Not checked yetcites [39] Marco A, Meharena HS, Dileep V, Raju RM, Davila-Velderrain J, Zhang AL, Adaikkan C, Young JZ, Gao F, Kellis M, (2020). Mapping the epigenomic and transcriptomic interplay during memory formation and recall in the hippocampal engram ensemble. Nat. Neurosci, 1– 12. 10.1038/s41593-020-00717-0. 33020654 PMC7686266 source
- Not checked yetcites [40] Dileep V, and Tsai LH (2021). Three-dimensional chromatin organization in brain function and dysfunction. Curr. Opin. Neurobiol. 69, 214– 221. 10.1016/J.CONB.2021.04.006. 34111830 source
- Not checked yetcites [41] Marco A (2022). Activity-dependent remodeling of genome architecture in engram cells facilitates memory formation and recall. Neural Regen. Res. 17. 10.4103/1673-5374.324834. PMC8552845 34558515 source
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“The cohesin complex is an important architectural protein that organizes the 3D genome and is also important in DSB repair”
§ Neuronal DNA double-strand breaks lead to genome structural variations and 3D genome disruption in neurodegeneration > Results > Neurons burdened with DSBs are associated with the disruption of 3D genome organization
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [32] Arnould C, Rocher V, Finoux AL, Clouaire T, Li K, Zhou F, Caron P, Mangeot PE, Ricci EP, Mourad R, (2021). Loop extrusion as a mechanism for formation of DNA damage repair foci. Nature 590, 660– 665. 33597753 PMC7116834 source
- Not checked yetcites [76] Phillips-Cremins JE, Sauria MEG, Sanyal A, Gerasimova TI, Lajoie BR, Bell JSK, Ong CT, Hookway TA, Guo C, Sun Y, (2013). Architectural protein subclasses shape 3D organization of genomes during lineage commitment. Cell 153, 1281– 1295. 10.1016/j.cell.2013.04.053. 23706625 PMC3712340 source
- Not checked yetcites [77] Rao SSP, Huang SC, Glenn St Hilaire B, Engreitz JM, Perez EM, Kieffer-Kwon KR, Sanborn AL, Johnstone SE, Bascom GD, Bochkov ID, (2017). Cohesin Loss Eliminates All Loop Domains. Cell. 10.1016/j.cell.2017.09.026. PMC5846482 28985562 source
- Not checked yetcites [78] Caron P, Aymard F, Iacovoni JS, Briois S, Canitrot Y, Bugler B, Massip L, Losada A, and Legube G (2012). Cohesin Protects Genes against γH2AX Induced by DNA Double-Strand Breaks. PLOS Genet. 8, e1002460. 10.1371/JOURNAL.PGEN.1002460. 22275873 PMC3261922 source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“cohesin has been shown to protect against genome structural variations”
§ Neuronal DNA double-strand breaks lead to genome structural variations and 3D genome disruption in neurodegeneration > Results > Neurons burdened with DSBs are associated with the disruption of 3D genome organization
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [79] Covo S, Westmoreland JW, Gordenin DA, and Resnick MA (2010). Cohesin Is limiting for the suppression of DNA damage-induced recombination between homologous chromosomes. PLoS Genet. 6, 1– 16. 10.1371/JOURNAL.PGEN.1001006. PMC2895640 20617204 source
- Not checked yetcites [80] Gelot C, Guirouilh-Barbat J, Le Guen T, Dardillac E, Chailleux C, Canitrot Y, and Lopez BS (2016). The Cohesin Complex Prevents the End Joining of Distant DNA Double-Strand Ends. Mol. Cell 61, 15– 26. 10.1016/J.MOLCEL.2015.11.002. 26687679 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“disease-associated SNPs in non-coding areas of the genome influence genes associated with diseases including Alzheimer’s Disease (AD)”
§ Neuronal DNA double-strand breaks lead to genome structural variations and 3D genome disruption in neurodegeneration > Introduction
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [46] Won H, De La Torre-Ubieta L, Stein JL, Parikshak NN, Huang J, Opland CK, Gandal MJ, Sutton GJ, Hormozdiari F, Lu D, (2016). Chromosome conformation elucidates regulatory relationships in developing human brain. Nature. 10.1038/nature19847. PMC5358922 27760116 source
- Not checked yetcites [47] Rajarajan P, Borrman T, Liao W, Schrode N, Flaherty E, Casiño C, Powell S, Yashaswini C, LaMarca EA, Kassim B, (2018). Neuron-specific signatures in the chromosomal connectome associated with schizophrenia risk. Science (80-.). 10.1126/science.aat4311. PMC6408958 30545851 source
- Not checked yetcites [48] Nott A, Holtman IR, Coufal NG, Schlachetzki JCM, Yu M, Hu R, Han CZ, Pena M, Xiao J, Wu Y, (2019). Brain cell type–specific enhancer–promoter interactome maps and disease-risk association. Science (80-.). 366, 1134– 1139. 10.1126/science.aay0793. PMC7028213 31727856 source
- Not checked yetcites [49] Kikuchi M, Hara N, Hasegawa M, Miyashita A, Kuwano R, Ikeuchi T, and Nakaya A (2019). Enhancer variants associated with Alzheimer’s disease affect gene expression via chromatin looping. BMC Med. Genomics. 10.1186/s12920-019-0574-8. PMC6734281 31500627 source
- Not checked yetcites [50] Javierre BM, Sewitz S, Cairns J, Wingett SW, Várnai C, Thiecke MJ, Freire-Pritchett P, Spivakov M, Fraser P, Burren OS, (2016). Lineage-Specific Genome Architecture Links Enhancers and Non-coding Disease Variants to Target Gene Promoters. Cell. 10.1016/j.cell.2016.09.037. PMC5123897 27863249 source
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“the disruption of 3D genome organization has been demonstrated in neurodevelopmental and neurological neurodegenerative disorders such as Huntington’s disease, Fragile X syndrome, Down syndrome, etc.”
§ Neuronal DNA double-strand breaks lead to genome structural variations and 3D genome disruption in neurodegeneration > Introduction
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [42] Meharena HS, Marco A, Dileep V, Lockshin ER, Akatsu GY, Mullahoo J, Watson LA, Ko T, Guerin LN, Abdurrob F, (2022). Down-syndrome-induced senescence disrupts the nuclear architecture of neural progenitors. Cell Stem Cell 29, 116– 130.e7. 10.1016/J.STEM.2021.12.002. 34995493 PMC8805993 source
- Not checked yetcites [43] Sun JH, Zhou L, Emerson DJ, Phyo SA, Titus KR, Gong W, Gilgenast TG, Beagan JA, Davidson BL, Tassone F, (2018). Disease-Associated Short Tandem Repeats Colocalize with Chromatin Domain Boundaries. Cell. 10.1016/j.cell.2018.08.005. PMC6175607 30173918 source
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“the accompanying manuscript by Xiong et al. describes widespread changes in cell-type specific chromatin accessibility within excitatory neurons in human AD samples which they term “epigenome erosion””
§ Neuronal DNA double-strand breaks lead to genome structural variations and 3D genome disruption in neurodegeneration > Results > Neurons burdened with DSBs are associated with the disruption of 3D genome organization
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [89] Xiong X, James BT, Boix CA, Park Y, Galani K, Victor MB, Sun N, Hou L, Dileep V, Ho L-L, (2023). Single-cell epigenomic dissection of Alzheimer’s disease pinpoints causal variants and reveals epigenome erosion. Cell 186. PMC10782612 37774680 source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Chromatin loops enable interactions between enhancers and promoters enabling fine control of gene expression, in addition to the regulation mediated by transcription factors and other epigenetic modifications”
§ Neuronal DNA double-strand breaks lead to genome structural variations and 3D genome disruption in neurodegeneration > Results > Disruption of the 3D genome organization by DSBs is associated with differential gene regulation.
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [27] Schoenfelder S, and Fraser P (2019). Long-range enhancer–promoter contacts in gene expression control. Nat. Rev. Genet. 10.1038/s41576-019-0128-0. 31086298 source
- Not checked yetcites [98] Kim JH, Rege M, Valeri J, Dunagin MC, Metzger A, Titus KR, Gilgenast TG, Gong W, Beagan JA, Raj A, (2019). LADL: light-activated dynamic looping for endogenous gene expression control. Nat. Methods. 10.1038/s41592-019-0436-5. PMC6599567 31235883 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
In the paper
“Lamin B1 has been shown to control the release of DSB repair protein 53BP1 and overexpression of LaminB1 impeded DSB repair leading to persistent DSBs”
§ Neuronal DNA double-strand breaks lead to genome structural variations and 3D genome disruption in neurodegeneration > Results > Neurons burdened with DSBs are associated with the disruption of 3D genome organization
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [88] Etourneaud L, Moussa A, Rass E, Genet D, Willaume S, Chabance-Okumura C, Wanschoor P, Picotto J, Thézé B, Dépagne J, (2021). Lamin B1 sequesters 53BP1 to control its recruitment to DNA damage. Sci. Adv. 7, 3799– 3826. 10.1126/SCIADV.ABB3799. PMC8397269 34452908 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“loop extrusion mediated by cohesin and CTCF mediates the formation of chromatin loops and self-interacting Topologically Associating Domains (TADs)”
§ Neuronal DNA double-strand breaks lead to genome structural variations and 3D genome disruption in neurodegeneration > Results > Neurons burdened with DSBs are associated with the disruption of 3D genome organization
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [77] Rao SSP, Huang SC, Glenn St Hilaire B, Engreitz JM, Perez EM, Kieffer-Kwon KR, Sanborn AL, Johnstone SE, Bascom GD, Bochkov ID, (2017). Cohesin Loss Eliminates All Loop Domains. Cell. 10.1016/j.cell.2017.09.026. PMC5846482 28985562 source
- Not checked yetcites [81] Hansen AS, Cattoglio C, Darzacq X, and Tjian R (2018). Recent evidence that TADs and chromatin loops are dynamic structures. Nucleus 9, 20. 10.1080/19491034.2017.1389365. 29077530 PMC5990973 source
- Not checked yetcites [82] Davidson IF, Bauer B, Goetz D, Tang W, Wutz G, and Peters JM (2019). DNA loop extrusion by human cohesin. Science (80-.). 366, 1338– 1345. 10.1126/science.aaz3418. 31753851 source
- Not checked yetcites [83] Kim Y, Shi Z, Zhang H, Finkelstein IJ, and Yu H (2019). Human cohesin compacts DNA by loop extrusion. Science 366, 1345– 1349. 10.1126/SCIENCE.AAZ4475. 31780627 PMC7387118 source
- Not checked yetcites [84] Dixon JR, Selvaraj S, Yue F, Kim A, Li Y, Shen Y, Hu M, Liu JS, and Ren B (2012). Topological Domains in Mammalian Genomes Identified by Analysis of Chromatin Interactions. Nature 485, 376. 10.1038/NATURE11082. 22495300 PMC3356448 source
- Not checked yetcites [85] Nora EP, Lajoie BR, Schulz EG, Giorgetti L, Okamoto I, Servant N, Piolot T, Van Berkum NL, Meisig J, Sedat J, (2012). Spatial partitioning of the regulatory landscape of the X-inactivation centre. Nat. 2012 4857398 485, 381– 385. 10.1038/nature11049. PMC3555144 22495304 source
- Not checked yetcites [86] Nora EP, Goloborodko A, Valton AL, Gibcus JH, Uebersohn A, Abdennur N, Dekker J, Mirny LA, and Bruneau BG (2017). Targeted Degradation of CTCF Decouples Local Insulation of Chromosome Domains from Genomic Compartmentalization. Cell. 10.1016/j.cell.2017.05.004. PMC5538188 28525758 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“loop boundaries are hotspots for TOP2 B-mediated DNA breaks in T-cells and B-cells”
§ Neuronal DNA double-strand breaks lead to genome structural variations and 3D genome disruption in neurodegeneration > Results > Neurons burdened with DSBs are associated with the disruption of 3D genome organization
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [28] Canela A, Maman Y, Jung S, Wong N, Callen E, Day A, Kieffer-Kwon K-R, Pekowska A, Zhang H, Rao SSP, (2017). Genome Organization Drives Chromosome Fragility. Cell 170, 507– 521.e18. 10.1016/j.cell.2017.06.034. 28735753 PMC6133249 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Lamin B1 plays a crucial role in the 3D genome organization by tethering heterochromatin to the nuclear periphery”
§ Neuronal DNA double-strand breaks lead to genome structural variations and 3D genome disruption in neurodegeneration > Results > Neurons burdened with DSBs are associated with the disruption of 3D genome organization
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [87] Solovei I, Wang AS, Thanisch K, Schmidt CS, Krebs S, Zwerger M, Cohen TV, Devys D, Foisner R, Peichl L, (2013). LBR and lamin A/C sequentially tether peripheral heterochromatin and inversely regulate differentiation. Cell 152, 584– 598. 10.1016/j.cell.2013.01.009. 23374351 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“While the A compartment is largely localized to the nuclear interior, the B compartment is tethered to the nuclear periphery by Lamin B1”
§ Neuronal DNA double-strand breaks lead to genome structural variations and 3D genome disruption in neurodegeneration > Results > Neurons burdened with DSBs are associated with the disruption of 3D genome organization
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [91] Lieberman-Aiden E, Van Berkum NL, Williams L, Imakaev M, Ragoczy T, Telling A, Amit I, Lajoie BR, Sabo PJ, Dorschner MO, (2009). Comprehensive mapping of long range interactions reveals folding principles of the human genome. Science 326, 289. 10.1126/SCIENCE.1181369. 19815776 PMC2858594 source
- Not checked yetcites [92] van Steensel B, and Belmont AS (2017). Lamina-Associated Domains: Links with Chromosome Architecture, Heterochromatin, and Gene Repression (NIH Public Access) 10.1016/j.cell.2017.04.022. PMC5532494 28525751 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We propose that the increased stochastic DSB burden strains the DNA repair resources, leading to defective DNA repair and genome structural variations that disproportionately affect hotspots of DNA breaks such as highly expressed genes, long genes, and loop anchors.”
