The DOI matches its Crossref record; 13 of the 13 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
A systematic CRISPR screen defines mutational mechanisms underpinning signatures caused by replication errors and endogenous DNA damage
Published version of a preprint
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
“These observations are consistent with the hypothesis that SBS5 and SBS40 result from a combination of correlated mutational processes, with some variation across human tissues18,33 and across species.”
From Somatic mutation rates scale with lifespan across mammals (2022) · cites this paper as [33]
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
“SBS1, SBSB/5 and SBSC/18 are believed to result from different forms of DNA damage and are expected to be subject to different DNA repair pathways18,33.”
From Somatic mutation rates scale with lifespan across mammals (2022) · cites this paper as [33]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“This analysis suggests that the same three signatures that dominate somatic mutagenesis in the human colon are dominant in other mammals: SBS1, which is believed to result from the spontaneous deamination of 5-methylcytosine8,32; SBSB (SBS5), a common signature across human tissues that may result from endogenous damage and repair18,33; and SBSC (SBS18), which is dominated by C>A substitutions and”
From Somatic mutation rates scale with lifespan across mammals (2022) · cites this paper as [33]
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
Pan-cancer analysis of whole genomes
The ICGC/TCGA Pan-Cancer Analysis of Whole Genomes Consortium, Aaltonen, L. A., Abascal, F., Abeshouse, A., Aburatani, H., Adams, D. J., Agrawal, N., Ahn, K. S., Ahn, S.-M., Aikata, H., et al. (2020) · Nature · doi:10.1038/s41586-020-1969-6 · Cited by 3,064
Self-citationLandscape of somatic mutations in 560 breast cancer whole-genome sequences
Nik-Zainal, S., Davies, H., Staaf, J., Ramakrishna, M., Glodzik, D., Zou, X., Martincorena, I., Alexandrov, L. B., Martin, S., Wedge, D. C., et al. (2016) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature17676 · Cited by 2,218
Self-citationThe Life History of 21 Breast Cancers
Nik-Zainal, S., Van Loo, P., Wedge, D. C., Alexandrov, L. B., Greenman, C. D., Lau, K. W., Raine, K., Jones, D., Marshall, J., Ramakrishna, M., et al. (2012) · Cell · doi:10.1016/j.cell.2012.04.023 · Cited by 1,443
Oxidative DNA damage and disease: induction, repair and significance
Evans, M. D., Dizdaroglu, M., & Cooke, M. S. (2004) · Mutation Research/Reviews in Mutation Research · doi:10.1016/j.mrrev.2003.11.001 · Cited by 1,372
Base-excision repair of oxidative DNA damage
David, S. S., O'Shea, V. L., & Kundu, S. (2007) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature05978 · Cited by 1,238
Pan-cancer whole-genome analyses of metastatic solid tumours
Priestley, P., Baber, J., Lolkema, M. P., Steeghs, N., de Bruijn, E., Shale, C., Duyvesteyn, K., Haidari, S., van Hoeck, A., Onstenk, W., et al. (2019) · Nature · doi:10.1038/s41586-019-1689-y · Cited by 1,106
Repair and Genetic Consequences of Endogenous DNA Base Damage in Mammalian Cells
Barnes, D. E., & Lindahl, T. (2004) · Annual Review of Genetics · doi:10.1146/annurev.genet.38.072902.092448 · Cited by 753
Repair of Endogenous DNA Damage
LINDAHL, T., & BARNES, D. E. (2000) · Cold Spring Harbor Symposia on Quantitative Biology · doi:10.1101/sqb.2000.65.127 · Cited by 714
Structure of a repair enzyme interrogating undamaged DNA elucidates recognition of damaged DNA
