Cited by 4,368DNA Repair MechanismsCancer-related Molecular PathwaysPARP inhibition in cancer therapy

The DNA Damage Response: Making It Safe to Play with Knives

Open access
Ciccia, Alberto, Elledge, Stephen J.·2010·Molecular Cell

Abstract

Damage to our genetic material is an ongoing threat to both our ability to faithfully transmit genetic information to our offspring as well as our own survival. To respond to these threats, eukaryotes have evolved the DNA damage response (DDR). The DDR is a complex signal transduction pathway that has the ability to sense DNA damage and transduce this information to the cell to influence cellular responses to DNA damage. Cells possess an arsenal of enzymatic tools capable of remodeling and repairing DNA; however, their activities must be tightly regulated in a temporal, spatial, and DNA lesion-appropriate fashion to optimize repair and prevent unnecessary and potentially deleterious alterations in the structure of DNA during normal cellular processes. This review will focus on how the DDR controls DNA repair and the phenotypic consequences of defects in these critical regulatory functions in mammals.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.molcel.2010.09.019

Cites

246 of 246 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Ciccia, A., & Elledge, S. J.
Affiliations
Brigham and Women's Hospital (US)
Corresponding author
Elledge, Stephen J.
Venue
Molecular Cell
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2010-10
Volume
40
Issue
2
Pages
179-204
ISSN
1097-2765 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2077436902
Cited by
4,368
References
246
Citations by year
2026: 198 · 2025: 240 · 2024: 246 · 2023: 301 · 2022: 292 · 2021: 335 · 2020: 343 · 2019: 308 · 2018: 292 · 2017: 303 · 2016: 329 · 2015: 289 · 2014: 288 · 2013: 269 · 2012: 201
FWCI
16.84
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Molecular Cell (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • Howard Hughes Medical Institute
  • National Institute of General Medical Sciences (R37GM044664)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › DNA Repair Mechanisms
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Cancer-related Molecular Pathways
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › PARP inhibition in cancer therapy
Keywords
DNA damage response, DNA repair, signal transduction, DNA damage recognition, DNA repair regulation, mammalian cells, genetic stability, genome stability
MeSH terms
Animals, DNA, DNA Damage, DNA Repair, Models, Genetic, Recombination, Genetic, Signal Transduction, DNA Breaks, Double-Stranded, Eukaryota

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