§ Neuronal DNA double-strand breaks lead to genome structural variations and 3D genome disruption in neurodegeneration > Discussion
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“For instance, a neo-TAD caused by structural variation was associated with higher expression of the oncogene MYC in neuroblastomas23.”
§ Neuronal DNA double-strand breaks lead to genome structural variations and 3D genome disruption in neurodegeneration > Discussion
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [23] Dixon JR, Xu J, Dileep V, Zhan Y, Song F, Le VT, Yardımcı GG, Chakraborty A, Bann DV, Wang Y, (2018). Integrative detection and analysis of structural variation in cancer genomes. Nat. Genet. 10.1038/s41588-018-0195-8. PMC6301019 30202056 source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Indeed, genomic mosaicism by retro transposition of LINE-1 elements has been associated with the neuronal genome and the derepression of LINE-1 elements has been associated with senescence129–131.”
§ Neuronal DNA double-strand breaks lead to genome structural variations and 3D genome disruption in neurodegeneration > Discussion
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [129] Bedrosian TA, Quayle C, Novaresi N, and Gage FH (2018). Early life experience drives structural variation of neural genomes in mice. Science (80-.). 10.1126/science.aah3378. 29567711 source
- Not checked yetcites [130] De Cecco M, Ito T, Petrashen AP, Elias AE, Skvir NJ, Criscione SW, Caligiana A, Brocculi G, Adney EM, Boeke JD, (2019). LINE-1 derepression in senescent cells triggers interferon and inflammaging. Nature 566, 73. 10.1038/S41586-018-0784-9. 30728521 PMC6519963 source
- Not checked yetcites [131] Valle F. Della, Reddy P, Yamamoto M, Liu P, Saera-Vila A, Bensaddek D, Zhang H, Martinez JP, Abassi L, Celii M, (2022). LINE-1 RNA causes heterochromatin erosion and is a target for amelioration of senescent phenotypes in progeroid syndromes. Sci. Transl. Med. 14. 10.1126/scitranslmed.abl6057. 35947677 source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“genome structural variations can lead to gene fusions and are often drivers of cancer”
§ Neuronal DNA double-strand breaks lead to genome structural variations and 3D genome disruption in neurodegeneration > Discussion
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [112] Edwards PAW (2010). Fusion genes and chromosome translocations in the common epithelial cancers. J. Pathol. 220, 244– 254. 10.1002/PATH.2632. 19921709 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Interestingly, erosion of epigenetic information, TAD insulation, and cell identity was recently reported in a mouse model with inducible DNA damage (ICE mouse model) accompanied by brain aging and cognitive decline132.”
§ Neuronal DNA double-strand breaks lead to genome structural variations and 3D genome disruption in neurodegeneration > Discussion
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [132] Yang JH, Hayano M, Griffin PT, Amorim JA, Bonkowski MS, Apostolides JK, Salfati EL, Blanchette M, Munding EM, Bhakta M, (2023). Loss of epigenetic information as a cause of mammalian aging. Cell 186. 10.1016/j.cell.2022.12.027. PMC10166133 36638792 source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Surprisingly, X-ray radiation-induced DSBs increased the segregation of TAD fibroblasts54.”
§ Neuronal DNA double-strand breaks lead to genome structural variations and 3D genome disruption in neurodegeneration > Discussion
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [54] Sanders JT, Freeman TF, Xu Y, Golloshi R, Stallard MA, Hill AM, San Martin R, Balajee AS, and McCord RP (2020). Radiation-induced DNA damage and repair effects on 3D genome organization. Nat. Commun. 2020 111 11, 1– 14. 10.1038/s41467-020-20047-w. PMC7710719 33268790 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Surprisingly, Step 1 showed lower DSB enrichments for highly transcribed and long genes, and DSBs were supported by fewer UMIs, suggesting that Step 1 DSBs are largely stochastic.”
§ Neuronal DNA double-strand breaks lead to genome structural variations and 3D genome disruption in neurodegeneration > Discussion
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“These observations combined with our results suggest that genomic mosaicism is an important driver of senescence in neurons and could contribute to the pathogenesis of neurodegenerative disease.”
§ Neuronal DNA double-strand breaks lead to genome structural variations and 3D genome disruption in neurodegeneration > Discussion
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Recently, a study identified an increase in mosaicism due to recombination between Alu and L1 elements in Parkinson’s and Alzheimer’s disease120.”
§ Neuronal DNA double-strand breaks lead to genome structural variations and 3D genome disruption in neurodegeneration > Discussion
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [120] Pascarella G, Hon CC, Hashimoto K, Busch A, Luginbühl J, Parr C, Hin Yip W, Abe K, Kratz A, Bonetti A, (2022). Recombination of repeat elements generates somatic complexity in human genomes. Cell 185, 3025– 3040.e6. 10.1016/J.CELL.2022.06.032. 35882231 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Previous studies have shown increased neuronal genomic mosaicism (including SNVs, copy number variations, and cDNA insertions in neurodegeneration)124–128.”
§ Neuronal DNA double-strand breaks lead to genome structural variations and 3D genome disruption in neurodegeneration > Discussion
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [124] Lodato MA, Rodin RE, Bohrson CL, Coulter ME, Barton AR, Kwon M, Sherman MA, Vitzthum CM, Luquette LJ, Yandava CN, (2018). Aging and neurodegeneration are associated with increased mutations in single human neurons. Science (80-.). 359, 555– 559. 10.1126/science.aao4426. PMC5831169 29217584 source
- Not checked yetcites [125] Miller MB, Yue Huang A, Kim J, Zhou Z, Kirkham SL, Maury EA, Ziegenfuss JS, Reed HC, Neil JE, Rento L, (2022). Somatic genomic changes in single Alzheimer’s disease neurons. | Nat. | 604. 10.1038/s41586-022-04640-1. PMC9357465 35444284 source
- Not checked yetcites [126] Lee MH, Siddoway B, Kaeser GE, Segota I, Rivera R, Romanow WJ, Liu CS, Park C, Kennedy G, Long T, (2018). Somatic APP gene recombination in Alzheimer’s disease and normal neurons. Nature. 10.1038/s41586-018-0718-6. PMC6391999 30464338 source
- Not checked yetcites [127] Kousi M, Boix C, Park YP, Mathys H, Sledzieski S, Peng Z, Bennett DA, Tsai L-H, and Kellis M (2022). Single-cell mosaicism analysis reveals cell-type-specific somatic mutational burden in Alzheimer’s Dementia. bioRxiv, 2022.04.21.489103. 10.1101/2022.04.21.489103. source
- Not checked yetcites [128] McConnell MJ, Moran JV, Abyzov A, Akbarian S, Bae T, Cortes-Ciriano I, Erwin JA, Fasching L, Flasch DA, Freed D, (2017). Intersection of diverse neuronal genomes and neuropsychiatric disease: The Brain Somatic Mosaicism Network. Science (80-.). 356. 10.1126/science.aal1641. PMC5558435 28450582 source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Interestingly, genome structural variations have been shown to cause pathological TAD fusions and create neo-TADs in several cancers.”
§ Neuronal DNA double-strand breaks lead to genome structural variations and 3D genome disruption in neurodegeneration > Discussion
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [23] Dixon JR, Xu J, Dileep V, Zhan Y, Song F, Le VT, Yardımcı GG, Chakraborty A, Bann DV, Wang Y, (2018). Integrative detection and analysis of structural variation in cancer genomes. Nat. Genet. 10.1038/s41588-018-0195-8. PMC6301019 30202056 source
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“A recent study proposed that DSBs can act as roadblocks to loop extrusion32.”
