Cited by 163DNA Repair MechanismsCancer-related Molecular PathwaysGenetic factors in colorectal cancer

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 241 of the 251 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

DNA replication fidelity and cancer

Open access
Preston, Bradley D., Albertson, Tina M., Herr, Alan J.·2010·Seminars in Cancer Biology

Abstract

Cancer is fueled by mutations and driven by adaptive selection. Normal cells avoid deleterious mutations by replicating their genomes with extraordinary accuracy. Here we review the pathways governing DNA replication fidelity and discuss evidence implicating replication errors (point mutation instability or PIN) in carcinogenesis.

Overview

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.semcancer.2010.10.009

Cites

241 of 241 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

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.

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

10 of the 251 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Zhou, 2003, Highly conserved region of the catalytic subunit of DNA polymerase epsilon in human breast cancer, Exp Oncol, 25, 206
  2. Boveri, 1902, Über mehrpolige Mitosen als Mittel zur Analyze des Zellkerns, Verh Dtsch Zool Ges Würzburg, 35, 67

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 163

Metadata

Authors
Preston, B. D., Albertson, T. M., & Herr, A. J.
Affiliations
University of Washington (US)
Corresponding author
Preston, Bradley D.
Venue
Seminars in Cancer Biology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2010-10
Volume
20
Issue
5
Pages
281-293
ISSN
1044-579X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2056156376
Cited by
160
References
251
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 13 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 12 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 9 · 2015: 11 · 2014: 13 · 2013: 17 · 2012: 16
FWCI
1.16
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Seminars in Cancer Biology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institute on Aging (P01AG001751)
  • National Cancer Institute (P20CA103728, R01CA111582, P01CA077852, R01CA098243)
  • National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (R01ES009927, P30ES007033)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › DNA Repair Mechanisms
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Cancer-related Molecular Pathways
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pathology and Forensic Medicine › Genetic factors in colorectal cancer
Keywords
DNA replication fidelity, carcinogenesis, replication errors, mutation avoidance, positive selection, genome stability
MeSH terms
Animals, Chromosome Aberrations, DNA Damage, DNA-Directed DNA Polymerase, DNA Repair, DNA Replication, Humans, Mutation, Neoplasms, Gene Rearrangement, Point Mutation, Microsatellite Instability, DNA Mismatch Repair

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