Cited by 94DNA Repair MechanismsCancer-related Molecular PathwaysBacterial Genetics and Biotechnology

Checkpoint mechanisms at the intersection between DNA damage and repair

Lazzaro, Federico, Giannattasio, Michele, Puddu, Fabio, Granata, Magda, Pellicioli, Achille, Plevani, Paolo, Muzi-Falconi, Marco·2009·DNA Repair

Abstract

In response to genomic insults cells trigger a signal transduction pathway, known as DNA damage checkpoint, whose role is to help the cell to cope with the damage by coordinating cell cycle progression, DNA replication and DNA repair mechanisms. Accumulating evidence suggests that activation of the first checkpoint kinase in the cascade is not due to the lesion itself, but it requires recognition and initial processing of the lesion by a specific repair mechanism. Repair enzymes likely convert a variety of physically and chemically different lesions to a unique common structure, a ssDNA region, which is the checkpoint triggering signal. Checkpoint kinases can modify the activity of repair mechanisms, allowing for efficient repair, on one side, and modulating the generation of the ssDNA signal, on the other. This strategy may be important to allow the most effective repair and a prompt recovery from the damage condition. Interestingly, at least in some cases, if the damage level is low enough the cell can deal with the lesions and it does not need to activate the checkpoint response. On the other hand if damage level is high or if the lesions are not rapidly repairable, checkpoint mechanisms become important for cell survival and preservation of genome integrity.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.dnarep.2009.04.022

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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 citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 172 · Cited by 94

Authors
Lazzaro, F., Giannattasio, M., Puddu, F., Granata, M., Pellicioli, A., Plevani, P., & Muzi-Falconi, M.
Affiliations
University of Milan (IT)
Corresponding author
  • Plevani, Paolo
  • Muzi-Falconi, Marco
Venue
DNA Repair
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2009-09-02
Volume
8
Issue
9
Pages
1055-1067
ISSN
  • 1568-7856 (ISSN-L)
  • 1568-7864
OpenAlex
W2107643519
Cited by
94
References
172
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 15 · 2012: 11
FWCI
5.09
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • DNA repair (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Ministero dell’Istruzione, dell’Università e della Ricerca
  • Associazione Italiana per la Ricerca sul Cancro
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › DNA Repair Mechanisms
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Cancer-related Molecular Pathways
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Bacterial Genetics and Biotechnology
Keywords
DNA damage checkpoint, checkpoint kinase, single-stranded DNA, DNA damage signaling, cell cycle regulation, DNA replication, genome stability
MeSH terms
Animals, Cell Cycle, DNA, DNA Damage, DNA Repair, Humans, Ultraviolet Rays, Base Pair Mismatch

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.

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