§ Neuronal DNA double-strand breaks lead to genome structural variations and 3D genome disruption in neurodegeneration > Discussion
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [32] Arnould C, Rocher V, Finoux AL, Clouaire T, Li K, Zhou F, Caron P, Mangeot PE, Ricci EP, Mourad R, (2021). Loop extrusion as a mechanism for formation of DNA damage repair foci. Nature 590, 660– 665. 33597753 PMC7116834 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“accumulation of DNA damage can lead to a senescence-like state in neurons and has been implicated in the progression of AD”
§ Neuronal DNA double-strand breaks lead to genome structural variations and 3D genome disruption in neurodegeneration > Discussion
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [121] Jurk D, Wang C, Miwa S, Maddick M, Korolchuk V, Tsolou A, Gonos ES, Thrasivoulou C, Jill Saffrey M, Cameron K, (2012). Postmitotic neurons develop a p21-dependent senescence-like phenotype driven by a DNA damage response. Aging Cell 11, 996. 10.1111/J.1474-9726.2012.00870.X. 22882466 PMC3533793 source
- Not checked yetcites [122] Saez-Atienzar S, and Masliah E (2020). Cellular senescence and Alzheimer disease: the egg and the chicken scenario. Nat. Rev. Neurosci. 2020 218 21, 433– 444. 10.1038/s41583-020-0325-z. PMC12548380 32601397 source
- Not checked yetcites [123] Welch G, and Tsai L (2022). Mechanisms of DNA damage-mediated neurotoxicity in neurodegenerative disease. EMBO Rep. 23. 10.15252/EMBR.202154217. PMC9171412 35499251 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“DSBs are repaired via the classical non-homologous end joining (NHEJ) pathway in post-mitotic cells and can lead to genome structural variations”
§ Neuronal DNA double-strand breaks lead to genome structural variations and 3D genome disruption in neurodegeneration > Discussion
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [18] Richardson C, and Jasin M (2000). Frequent chromosomal translocations induced by DNA double-strand breaks. Nature 405, 697– 700. 10.1038/35015097. 10864328 source
- Not checked yetcites [19] Ferguson DO, and Alt FW (2001). DNA double strand break repair and chromosomal translocation: Lessons from animal models. Oncogene 20, 5572– 5579. 10.1038/sj.onc.1204767. 11607810 source
- Not checked yetcites [20] Lin C, Yang L, Tanasa B, Hutt K, Ju B. gun, Ohgi K, Zhang J, Rose DW, Fu XD, Glass CK, (2009). Nuclear Receptor-Induced Chromosomal Proximity and DNA Breaks Underlie Specific Translocations in Cancer. Cell 139, 1069– 1083. 10.1016/j.cell.2009.11.030. 19962179 PMC2812435 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In the current study, we are unable to resolve the precise role of each of these components.”
§ Neuronal DNA double-strand breaks lead to genome structural variations and 3D genome disruption in neurodegeneration > Limitations of the Study
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Bio-replicate 1 of Step 2 neurons was excluded from the analysis of differential A/B compartment statistical significance owing to its lower read depth.”
§ Neuronal DNA double-strand breaks lead to genome structural variations and 3D genome disruption in neurodegeneration > STAR Methods > QUANTIFICATION AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The disruption in the 3D genome organization could be caused both directly by unresolved DSBs and by genome structural variations.”
§ Neuronal DNA double-strand breaks lead to genome structural variations and 3D genome disruption in neurodegeneration > Limitations of the Study
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Additionally, studies have shown senescence-associated 3D genome reorganization in dividing cell types42,140–143.”
§ Neuronal DNA double-strand breaks lead to genome structural variations and 3D genome disruption in neurodegeneration > Discussion
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [42] Meharena HS, Marco A, Dileep V, Lockshin ER, Akatsu GY, Mullahoo J, Watson LA, Ko T, Guerin LN, Abdurrob F, (2022). Down-syndrome-induced senescence disrupts the nuclear architecture of neural progenitors. Cell Stem Cell 29, 116– 130.e7. 10.1016/J.STEM.2021.12.002. 34995493 PMC8805993 source
- Not checked yetcites [140] Chandra T, Ewels PA, Schoenfelder S, Furlan-Magaril M, Wingett SW, Kirschner K, Thuret JY, Andrews S, Fraser P, and Reik W (2015). Global reorganization of the nuclear landscape in senescent cells. Cell Rep. 10, 471– 483. 10.1016/J.CELREP.2014.12.055. 25640177 PMC4542308 source
- Not checked yetcites [141] Criscione SW, Cecco M. De, Siranosian B, Zhang Y, Kreiling JA, Sedivy JM, and Neretti N (2016). Reorganization of chromosome architecture in replicative cellular senescence. Sci. Adv. 2. 10.1126/SCIADV.1500882. PMC4788486 26989773 source
- Not checked yetcites [142] Iwasaki O, Tanizawa H, Kim KD, Kossenkov A, Nacarelli T, Tashiro S, Majumdar S, Showe LC, Zhang R, and Noma K ichi (2019). Involvement of condensin in cellular senescence through gene regulation and compartmental reorganization. Nat. Commun. 2019 101 10, 1– 20. 10.1038/s41467-019-13604-5. PMC6908677 31831736 source
- Not checked yetcites [143] Zirkel A, Nikolic M, Sofiadis K, Mallm JP, Brackley CA, Gothe H, Drechsel O, Becker C, Altmüller J, Josipovic N, (2018). HMGB2 Loss upon Senescence Entry Disrupts Genomic Organization and Induces CTCF Clustering across Cell Types. Mol. Cell 70, 730– 744.e6. 10.1016/j.molcel.2018.03.030. 29706538 source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We quantified the enrichment of putative fusion events at the cell level across conditions using a negative binomial generalized linear model where we model the number of fusions in each cell with an offset term for the number of reads captured for that cell (log(n_counts)).”
§ Neuronal DNA double-strand breaks lead to genome structural variations and 3D genome disruption in neurodegeneration > STAR Methods > QUANTIFICATION AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one. The quote only partly states this claim.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Previous studies have shown the importance of histones in DNA damage response, senescence, brain aging, neuronal identity, and memory formation100–102,136–139.”
§ Neuronal DNA double-strand breaks lead to genome structural variations and 3D genome disruption in neurodegeneration > Discussion
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [100] Kalocsay M, Hiller NJ, and Jentsch S (2009). Chromosome-wide Rad51 Spreading and SUMO-H2A.Z-Dependent Chromosome Fixation in Response to a Persistent DNA Double-Strand Break. Mol. Cell 33, 335– 343. 10.1016/J.MOLCEL.2009.01.016. 19217407 source
- Not checked yetcites [101] Stefanelli G, Azam AB, Walters BJ, Brimble MA, Gettens CP, Bouchard-Cannon P, Cheng HYM, Davidoff AM, Narkaj K, Day JJ, (2018). Learning and Age-Related Changes in Genome-wide H2A.Z Binding in the Mouse Hippocampus. Cell Rep. 22, 1124– 1131. 10.1016/J.CELREP.2018.01.020. 29386101 PMC5820781 source
- Not checked yetcites [102] Zovkic IB, Paulukaitis BS, Day JJ, Etikala DM, and Sweatt JD (2014). Histone H2A.Z subunit exchange controls consolidation of recent and remote memory. Nat. 2014 5157528 515, 582– 586. 10.1038/nature13707. PMC4768489 25219850 source
- Not checked yetcites [136] Isermann A, Mann C, and Rübe CE (2020). Histone Variant H2A.J Marks Persistent DNA Damage and Triggers the Secretory Phenotype in Radiation-Induced Senescence. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 21, 1– 20. 10.3390/IJMS21239130. PMC7729917 33266246 source
- Not checked yetcites [137] Contrepois K, Coudereau C, Benayoun BA, Schuler N, Roux PF, Bischof O, Courbeyrette R, Carvalho C, Thuret JY, Ma Z, (2017). Histone variant H2A.J accumulates in senescent cells and promotes inflammatory gene expression. Nat. Commun. 2017 81 8, 1– 18. 10.1038/ncomms14995. PMC5436145 28489069 source
- Not checked yetcites [138] Rübe CE, Bäumert C, Schuler N, Isermann A, Schmal Z, Glanemann M, Mann C, and Scherthan H (2021). Human skin aging is associated with increased expression of the histone variant H2A.J in the epidermis. npj Aging Mech. Dis. 2021 71 7, 1– 11. 10.1038/s41514-021-00060-z. PMC8016850 33795696 source
- Not checked yetcites [139] Funk OH, Qalieh Y, Doyle DZ, Lam MM, and Kwan KY (2022). Postmitotic accumulation of histone variant H3.3 in new cortical neurons establishes neuronal chromatin, transcriptome, and identity. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 119. 10.1073/pnas.2116956119. PMC9371731 35930666 source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Three replicates were performed, where each replicate was a pool of 3 CK-p25 mice forebrains (Table S1, page 16).”
§ Neuronal DNA double-strand breaks lead to genome structural variations and 3D genome disruption in neurodegeneration > STAR Methods > METHOD DETAILS
plainn = 3- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“All the experiments were approved by the Committee for Animal Care of the Division of Comparative Medicine at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) and carried out at MIT.”
§ Neuronal DNA double-strand breaks lead to genome structural variations and 3D genome disruption in neurodegeneration > STAR Methods > EXPERIMENTAL MODEL AND STUDY PARTICIPANT DETAILS
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“At least two coronal slices were used for each mouse for image quantification.”
§ Neuronal DNA double-strand breaks lead to genome structural variations and 3D genome disruption in neurodegeneration > STAR Methods > METHOD DETAILS
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“While relatively uncommon, chimeric molecules arising through PCR artifacts and random ligations during library preparation are difficult to distinguish from chimeric molecules arising from true mosaic gene fusions.”
§ Neuronal DNA double-strand breaks lead to genome structural variations and 3D genome disruption in neurodegeneration > Limitations of the Study
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We removed the ‘SM_171013Tsa’ batch from the original dataset due to markedly lower quality, number of reads, and number of genes detected per cell.”
§ Neuronal DNA double-strand breaks lead to genome structural variations and 3D genome disruption in neurodegeneration > STAR Methods > QUANTIFICATION AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We fitted a linear mixed-effects model with the percentage of high RAD21 neurons or mean intensity of RAD21 as the response variable, group (Control or AD) as the fixed effect, and individual (ID) as the random effect.”
§ Neuronal DNA double-strand breaks lead to genome structural variations and 3D genome disruption in neurodegeneration > STAR Methods > QUANTIFICATION AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The quote only partly states this claim.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Single-cell RNA seq provides a sparse readout of gene expression and is likely to generally underestimate the number of gene fusions in each cell.”
§ Neuronal DNA double-strand breaks lead to genome structural variations and 3D genome disruption in neurodegeneration > Limitations of the Study
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“For single-nucleus Smart-seq2, we selected a subset of 47 individuals comprised of 24 and 23 age and sex-matched cases with AD pathology (NIA-Reagan 1–2) and no pathologic AD (NIA-Reagan 3–4).”
§ Neuronal DNA double-strand breaks lead to genome structural variations and 3D genome disruption in neurodegeneration > STAR Methods > EXPERIMENTAL MODEL AND STUDY PARTICIPANT DETAILS
plainn = 47- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Informed consent was obtained from each subject, and the Religious Orders Study and Rush Memory and Aging Project were each approved by an Institutional Review Board (IRB) of Rush University Medical Center.”
§ Neuronal DNA double-strand breaks lead to genome structural variations and 3D genome disruption in neurodegeneration > STAR Methods > EXPERIMENTAL MODEL AND STUDY PARTICIPANT DETAILS
plainn = 427- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
The authors state this as an assumption.
Gene fusions detected from snRNA-seq reads are a valid proxy for genome structural variations in neurons.
