Cited by 105DNA Repair MechanismsCarcinogens and Genotoxicity AssessmentGenomic variations and chromosomal abnormalities

DNA double-strand breaks, chromosomal rearrangements, and genomic instability

Morgan, William F., Corcoran, James, Hartmann, Andreas, Kaplan, Mark I., Limoli, Charles L., Ponnaiya, Brian·1998·Mutation Research - Fundamental and Molecular Mechanisms of Mutagenesis

Abstract

DNA double-strand breaks can lead to chromosomal rearrangements at the first mitosis after exposure to the DNA strand-breaking agent. The evidence suggests a number of different pathways for DNA double-strand break rejoining in mammalian cells, but it is unclear what factors determine the fate of the induced break and whether or not it will lead to chromosomal rearrangement. If a cell does survive and proliferate after DNA cleavage, delayed chromosomal instability can be observed in the clonal descendants of the exposed cell. Most, but not all DNA double-strand breaking agents are effective at inducing this delayed chromosomal instability. In this paper, we review the evidence for the role of the DNA double-strand break in directly induced and delayed chromosomal rearrangements.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s0027-5107(98)00104-3

Cites

18 of 18 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Morgan, W. F., Corcoran, J., Hartmann, A., Kaplan, M. I., Limoli, C. L., & Ponnaiya, B.
Affiliations
  • University of California, San Francisco (US)
  • Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (US)
Corresponding author
Morgan, William F.
Venue
Mutation Research - Fundamental and Molecular Mechanisms of Mutagenesis
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
1998-08
Volume
404
Issue
1-2
Pages
125-128
ISSN
  • 0027-5107 (ISSN-L)
  • 1386-1964
OpenAlex
W1971729092
Cited by
105
References
15
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 5 · 2012: 2
FWCI
0.81
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Mutation research. Fundamental and molecular mechanisms of mutagenesis (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health (5-T32-ES07016)
  • Office of Naval Research
  • U.S. Department of Energy (DE-4459-011542)
  • National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › DNA Repair Mechanisms
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Cancer Research › Carcinogens and Genotoxicity Assessment
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genomic variations and chromosomal abnormalities
Keywords
DNA double-strand breaks, chromosomal rearrangements, genomic instability, DNA double-strand break rejoining, mitotic recombination, clonal cell lines, mammalian cells
MeSH terms
Animals, Chromosome Aberrations, DNA, DNA Damage, DNA Repair, DNA Restriction Enzymes, Cricetinae, Mammals, CHO Cells, Chromosome Breakage

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