“using STAR-fusion to detect chimeric snRNA-seq reads mapping between two genes as a proxy for genome structural variations”
“increased levels of gene fusions as a proxy for increased genome structural variation”
The authors state this as an assumption.
AD vs. Control classification and various gene expression pattern enrichments explored in this do not modify PCR artifacts and random ligations during library preparation.
“We make the assumption that AD vs. Control classification and various gene expression pattern enrichments explored in this do not modify PCR artifacts and random ligations during library preparation.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Genome structural variations can bring ectopic regulatory elements next to genes causing pathological up or down-regulation of genes.
“Genome structural variations can bring ectopic regulatory elements next to genes causing pathological up or down-regulation of genes.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Gene fusions at important neural genes can result in a pathological gain or loss of their function and result in defects in neuronal function.
“Gene fusions at important neural genes can result in a pathological gain or loss of their function and result in defects in neuronal function.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Gene fusions arise from a subset of genome structural variations.
“Gene fusions arise from a subset of genome structural variations”
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“However, features of premature senescence associated particularly with DNA double-strand breaks (DSBs) and p16 expression also have been described in post-mitotic cells such as neurons[16, 18, 29].”
From Characterisation of premature cell senescence in Alzheimer's disease using single nuclear transcriptomics (2024) · cites this paper as [18]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Recent single-cell studies of human AD revealed the links between DNA damage and epigenome erosion during disease progression77,78.”
From Single-cell parallel analysis of DNA damage and transcriptome reveals selective genome vulnerability (2025) · cites this paper as [77]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“These work estimated damage burden by measuring chimeric gene fusions arose from DSBs.”
From Single-cell parallel analysis of DNA damage and transcriptome reveals selective genome vulnerability (2025) · cites this paper as [77]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“we compared 832 DEGs identified in our LOAD spheroid RNA-seq dataset with the recently published gene list from single-nucleus RNA-seq (snRNA-seq) of postmortem human prefrontal cortex from individuals with AD (79). The signature protein-coding genes of neurodegeneration, upregulated in the excitatory neurons in the snRNA-seq, exhibited an overlap of 233 genes (Table S7, page 1).”
From Modeling late-onset Alzheimer’s disease neuropathology via direct neuronal reprogramming (2024) · cites this paper as [79]
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“a recent study demonstrated that disruption of genome stability and 3D genome organization are pathological steps in progression of AD (79).”
From Modeling late-onset Alzheimer’s disease neuropathology via direct neuronal reprogramming (2024) · cites this paper as [79]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
§ Neuronal DNA double-strand breaks lead to genome structural variations and 3D genome disruption in neurodegeneration > Results > DSB-bearing neurons have mosaic genome structural variations in neurodegeneration
“The fragments were circularized and then sheared into 200–300 bp fragments.”
§ Neuronal DNA double-strand breaks lead to genome structural variations and 3D genome disruption in neurodegeneration > STAR Methods > METHOD DETAILS
“Circularized DNA was sheared using Covaris E220 using microtUBE AFA Fiber Pre-Slit Snap-Cap 6×16mm (Covaris, 520045) to an average size of 500 bp.”
Citations
Cites
Fitting Linear Mixed-Effects Models Using lme4
Bates, D., Mächler, M., Bolker, B., & Walker, S. (2015) · Journal of Statistical Software · doi:10.18637/jss.v067.i01 · Cited by 86,835
The Sequence Alignment/Map format and SAMtools
Li, H., Handsaker, B., Wysoker, A., Fennell, T., Ruan, J., Homer, N., Marth, G., Abecasis, G., Durbin, R., & 1000 Genome Project Data Processing Subgroup (2009) · Bioinformatics · doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/btp352 · Cited by 62,041
Fast and accurate short read alignment with Burrows-Wheeler transform
Li, H., & Durbin, R. (2009) · Bioinformatics · doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/btp324 · Cited by 58,607
Fast gapped-read alignment with Bowtie 2
Langmead, B., & Salzberg, S. L. (2012) · Nature Methods · doi:10.1038/nmeth.1923 · Cited by 56,400
STAR: ultrafast universal RNA-seq aligner
Dobin, A., Davis, C. A., Schlesinger, F., Drenkow, J., Zaleski, C., Jha, S., Batut, P., Chaisson, M., & Gingeras, T. R. (2013) · Bioinformatics · doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/bts635 · Cited by 51,709
HTSeq—a Python framework to work with high-throughput sequencing data
Anders, S., Pyl, P. T., & Huber, W. (2015) · Bioinformatics · doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/btu638 · Cited by 21,464
Minimap2: Pairwise alignment for nucleotide sequences
Li, H. (2018) · Bioinformatics · doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/bty191 · Cited by 14,807
Heinz, S., Benner, C., Spann, N., Bertolino, E., Lin, Y. C., Laslo, P., Cheng, J. X., Murre, C., Singh, H., & Glass, C. K. (2010) · Molecular Cell · doi:10.1016/j.molcel.2010.05.004 · Cited by 13,382
Fitting Linear Mixed-Effects Models Using lme4Preprint
Bates, D. M., Maechler, M., Bolker, B. M., & Walker, S. (2014) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.3929/ethz-b-000105397 · Cited by 9,435
A 3D Map of the Human Genome at Kilobase Resolution Reveals Principles of Chromatin Looping
Rao, S. S. P., Huntley, M. H., Durand, N. C., Stamenova, E. K., Bochkov, I. D., Robinson, J. T., Sanborn, A. L., Machol, I., Omer, A. D., Lander, E. S., et al. (2014) · Cell · doi:10.1016/j.cell.2014.11.021 · Cited by 9,212
Comprehensive Mapping of Long-Range Interactions Reveals Folding Principles of the Human Genome
Lieberman-Aiden, E., van Berkum, N. L., Williams, L., Imakaev, M., Ragoczy, T., Telling, A., Amit, I., Lajoie, B. R., Sabo, P. J., Dorschner, M. O., et al. (2009) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1181369 · Cited by 8,898
SCANPY: large-scale single-cell gene expression data analysis
Wolf, F. A., Angerer, P., & Theis, F. J. (2018) · Genome Biology · doi:10.1186/s13059-017-1382-0 · Cited by 8,881
Trapnell, C., Cacchiarelli, D., Grimsby, J., Pokharel, P., Li, S., Morse, M., Lennon, N. J., Livak, K. J., Mikkelsen, T. S., & Rinn, J. L. (2014) · Nature Biotechnology · doi:10.1038/nbt.2859 · Cited by 7,314
Topological domains in mammalian genomes identified by analysis of chromatin interactions
Dixon, J. R., Selvaraj, S., Yue, F., Kim, A., Li, Y., Shen, Y., Hu, M., Liu, J. S., & Ren, B. (2012) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature11082 · Cited by 6,829
Single-cell RNA-seq highlights intratumoral heterogeneity in primary glioblastoma
Patel, A. P., Tirosh, I., Trombetta, J. J., Shalek, A. K., Gillespie, S. M., Wakimoto, H., Cahill, D. P., Nahed, B. V., Curry, W. T., Martuza, R. L., et al. (2014) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1254257 · Cited by 5,063
Full-length RNA-seq from single cells using Smart-seq2
Picelli, S., Faridani, O. R., Björklund, Å. K., Winberg, G., Sagasser, S., & Sandberg, R. (2014) · Nature Protocols · doi:10.1038/nprot.2014.006 · Cited by 4,137
GOrilla: a tool for discovery and visualization of enriched GO terms in ranked gene lists
Eden, E., Navon, R., Steinfeld, I., Lipson, D., & Yakhini, Z. (2009) · BMC Bioinformatics · doi:10.1186/1471-2105-10-48 · Cited by 3,356
Spatial partitioning of the regulatory landscape of the X-inactivation centre
Nora, E. P., Lajoie, B. R., Schulz, E. G., Giorgetti, L., Okamoto, I., Servant, N., Piolot, T., van Berkum, N. L., Meisig, J., Sedat, J., et al. (2012) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature11049 · Cited by 2,895
New insights into the genetic etiology of Alzheimer’s disease and related dementias
Bellenguez, C., Küçükali, F., Jansen, I. E., Kleineidam, L., Moreno-Grau, S., Amin, N., Naj, A. C., Campos-Martin, R., Grenier-Boley, B., Andrade, V., et al. (2022) · Nature Genetics · doi:10.1038/s41588-022-01024-z · Cited by 2,498
Synapse Loss and Microglial Activation Precede Tangles in a P301S Tauopathy Mouse Model
Yoshiyama, Y., Higuchi, M., Zhang, B., Huang, S.-M., Iwata, N., Saido, T. C., Maeda, J., Suhara, T., Trojanowski, J. Q., & Lee, V. M.-Y. (2007) · Neuron · doi:10.1016/j.neuron.2007.01.010 · Cited by 2,208
Cohesin Loss Eliminates All Loop Domains
Rao, S. S. P., Huang, S.-C., Glenn St Hilaire, B., Engreitz, J. M., Perez, E. M., Kieffer-Kwon, K.-R., Sanborn, A. L., Johnstone, S. E., Bascom, G. D., Bochkov, I. D., et al. (2017) · Cell · doi:10.1016/j.cell.2017.09.026 · Cited by 1,883
Gene regulation and DNA damage in the ageing human brain
Lu, T., Pan, Y., Kao, S.-Y., Li, C., Kohane, I., Chan, J., & Yankner, B. A. (2004) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature02661 · Cited by 1,874
Nora, E. P., Goloborodko, A., Valton, A.-L., Gibcus, J. H., Uebersohn, A., Abdennur, N., Dekker, J., Mirny, L. A., & Bruneau, B. G. (2017) · Cell · doi:10.1016/j.cell.2017.05.004 · Cited by 1,709 · cited 1×
“79,80 84 To directly investigate the levels of the cohesin complex in excitatory neurons with DSBs, we stained the CK-p25 hippocampus for the cohesin subunit RAD21 after 2 weeks of induction.”
MethodThe NHGRI-EBI GWAS Catalog: knowledgebase and deposition resource
Sollis, E., Mosaku, A., Abid, A., Buniello, A., Cerezo, M., Gil, L., Groza, T., Güneş, O., Hall, P., Hayhurst, J., et al. (2023) · Nucleic Acids Research · doi:10.1093/nar/gkac1010 · Cited by 1,641
Chromosomal translocations in human cancer
Rabbitts, T. H. (1994) · Nature · doi:10.1038/372143a0 · Cited by 1,497
Multiscale 3D Genome Rewiring during Mouse Neural Development
Bonev, B., Mendelson Cohen, N., Szabo, Q., Fritsch, L., Papadopoulos, G. L., Lubling, Y., Xu, X., Lv, X., Hugnot, J.-P., Tanay, A., et al. (2017) · Cell · doi:10.1016/j.cell.2017.09.043 · Cited by 1,338
Neuropathology of older persons without cognitive impairment from two community-based studies
Bennett, D. A., Schneider, J. A., Arvanitakis, Z., Kelly, J. F., Aggarwal, N. T., Shah, R. C., & Wilson, R. S. (2006) · Neurology · doi:10.1212/01.wnl.0000219668.47116.e6 · Cited by 1,336
Self-citationReligious Orders Study and Rush Memory and Aging Project
Bennett, D. A., Buchman, A. S., Boyle, P. A., Barnes, L. L., Wilson, R. S., & Schneider, J. A. (2018) · Journal of Alzheimer's Disease · doi:10.3233/jad-179939 · Cited by 1,260
Self-citationL1 drives IFN in senescent cells and promotes age-associated inflammation
De Cecco, M., Ito, T., Petrashen, A. P., Elias, A. E., Skvir, N. J., Criscione, S. W., Caligiana, A., Brocculi, G., Adney, E. M., Boeke, J. D., et al. (2019) · Nature · doi:10.1038/s41586-018-0784-9 · Cited by 1,255
Architectural protein subclasses shape 3D organization of genomes during lineage commitment
Phillips-Cremins, J. E., Sauria, M. E. G., Sanyal, A., Gerasimova, T. I., Lajoie, B. R., Bell, J. S. K., Ong, C.-T., Hookway, T. A., Guo, C., Sun, Y., et al. (2013) · Cell · doi:10.1016/j.cell.2013.04.053 · Cited by 1,187
Lamina-Associated Domains: Links with Chromosome Architecture, Heterochromatin, and Gene Repression
van Steensel, B., & Belmont, A. S. (2017) · Cell · doi:10.1016/j.cell.2017.04.022 · Cited by 1,140
Long-range enhancer–promoter contacts in gene expression control
Schoenfelder, S., & Fraser, P. (2019) · Nature Reviews Genetics · doi:10.1038/s41576-019-0128-0 · Cited by 1,102 · cited 1×
“Chromatin loops enable interactions between enhancers and promoters enabling fine control of gene expression, in addition to the regulation mediated by transcription factors and other epigenetic modifications.(27,96) To investigate if the chromatin loop dysregulation in Step 1 and Step 2 neurons is associated with gen…”
BackgroundJavierre, B. M., Burren, O. S., Wilder, S. P., Kreuzhuber, R., Hill, S. M., Sewitz, S., Cairns, J., Wingett, S. W., Várnai, C., Thiecke, M. J., et al. (2016) · Cell · doi:10.1016/j.cell.2016.09.037 · Cited by 1,046
Natural history of mild cognitive impairment in older persons
Bennett, D. A., Wilson, R. S., Schneider, J. A., Evans, D. A., Beckett, L. A., Aggarwal, N. T., Barnes, L. L., Fox, J. H., & Bach, J. (2002) · Neurology · doi:10.1212/wnl.59.2.198 · Cited by 1,037
Self-citationThe central role of DNA damage in the ageing process
Schumacher, B., Pothof, J., Vijg, J., & Hoeijmakers, J. H. J. (2021) · Nature · doi:10.1038/s41586-021-03307-7 · Cited by 907 · cited 2×
“This apparent lack of statistical significance may be because certain mutations in DNA repair genes predispose individuals to premature death before AD onset through accelerated aging and other severe diseases such as cancer and diabetes, leading to their underrepresentation in GWAS.(107,108) Consistent with this hypo…”
BackgroundPatterns of somatic structural variation in human cancer genomes
Li, Y., Roberts, N. D., Wala, J. A., Shapira, O., Schumacher, S. E., Kumar, K., Khurana, E., Waszak, S., Korbel, J. O., Haber, J. E., et al. (2020) · Nature · doi:10.1038/s41586-019-1913-9 · Cited by 867
DNA loop extrusion by human cohesin
Davidson, I. F., Bauer, B., Goetz, D., Tang, W., Wutz, G., & Peters, J.-M. (2019) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.aaz3418 · Cited by 863
Solovei, I., Wang, A. S., Thanisch, K., Schmidt, C. S., Krebs, S., Zwerger, M., Cohen, T. V., Devys, D., Foisner, R., Peichl, L., et al. (2013) · Cell · doi:10.1016/j.cell.2013.01.009 · Cited by 809
In vivo interrogation of gene function in the mammalian brain using CRISPR-Cas9
Swiech, L., Heidenreich, M., Banerjee, A., Habib, N., Li, Y., Trombetta, J., Sur, M., & Zhang, F. (2015) · Nature Biotechnology · doi:10.1038/nbt.3055 · Cited by 772 · cited 1×
“We adapted the protocol for the isolation of nuclei from frozen postmortem brain tissue from Swiech et al. 2015.”
MethodA pathway for mitotic chromosome formation
Gibcus, J. H., Samejima, K., Goloborodko, A. A., Samejima, I., Naumova, N., Nuebler, J., Kanemaki, M. T., Xie, L., Paulson, J. R., Earnshaw, W. C., et al. (2018) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.aao6135 · Cited by 744
Human cohesin compacts DNA by loop extrusion
Kim, Y., Shi, Z., Zhang, H., Finkelstein, I. J., & Yu, H. (2019) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.aaz4475 · Cited by 701
Activity-Induced DNA Breaks Govern the Expression of Neuronal Early-Response Genes
Madabhushi, R., Gao, F., Pfenning, A. R., Pan, L., Yamakawa, S., Seo, J., Rueda, R., Phan, T. X., Yamakawa, H., Pao, P.-C., et al. (2015) · Cell · doi:10.1016/j.cell.2015.05.032 · Cited by 700
Self-citationBrain cell type–specific enhancer–promoter interactome maps and disease - risk association
Nott, A., Holtman, I. R., Coufal, N. G., Schlachetzki, J. C. M., Yu, M., Hu, R., Han, C. Z., Pena, M., Xiao, J., Wu, Y., et al. (2019) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.aay0793 · Cited by 699
DNA repair mechanisms in dividing and non-dividing cells
Iyama, T., & Wilson, D. M. (2013) · DNA Repair · doi:10.1016/j.dnarep.2013.04.015 · Cited by 697
A critical role for DNA end-joining proteins in both lymphogenesis and neurogenesis
Gao, Y., Sun, Y., Frank, K. M., Dikkes, P., Fujiwara, Y., Seidl, K. J., Sekiguchi, J. M., Rathbun, G. A., Swat, W., Wang, J., et al. (1998) · Cell · doi:10.1016/s0092-8674(00)81714-6 · Cited by 688
Neuronal activity modifies the DNA methylation landscape in the adult brain
Guo, J. U., Ma, D. K., Mo, H., Ball, M. P., Jang, M.-H., Bonaguidi, M. A., Balazer, J. A., Eaves, H. L., Xie, B., Ford, E., et al. (2011) · Nature Neuroscience · doi:10.1038/nn.2900 · Cited by 669
Identification of Genetic Factors that Modify Clinical Onset of Huntington’s Disease
Lee, J.-M., Wheeler, V. C., Chao, M. J., Vonsattel, J. P. G., Pinto, R. M., Lucente, D., Abu-Elneel, K., Ramos, E. M., Mysore, J. S., Gillis, T., et al. (2015) · Cell · doi:10.1016/j.cell.2015.07.003 · Cited by 655
DNA damage and its links to neurodegeneration
Madabhushi, R., Pan, L., & Tsai, L.-H. (2014) · Neuron · doi:10.1016/j.neuron.2014.06.034 · Cited by 654
Self-citationHeterochromatin drives compartmentalization of inverted and conventional nuclei
Falk, M., Feodorova, Y., Naumova, N., Imakaev, M., Lajoie, B. R., Leonhardt, H., Joffe, B., Dekker, J., Fudenberg, G., Solovei, I., et al. (2019) · Nature · doi:10.1038/s41586-019-1275-3 · Cited by 646 · cited 1×
“133 Changes in the 3D genome aligned with transcriptional cha-nges overall, with reduced loop intensities having a striking correlation with the down-regulation of genes.”
BackgroundHaas, B. J., Dobin, A., Li, B., Stransky, N., Pochet, N., & Regev, A. (2019) · Genome biology · doi:10.1186/s13059-019-1842-9 · Cited by 646
Loss of epigenetic information as a cause of mammalian aging
Yang, J.-H., Hayano, M., Griffin, P. T., Amorim, J. A., Bonkowski, M. S., Apostolides, J. K., Salfati, E. L., Blanchette, M., Munding, E. M., Bhakta, M., et al. (2023) · Cell · doi:10.1016/j.cell.2022.12.027 · Cited by 643
Role of p53 in the Regulation of Cellular Senescence
Mijit, M., Caracciolo, V., Melillo, A., Amicarelli, F., & Giordano, A. (2020) · Biomolecules · doi:10.3390/biom10030420 · Cited by 639 · cited 1×
“72 Similar to our observations from BLISS in CK-p25, human fusion genes in excitatory neurons also tended to have increased gene expression in both AD and control individuals (Figure 2E).”
ResultAging and neurodegeneration are associated with increased mutations in single human neurons
Lodato, M. A., Rodin, R. E., Bohrson, C. L., Coulter, M. E., Barton, A. R., Kwon, M., Sherman, M. A., Vitzthum, C. M., Luquette, L. J., Yandava, C. N., et al. (2018) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.aao4426 · Cited by 635
Cruz, J. C., Tseng, H.-C., Goldman, J. A., Shih, H., & Tsai, L.-H. (2003) · Neuron · doi:10.1016/s0896-6273(03)00627-5 · Cited by 609
Self-citationJurk, D., Wang, C., Miwa, S., Maddick, M., Korolchuk, V., Tsolou, A., Gonos, E. S., Thrasivoulou, C., Jill Saffrey, M., Cameron, K., et al. (2012) · Aging Cell · doi:10.1111/j.1474-9726.2012.00870.x · Cited by 598
Chromosome conformation elucidates regulatory relationships in developing human brain
Won, H., de la Torre-Ubieta, L., Stein, J. L., Parikshak, N. N., Huang, J., Opland, C. K., Gandal, M. J., Sutton, G. J., Hormozdiari, F., Lu, D., et al. (2016) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature19847 · Cited by 584
Lin, C., Yang, L., Tanasa, B., Hutt, K., Ju, B.-G., Ohgi, K. A., Zhang, J., Rose, D. W., Fu, X.-D., Glass, C. K., et al. (2009) · Cell · doi:10.1016/j.cell.2009.11.030 · Cited by 576
Spatial Organization of the Mouse Genome and Its Role in Recurrent Chromosomal Translocations
Zhang, Y., McCord, R. P., Ho, Y.-J., Lajoie, B. R., Hildebrand, D. G., Simon, A. C., Becker, M. S., Alt, F. W., & Dekker, J. (2012) · Cell · doi:10.1016/j.cell.2012.02.002 · Cited by 572
Mild cognitive impairment is related to Alzheimer disease pathology and cerebral infarctions
Bennett, D. A., Schneider, J. A., Bienias, J. L., Evans, D. A., & Wilson, R. S. (2005) · Neurology · doi:10.1212/01.wnl.0000152982.47274.9e · Cited by 537
Self-citationEnhancer loops appear stable during development and are associated with paused polymerase
Ghavi-Helm, Y., Klein, F. A., Pakozdi, T., Ciglar, L., Noordermeer, D., Huber, W., & Furlong, E. E. M. (2014) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature13417 · Cited by 536
Accurate and efficient detection of gene fusions from RNA sequencing data
Uhrig, S., Ellermann, J., Walther, T., Burkhardt, P., Fröhlich, M., Hutter, B., Toprak, U. H., Neumann, O., Stenzinger, A., Scholl, C., et al. (2021) · Genome Research · doi:10.1101/gr.257246.119 · Cited by 526
Frequent chromosomal translocations induced by DNA double-strand breaks
Richardson, C., & Jasin, M. (2000) · Nature · doi:10.1038/35015097 · Cited by 517
Crowell, H. L., Soneson, C., Germain, P.-L., Calini, D., Collin, L., Raposo, C., Malhotra, D., & Robinson, M. D. (2020) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/s41467-020-19894-4 · Cited by 515
Mathys, H., Peng, Z., Boix, C. A., Victor, M. B., Leary, N., Babu, S., Abdelhady, G., Jiang, X., Ng, A. P., Ghafari, K., et al. (2023) · Cell · doi:10.1016/j.cell.2023.08.039 · Cited by 495
Self-citationDynamics of DNA Double-Strand Breaks Revealed by Clustering of Damaged Chromosome Domains
Aten, J. A., Stap, J., Krawczyk, P. M., van Oven, C. H., Hoebe, R. A., Essers, J., & Kanaar, R. (2004) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1088845 · Cited by 491
Suberbielle, E., Sanchez, P. E., Kravitz, A. V., Wang, X., Ho, K., Eilertson, K., Devidze, N., Kreitzer, A. C., & Mucke, L. (2013) · Nature Neuroscience · doi:10.1038/nn.3356 · Cited by 487
Aguilera, A., & García-Muse, T. (2013) · Annual Review of Genetics · doi:10.1146/annurev-genet-111212-133232 · Cited by 476
Integrative detection and analysis of structural variation in cancer genomes
Dixon, J. R., Xu, J., Dileep, V., Zhan, Y., Song, F., Le, V. T., Yardımcı, G. G., Chakraborty, A., Bann, D. V., Wang, Y., et al. (2018) · Nature Genetics · doi:10.1038/s41588-018-0195-8 · Cited by 452
Self-citationGenome Organization Drives Chromosome Fragility
Canela, A., Maman, Y., Jung, S., Wong, N., Callen, E., Day, A., Kieffer-Kwon, K.-R., Pekowska, A., Zhang, H., Rao, S. S. P., et al. (2017) · Cell · doi:10.1016/j.cell.2017.06.034 · Cited by 383
BLISS is a versatile and quantitative method for genome-wide profiling of DNA double-strand breaks
Yan, W. X., Mirzazadeh, R., Garnerone, S., Scott, D., Schneider, M. W., Kallas, T., Custodio, J., Wernersson, E., Li, Y., Gao, L., et al. (2017) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/ncomms15058 · Cited by 369 · cited 1×
“69 Surpris-ingly, the level of enrichment of DSBs at highly transcribed genes was lower in Step 1 and Step 2 neurons compared to Control.”
BackgroundGlobal reorganization of the nuclear landscape in senescent cells
Chandra, T., Ewels, P. A., Schoenfelder, S., Furlan-Magaril, M., Wingett, S. W., Kirschner, K., Thuret, J.-Y., Andrews, S., Fraser, P., & Reik, W. (2015) · Cell Reports · doi:10.1016/j.celrep.2014.12.055 · Cited by 348
Loop extrusion as a mechanism for formation of DNA damage repair foci
Arnould, C., Rocher, V., Finoux, A.-L., Clouaire, T., Li, K., Zhou, F., Caron, P., Mangeot, P. E., Ricci, E. P., Mourad, R., et al. (2021) · Nature · doi:10.1038/s41586-021-03193-z · Cited by 341
Kalocsay, M., Hiller, N. J., & Jentsch, S. (2009) · Molecular Cell · doi:10.1016/j.molcel.2009.01.016 · Cited by 340
DNA double strand break repair and chromosomal translocation: Lessons from animal models
Ferguson, D. O., & Alt, F. W. (2001) · Oncogene · doi:10.1038/sj.onc.1204767 · Cited by 333
Spatial Dynamics of Chromosome Translocations in Living Cells
Roukos, V., Voss, T. C., Schmidt, C. K., Lee, S., Wangsa, D., & Misteli, T. (2013) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1237150 · Cited by 331
DNA damage response and metabolic disease
Shimizu, I., Yoshida, Y., Suda, M., & Minamino, T. (2014) · Cell Metabolism · doi:10.1016/j.cmet.2014.10.008 · Cited by 286
Deregulation of HDAC1 by p25/Cdk5 in Neurotoxicity
Kim, D., Frank, C. L., Dobbin, M. M., Tsunemoto, R. K., Tu, W., Peng, P. L., Guan, J.-S., Lee, B.-H., Moy, L. Y., Giusti, P., et al. (2008) · Neuron · doi:10.1016/j.neuron.2008.10.015 · Cited by 286
Self-citationLong Neural Genes Harbor Recurrent DNA Break Clusters in Neural Stem/Progenitor Cells
Wei, P.-C., Chang, A. N., Kao, J., Du, Z., Meyers, R. M., Alt, F. W., & Schwer, B. (2016) · Cell · doi:10.1016/j.cell.2015.12.039 · Cited by 280
Chromatin structure dynamics during the mitosis-to-G1 phase transition
Zhang, H., Emerson, D. J., Gilgenast, T. G., Titus, K. R., Lan, Y., Huang, P., Zhang, D., Wang, H., Keller, C. A., Giardine, B., et al. (2019) · Nature · doi:10.1038/s41586-019-1778-y · Cited by 271
Recent evidence that TADs and chromatin loops are dynamic structures
Hansen, A. S., Cattoglio, C., Darzacq, X., & Tjian, R. (2018) · Nucleus · doi:10.1080/19491034.2017.1389365 · Cited by 266
Aymard, F., Aguirrebengoa, M., Guillou, E., Javierre, B. M., Bugler, B., Arnould, C., Rocher, V., Iacovoni, J. S., Biernacka, A., Skrzypczak, M., et al. (2017) · Nature Structural & Molecular Biology · doi:10.1038/nsmb.3387 · Cited by 263
McConnell, M. J., Moran, J. V., Abyzov, A., Akbarian, S., Bae, T., Cortes-Ciriano, I., Erwin, J. A., Fasching, L., Flasch, D. A., Freed, D., et al. (2017) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.aal1641 · Cited by 262
Cellular senescence and Alzheimer disease: the egg and the chicken scenario
Saez-Atienzar, S., & Masliah, E. (2020) · Nature Reviews Neuroscience · doi:10.1038/s41583-020-0325-z · Cited by 257
SIRT1 collaborates with ATM and HDAC1 to maintain genomic stability in neurons
Dobbin, M. M., Madabhushi, R., Pan, L., Chen, Y., Kim, D., Gao, J., Ahanonu, B., Pao, P.-C., Qiu, Y., Zhao, Y., et al. (2013) · Nature Neuroscience · doi:10.1038/nn.3460 · Cited by 250
Self-citationDisease-Associated Short Tandem Repeats Co-localize with Chromatin Domain Boundaries
Sun, J. H., Zhou, L., Emerson, D. J., Phyo, S. A., Titus, K. R., Gong, W., Gilgenast, T. G., Beagan, J. A., Davidson, B. L., Tassone, F., et al. (2018) · Cell · doi:10.1016/j.cell.2018.08.005 · Cited by 249 · cited 1×
“41 Further, the disruption of 3D genome organization has been demonstrated in neurodevelopmental disorders such as Fragile X syndrome and Down syndrome, etc. 42,43 Chromatin accessibility has also been shown to be disrupted in the AD brain.”
BackgroundHigh throughput error corrected Nanopore single cell transcriptome sequencing
Lebrigand, K., Magnone, V., Barbry, P., & Waldmann, R. (2020) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/s41467-020-17800-6 · Cited by 236
Maintaining genome stability in the nervous system
McKinnon, P. J. (2013) · Nature Neuroscience · doi:10.1038/nn.3537 · Cited by 229
Fan, J., Lee, H., Lee, S., Ryu, D., Lee, S., Xue, C., Kim, S. J., Kım, K., Barkas, N., Park, P. J., et al. (2018) · Genome Research · doi:10.1101/gr.228080.117 · Cited by 228
Lamin Dysfunction Mediates Neurodegeneration in Tauopathies
Frost, B., Bardai, F. H., & Feany, M. B. (2016) · Current Biology · doi:10.1016/j.cub.2015.11.039 · Cited by 226
Zirkel, A., Nikolic, M., Sofiadis, K., Mallm, J.-P., Brackley, C. A., Gothe, H., Drechsel, O., Becker, C., Altmüller, J., Josipovic, N., et al. (2018) · Molecular Cell · doi:10.1016/j.molcel.2018.03.030 · Cited by 226
Neuronal enhancers are hotspots for DNA single-strand break repair
Wu, W., Kargbo-Hill, S. E., Nathan, W. J., Paiano, J., Callen, E., Wang, D., Shinoda, K., van Wietmarschen, N., Colón-Mercado, J. M., Zong, D., et al. (2021) · Nature · doi:10.1038/s41586-021-03468-5 · Cited by 223
Somatic genomic changes in single Alzheimer’s disease neurons
Miller, M. B., Huang, A. Y., Kim, J., Zhou, Z., Kirkham, S. L., Maury, E. A., Ziegenfuss, J. S., Reed, H. C., Neil, J. E., Rento, L., et al. (2022) · Nature · doi:10.1038/s41586-022-04640-1 · Cited by 223
Neuron-specific signatures in the chromosomal connectome associated with schizophrenia risk
Rajarajan, P., Borrman, T., Liao, W., Schrode, N., Flaherty, E., Casiño, C., Powell, S., Yashaswini, C., LaMarca, E. A., Kassim, B., et al. (2018) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.aat4311 · Cited by 219
Early neuronal accumulation of DNA double strand breaks in Alzheimer’s disease
Shanbhag, N. M., Evans, M. D., Mao, W., Nana, A. L., Seeley, W. W., Adame, A., Rissman, R. A., Masliah, E., & Mucke, L. (2019) · Acta Neuropathologica Communications · doi:10.1186/s40478-019-0723-5 · Cited by 214
Somatic APP gene recombination in Alzheimer’s disease and normal neurons
Lee, M.-H., Siddoway, B., Kaeser, G. E., Segota, I., Rivera, R., Romanow, W. J., Liu, C. S., Park, C., Kennedy, G., Long, T., et al. (2018) · Nature · doi:10.1038/s41586-018-0718-6 · Cited by 210
Subtype-specific 3D genome alteration in acute myeloid leukaemia
Xu, J., Song, F., Lyu, H., Kobayashi, M., Zhang, B., Zhao, Z., Hou, Y., Wang, X., Luan, Y., Jia, B., et al. (2022) · Nature · doi:10.1038/s41586-022-05365-x · Cited by 208
Epigenomic dissection of Alzheimer’s disease pinpoints causal variants and reveals epigenome erosion
Xiong, X., James, B. T., Boix, C. A., Park, Y. P., Galani, K., Victor, M. B., Sun, N., Hou, L., Ho, L.-L., Mantero, J., et al. (2023) · Cell · doi:10.1016/j.cell.2023.08.040 · Cited by 205 · cited 2×
“87 Interestingly, erosion of epigenetic information, TAD insulation, and cell identity was recently reported in a mouse model with inducible DNA damage (ICE mouse model) accompanied by brain aging and cognitive decline.”
BackgroundSelf-citationDNA repair factor BRCA1 depletion occurs in Alzheimer brains and impairs cognitive function in mice
Suberbielle, E., Djukic, B., Evans, M., Kim, D. H., Taneja, P., Wang, X., Finucane, M. M., Knox, J. A., Ho, K., Devidze, N., et al. (2015) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/ncomms9897 · Cited by 204
Canela, A., Maman, Y., Huang, S.-Y. N., Wutz, G., Tang, W., Zagnoli-Vieira, G., Callén, E., Wong, N., Day, A., Peters, J., et al. (2019) · Molecular Cell · doi:10.1016/j.molcel.2019.04.030 · Cited by 202
p25/Cyclin-Dependent Kinase 5 Induces Production and Intraneuronal Accumulation of Amyloid βIn Vivo
Cruz, J. C., Kim, D., Moy, L. Y., Dobbin, M. M., Sun, X., Bronson, R. T., & Tsai, L. (2006) · Journal of Neuroscience · doi:10.1523/jneurosci.3133-06.2006 · Cited by 197
Self-citationHistone variant H2A.J accumulates in senescent cells and promotes inflammatory gene expression
Contrepois, K., Coudereau, C., Benayoun, B. A., Schuler, N., Roux, P.-F., Bischof, O., Courbeyrette, R., Carvalho, C., Thuret, J.-Y., Ma, Z., et al. (2017) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/ncomms14995 · Cited by 191
Identifying cis Elements for Spatiotemporal Control of Mammalian DNA Replication
Sima, J., Chakraborty, A., Dileep, V., Michalski, M., Klein, K. N., Holcomb, N. P., Turner, J. L., Paulsen, M. T., Rivera‐Mulia, J. C., Trevilla‐García, C., et al. (2018) · Cell · doi:10.1016/j.cell.2018.11.036 · Cited by 188
Self-citationJAFFA: High sensitivity transcriptome-focused fusion gene detection
Davidson, N., Majewski, I. J., & Oshlack, A. (2015) · Genome Medicine · doi:10.1186/s13073-015-0167-x · Cited by 184
Matias, I., Diniz, L. P., Damico, I. V., Araujo, A. P. B., Neves, L. D. S., Vargas, G., Leite, R. E. P., Suemoto, C. K., Nitrini, R., Jacob‐Filho, W., et al. (2022) · Aging Cell · doi:10.1111/acel.13521 · Cited by 183
Histone H2A.Z subunit exchange controls consolidation of recent and remote memory
Zovkic, I. B., Paulukaitis, B. S., Day, J. J., Etikala, D. M., & Sweatt, J. D. (2014) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature13707 · Cited by 179
Dileep, V., Ay, F., Sima, J., Vera, D. L., Noble, W. S., & Gilbert, D. M. (2015) · Genome Research · doi:10.1101/gr.183699.114 · Cited by 177
Self-citationGenomic integrity and the ageing brain
Chow, H.-M., & Herrup, K. (2015) · Nature Reviews Neuroscience · doi:10.1038/nrn4020 · Cited by 174
DNA strand breaks in Alzheimer’s disease
Adamec, E., Vonsattel, J. P., & Nixon, R. A. (1999) · Brain Research · doi:10.1016/s0006-8993(99)02004-1 · Cited by 167
Immediate and deferred epigenomic signatures of in vivo neuronal activation in mouse hippocampus
Fernandez-Albert, J., Lipinski, M., Lopez-Cascales, M. T., Rowley, M. J., Martin-Gonzalez, A. M., del Blanco, B., Corces, V. G., & Barco, A. (2019) · Nature Neuroscience · doi:10.1038/s41593-019-0476-2 · Cited by 166
Haplotype-aware analysis of somatic copy number variations from single-cell transcriptomes
Gao, T., Soldatov, R., Sarkar, H., Kurkiewicz, A., Biederstedt, E., Loh, P., & Kharchenko, P. V. (2022) · Nature Biotechnology · doi:10.1038/s41587-022-01468-y · Cited by 166
Reorganization of chromosome architecture in replicative cellular senescence
Criscione, S. W., De Cecco, M., Siranosian, B., Zhang, Y., Kreiling, J. A., Sedivy, J. M., & Neretti, N. (2016) · Science Advances · doi:10.1126/sciadv.1500882 · Cited by 164
Marco, A., Meharena, H. S., Dileep, V., Raju, R. M., Davila-Velderrain, J., Zhang, A. L., Adaikkan, C., Young, J. Z., Gao, F., Kellis, M., et al. (2020) · Nature Neuroscience · doi:10.1038/s41593-020-00717-0 · Cited by 159
Self-citationWang, X., Luan, Y., & Yue, F. (2022) · Science Advances · doi:10.1126/sciadv.abn9215 · Cited by 148 · cited 1×
“Persistent DSBs in neurons could also indirectly impact the 3D genome organization through genome structural variations.(55,56) To explore the genomic consequences of DSBs in AD, we used both human postmortem brain samples and a mouse model of neurodegeneration that recapitulate the pre-symptomatic accumulation of DSB…”
BackgroundBeagan, J. A., Pastuzyn, E. D., Fernandez, L. R., Guo, M. H., Feng, K., Titus, K. R., Chandrashekar, H., Shepherd, J. D., & Phillips-Cremins, J. E. (2020) · Nature Neuroscience · doi:10.1038/s41593-020-0634-6 · Cited by 143
Cohesin Protects Genes against γH2AX Induced by DNA Double-Strand Breaks
Caron, P., Aymard, F., Iacovoni, J. S., Briois, S., Canitrot, Y., Bugler, B., Massip, L., Losada, A., & Legube, G. (2012) · PLoS Genetics · doi:10.1371/journal.pgen.1002460 · Cited by 135
LADL: light-activated dynamic looping for endogenous gene expression control
Kim, J. H., Rege, M., Valeri, J., Dunagin, M. C., Metzger, A., Titus, K. R., Gilgenast, T. G., Gong, W., Beagan, J. A., Raj, A., et al. (2019) · Nature Methods · doi:10.1038/s41592-019-0436-5 · Cited by 135
Radiation-induced DNA damage and repair effects on 3D genome organization
Sanders, J. T., Freeman, T. F., Xu, Y., Golloshi, R., Stallard, M. A., Hill, A. M., San Martin, R., Balajee, A. S., & McCord, R. P. (2020) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/s41467-020-20047-w · Cited by 134
Early life experience drives structural variation of neural genomes in mice
Bedrosian, T. A., Quayle, C., Novaresi, N., & Gage, F. H. (2018) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.aah3378 · Cited by 131
Mechanisms of DNA damage-mediated neurotoxicity in neurodegenerative disease
Welch, G., & Tsai, L. (2022) · The EMBO Reports · doi:10.15252/embr.202154217 · Cited by 129
Self-citationDella Valle, F., Reddy, P., Yamamoto, M., Liu, P., Saera-Vila, A., Bensaddek, D., Zhang, H., Prieto Martinez, J., Abassi, L., Celii, M., et al. (2022) · Science Translational Medicine · doi:10.1126/scitranslmed.abl6057 · Cited by 127
Fusion genes and chromosome translocations in the common epithelial cancers
Edwards, P. A. (2010) · The Journal of Pathology · doi:10.1002/path.2632 · Cited by 126
A NPAS4–NuA4 complex couples synaptic activity to DNA repair
Pollina, E. A., Gilliam, D. T., Landau, A. T., Lin, C., Pajarillo, N., Davis, C. P., Harmin, D. A., Yap, E.-L., Vogel, I. R., Griffith, E. C., et al. (2023) · Nature · doi:10.1038/s41586-023-05711-7 · Cited by 125
Incorporation of a nucleoside analog maps genome repair sites in postmitotic human neurons
Reid, D. A., Reed, P. J., Schlachetzki, J. C. M., Nitulescu, I. I., Chou, G., Tsui, E. C., Jones, J. R., Chandran, S., Lu, A. T., McClain, C. A., et al. (2021) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.abb9032 · Cited by 121
CTCF orchestrates long-range cohesin-driven V(D)J recombinational scanning
Ba, Z., Lou, J., Ye, A. Y., Dai, H., Dring, E. W., Lin, S. G., Jain, S., Kyritsis, N., Kieffer-Kwon, K.-R., Casellas, R. C., et al. (2020) · Nature · doi:10.1038/s41586-020-2578-0 · Cited by 115
Neuronal and glial 3D chromatin architecture informs the cellular etiology of brain disorders
Hu, B., Won, H., Mah, W., Park, R. B., Kassim, B., Spiess, K., Kozlenkov, A., Crowley, C. A., Pochareddy, S., The PsychENCODE Consortium, et al. (2021) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/s41467-021-24243-0 · Cited by 103
The Cohesin Complex Prevents the End Joining of Distant DNA Double-Strand Ends
Gelot, C., Guirouilh-Barbat, J., Le Guen, T., Dardillac, E., Chailleux, C., Canitrot, Y., & Lopez, B. S. (2016) · Molecular Cell · doi:10.1016/j.molcel.2015.11.002 · Cited by 101
Learning and Age-Related Changes in Genome-wide H2A.Z Binding in the Mouse Hippocampus
Stefanelli, G., Azam, A. B., Walters, B. J., Brimble, M. A., Gettens, C. P., Bouchard-Cannon, P., Cheng, H.-Y. M., Davidoff, A. M., Narkaj, K., Day, J. J., et al. (2018) · Cell Reports · doi:10.1016/j.celrep.2018.01.020 · Cited by 98
Identification of copy number variations and translocations in cancer cells from Hi-C data
Chakraborty, A., & Ay, F. (2018) · Bioinformatics · doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/btx664 · Cited by 94
Thadathil, N., Delotterie, D. F., Xiao, J., Hori, R., McDonald, M. P., & Khan, M. M. (2021) · Molecular Neurobiology · doi:10.1007/s12035-020-02109-8 · Cited by 94
Down-syndrome-induced senescence disrupts the nuclear architecture of neural progenitors
Meharena, H. S., Marco, A., Dileep, V., Lockshin, E. R., Akatsu, G. Y., Mullahoo, J., Watson, L. A., Ko, T., Guerin, L. N., Abdurrob, F., et al. (2022) · Cell Stem Cell · doi:10.1016/j.stem.2021.12.002 · Cited by 92
Self-citationCovo, S., Westmoreland, J. W., Gordenin, D. A., & Resnick, M. A. (2010) · PLoS Genetics · doi:10.1371/journal.pgen.1001006 · Cited by 89
Welch, G. M., Boix, C. A., Schmauch, E., Davila-Velderrain, J., Victor, M. B., Dileep, V., Bozzelli, P. L., Su, Q., Cheng, J. D., Lee, A., et al. (2022) · Science Advances · doi:10.1126/sciadv.abo4662 · Cited by 84
Self-citationSensory experience remodels genome architecture in neural circuit to drive motor learning
Yamada, T., Yang, Y., Valnegri, P., Juric, I., Abnousi, A., Markwalter, K. H., Guthrie, A. N., Godec, A., Oldenborg, A., Hu, M., et al. (2019) · Nature · doi:10.1038/s41586-019-1190-7 · Cited by 83
The threat of programmed DNA damage to neuronal genome integrity and plasticity
Caldecott, K. W., Ward, M. E., & Nussenzweig, A. (2022) · Nature Genetics · doi:10.1038/s41588-021-01001-y · Cited by 80
Changes in Chromatin Structure Associated with Alzheimer’s Disease
Lewis, P. N., Lukiw, W. J., De Boni, U., & Crapper McLachlan, D. R. (1981) · Journal of Neurochemistry · doi:10.1111/j.1471-4159.1981.tb04670.x · Cited by 78
Recombination of repeat elements generates somatic complexity in human genomes
Pascarella, G., Hon, C. C., Hashimoto, K., Busch, A., Luginbühl, J., Parr, C., Hin Yip, W., Abe, K., Kratz, A., Bonetti, A., et al. (2022) · Cell · doi:10.1016/j.cell.2022.06.032 · Cited by 77
Rübe, C. E., Bäumert, C., Schuler, N., Isermann, A., Schmal, Z., Glanemann, M., Mann, C., & Scherthan, H. (2021) · npj Aging and Mechanisms of Disease · doi:10.1038/s41514-021-00060-z · Cited by 76
Enhancer variants associated with Alzheimer’s disease affect gene expression via chromatin looping
Kikuchi, M., Hara, N., Hasegawa, M., Miyashita, A., Kuwano, R., Ikeuchi, T., & Nakaya, A. (2019) · BMC Medical Genomics · doi:10.1186/s12920-019-0574-8 · Cited by 74
Wang, Z. F., Krasikov, T., Frey, M. R., Wang, J., Matera, A. G., & Marzluff, W. F. (1996) · Genome Research · doi:10.1101/gr.6.8.688 · Cited by 70
The three-dimensional landscape of cortical chromatin accessibility in Alzheimer’s disease
Bendl, J., Hauberg, M. E., Girdhar, K., Im, E., Vicari, J. M., Rahman, S., Fernando, M. B., Townsley, K. G., Dong, P., Misir, R., et al. (2022) · Nature Neuroscience · doi:10.1038/s41593-022-01166-7 · Cited by 65
Iwasaki, O., Tanizawa, H., Kim, K.-D., Kossenkov, A., Nacarelli, T., Tashiro, S., Majumdar, S., Showe, L. C., Zhang, R., & Noma, K.-I. (2019) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/s41467-019-13604-5 · Cited by 58
Tse, K., Cheng, A., Ma, F., & Herrup, K. (2018) · Alzheimer's & Dementia · doi:10.1016/j.jalz.2017.11.010 · Cited by 56
Isermann, A., Mann, C., & Rübe, C. E. (2020) · International Journal of Molecular Sciences · doi:10.3390/ijms21239130 · Cited by 54
Lamin B1 sequesters 53BP1 to control its recruitment to DNA damage
Etourneaud, L., Moussa, A., Rass, E., Genet, D., Willaume, S., Chabance-Okumura, C., Wanschoor, P., Picotto, J., Thézé, B., Dépagne, J., et al. (2021) · Science Advances · doi:10.1126/sciadv.abb3799 · Cited by 54
DNA Double-Strand Breaks as Pathogenic Lesions in Neurological Disorders
Provasek, V. E., Mitra, J., Malojirao, V. H., & Hegde, M. L. (2022) · International Journal of Molecular Sciences · doi:10.3390/ijms23094653 · Cited by 54
Altered DNA repair; an early pathogenic pathway in Alzheimer’s disease and obesity
Yu, H., Harrison, F. E., & Xia, F. (2018) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-018-23644-4 · Cited by 50
Mechanisms driving chromosomal translocations: lost in time and space
Ramsden, D. A., & Nussenzweig, A. (2021) · Oncogene · doi:10.1038/s41388-021-01856-9 · Cited by 46
Single-cell gene fusion detection by scFusion
Jin, Z., Huang, W., Shen, N., Li, J., Wang, X.-C., Dong, J., Park, P. J., & Xi, R. (2022) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/s41467-022-28661-6 · Cited by 36
Funk, O. H., Qalieh, Y., Doyle, D. Z., Lam, M. M., & Kwan, K. Y. (2022) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.2116956119 · Cited by 33
TET-TDG active DNA demethylation at CpG and non-CpG sites
DeNizio, J. E., Dow, B. J., Serrano, J. C., Ghanty, U., Drohat, A. C., & Kohli, R. M. (2021) · Journal of Molecular Biology · doi:10.1016/j.jmb.2021.166877 · Cited by 32 · cited 3×
“Consistent with the observations in CK-p25 mice and etoposide-treated neurons, Hi-C in P301S neurons showed a decreased number of chromatin loops and a significant decrease in TAD integrity as measured by inclusion ratio (Figures S5E and S5F; Table S1, pages 12, 13).”
BackgroundResultTranscriptional responses to DNA damage
Silva, E., & Ideker, T. (2019) · DNA repair · doi:10.1016/j.dnarep.2019.05.002 · Cited by 31 · cited 1×
“Since genome structural variations can result from errors in DNA repair and as DNA repair pathways can be up-regulated in the presence of DNA damage, we asked whether cells with increased activity of specific damage-associated and normal neuronal genes showed different gene fusions burden.(61) We scored all cells in t…”
BackgroundBotten, G., Zhang, Y., Dudnyk, K., Kim, Y., Liu, X., Sanders, J. T., Imanci, A., Droin, N., Cao, H., Kaphle, P., et al. (2022) · Blood · doi:10.1182/blood.2022017555 · Cited by 29
Aymard, F., & Legube, G. (2016) · Molecular & Cellular Oncology · doi:10.1080/23723556.2015.1134411 · Cited by 21
Zhu, Q., Niu, Y., Gundry, M., & Zong, C. (2021) · Science Advances · doi:10.1126/sciadv.abf3329 · Cited by 18
Lai, C., Barik, P., Hsieh, D. J., Day, C. H., Ho, T., Chen, R., Kuo, W., Padma, V. V., Shibu, M. A., & Huang, C. (2020) · Biochemical and Biophysical Research Communications · doi:10.1016/j.bbrc.2020.07.052 · Cited by 15
Three-dimensional chromatin organization in brain function and dysfunction
Dileep, V., & Tsai, L.-H. (2021) · Current Opinion in Neurobiology · doi:10.1016/j.conb.2021.04.006 · Cited by 14
Self-citationINKA2, a novel p53 target that interacts with the serine/threonine kinase PAK4
Liu, Y., Tanikawa, C., Ueda, K., & Matsuda, K. (2019) · International Journal of Oncology · doi:10.3892/ijo.2019.4786 · Cited by 13
Marco, A. (2022) · Neural Regeneration Research · doi:10.4103/1673-5374.324834 · Cited by 7
Self-citationKousi, M., Boix, C., Park, Y. P., Mathys, H., Sledzieski, S., Peng, Z., Bennett, D. A., Tsai, L.-H., & Kellis, M. (2022) · doi:10.1101/2022.04.21.489103 · Cited by 7
Self-citationDudnyk, K., Zhou, J., Botten, G. A., Zhang, Y., Kim, Y. J., Liu, X., Sanders, J. T., Imanci, A., Droin, N. M., Cao, H., et al. (2023) · Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) · doi:10.5281/zenodo.7596723 · Cited by 5
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Mathys, H., Peng, Z., Boix, C. A., Victor, M. B., Leary, N., Babu, S., Abdelhady, G., Jiang, X., Ng, A. P., Ghafari, K., et al. (2023) · Cell · doi:10.1016/j.cell.2023.08.039 · Cited by 495
Self-citationAlzheimer’s disease: insights into pathology, molecular mechanisms, and therapy
Zheng, Q., & Wang, X. (2024) · Protein & Cell · doi:10.1093/procel/pwae026 · Cited by 483
Redox regulation: mechanisms, biology and therapeutic targets in diseases
Li, B., Ming, H., Qin, S., Nice, E. C., Dong, J., Du, Z., & Huang, C. (2025) · Signal Transduction and Targeted Therapy · doi:10.1038/s41392-024-02095-6 · Cited by 389
Cellular and pathological functions of tau
Bravo, C. P., Naguib, S. A., & Gan, L. (2024) · Nature Reviews Molecular Cell Biology · doi:10.1038/s41580-024-00753-9 · Cited by 271
Epigenomic dissection of Alzheimer’s disease pinpoints causal variants and reveals epigenome erosion
Xiong, X., James, B. T., Boix, C. A., Park, Y. P., Galani, K., Victor, M. B., Sun, N., Hou, L., Ho, L.-L., Mantero, J., et al. (2023) · Cell · doi:10.1016/j.cell.2023.08.040 · Cited by 205
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Dileep, V., Boix, C. A., Mathys, H., Marco, A., Welch, G. M., Meharena, H. S., Loon, A., Jeloka, R., Peng, Z., Bennett, D. A., Kellis, M., & Tsai, L.-H.
- Affiliations
- Massachusetts Institute of Technology (US)
- MIT Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory (US)
- Rush University Medical Center (US)
- Broad Institute (US)
- Corresponding author
- Dileep, Vishnu
- Kellis, Manolis
- Tsai, Li-Huei
- ORCID
- Venue
- Cell
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2023-09
- Volume
- 186
- Issue
- 20
- Pages
- 4404-4421.e20
- ISSN
- 0092-8674 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC10697236
- OpenAlex
- W4387142572
- Semantic Scholar
- db858b708e9752459a4cefe64a28e29701a12bc8
- Cited by
- 130
- References
- 162
- Citations by year
- 2026: 28 · 2025: 53 · 2024: 41 · 2023: 7
- FWCI
- 11.49
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Cell (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
- Funders
- NIH (P30AG72975, K99 AG073466, R01AG15819, R01AG17917, P30AG10161, R01 AG058002, U01AG46152, U01 NS110453, U01AG61356, NS051874, AG054012, NS102730)
- Cure Alzheimer's Fund
- Alzheimer's Association (AARF-19-618751)
- JPB Foundation
- Schweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen Forschung (R01AG17917, R01AG15819, P30AG72975, P30AG10161, P2BSP3_151885, U01AG61356, U01AG46152)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › DNA Repair Mechanisms
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Alzheimer's disease research and treatments
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genomic variations and chromosomal abnormalities
- Keywords
- DNA double-strand breaks, neurodegeneration, Alzheimer's disease, structural variants, 3D genome organization, cohesin, DNA repair, cellular senescence, excitatory neurons, genome stability, histone genes
- MeSH terms
- Alzheimer Disease, Animals, DNA, DNA Repair, Humans, Neurons, Sequence Analysis, RNA, Neurodegenerative Diseases, Genomic Instability, Mice, DNA Breaks, Double-Stranded, Single-Cell Analysis
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-10, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-10 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review