Banerjee, A., Yang, W., Karplus, M., & Verdine, G. L. (2005) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature03458 · Cited by 346
Whole-genome sequencing of triple-negative breast cancers in a population-based clinical study
Staaf, J., Glodzik, D., Bosch, A., Vallon-Christersson, J., Reuterswärd, C., Häkkinen, J., Degasperi, A., Amarante, T. D., Saal, L. H., Hegardt, C., et al. (2019) · Nature Medicine · doi:10.1038/s41591-019-0582-4 · Cited by 307
Self-citation
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 74
- Helleday, T., Eshtad, S. & Nik-Zainal, S. Mechanisms underlying mutational signatures in human cancers. Nat. Rev. Genet. 15, 585–598 (2014). · DOI
- Alexandrov, L. B. et al. Signatures of mutational processes in human cancer. Nature 500, 415–421 (2013). · DOI · Paper page
- Nik-Zainal, S. et al. Mutational processes molding the genomes of 21 breast cancers. Cell 149, 979–993 (2012). · DOI · Paper page
- Haradhvala, N. J. et al. Distinct mutational signatures characterize concurrent loss of polymerase proofreading and mismatch repair. Nat. Commun. 9, 1746 (2018). · DOI
- Alexandrov, L. B. et al. The repertoire of mutational signatures in human cancer. Nature 578, 94–101 (2020). · DOI · Paper page
- Kim, J. et al. Somatic ERCC2 mutations are associated with a distinct genomic signature in urothelial tumors. Nat. Genet. 48, 600–606 (2016). · DOI
- Nik-Zainal, S. et al. The genome as a record of environmental exposure. Mutagenesis 30, 763–770 (2015).
- Zou, X. et al. Validating the concept of mutational signatures with isogenic cell models. Nat. Commun. 9, 1744 (2018). · DOI
- Christensen, S. et al. 5-Fluorouracil treatment induces characteristic T>G mutations in human cancer. Nat. Commun. 10, 4571 (2019). · DOI
- Kucab, J. E. et al. A compendium of mutational signatures of environmental agents. Cell 177, 821–836.e16 (2019). · DOI · Paper page
- Lindahl, T. & Nyberg, B. Rate of depurination of native deoxyribonucleic acid. Biochemistry 11, 3610–3618 (1972). · DOI
- Mardis, E. R.The impact of next-generation sequencing on cancer genomics: from discovery to clinic. Cold Spring Harb. Perspect. Med. 9, a036269 (2019). · DOI
- Berger, M. F. & Mardis, E. R. The emerging clinical relevance of genomics in cancer medicine. Nat. Rev. Clin. Oncol. 15, 353–365 (2018). · DOI
- Kunkel, T. A. & Erie, D. A. DNA mismatch repair. Annu. Rev. Biochem. 74, 681–710 (2005). · DOI
- Kottemann, M. C. & Smogorzewska, A. Fanconi anaemia and the repair of Watson and Crick DNA crosslinks. Nature 493, 356–363 (2013). · DOI
- Wood, R. D., Mitchell, M., Sgouros, J. & Lindahl, T. Human DNA repair genes. Science 291, 1284–1289 (2001). · DOI
- Ceccaldi, R., Rondinelli, B. & D’Andrea, A. D. Repair pathway choices and consequences at the double-strand break. Trends Cell Biol. 26, 52–64 (2016). · DOI · Paper page
- Hanawalt, P. C. & Spivak, G. Transcription-coupled DNA repair: two decades of progress and surprises. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 9, 958–970 (2008). · DOI
- Abid, A., Zhang, M. J., Bagaria, V. K. & Zou, J. Exploring patterns enriched in a dataset with contrastive principal component analysis. Nat. Commun. 9, 2134 (2018). · DOI
- Van der Maaten, L. & Hinton, G. Visualizing data using t-SNE. J. Mach. Learn. Res. 9, 2579–2605 (2008).
- Degasperi, A. et al. A practical framework and online tool for mutational signature analyses show intertissue variation and driver dependencies. Nat. Cancer 1, 249–263 (2020). · DOI · Paper page
- Radicella, J. P., Dherin, C., Desmaze, C., Fox, M. S. & Boiteux, S. Cloning and characterization of hOGG1, a human homolog of the OGG1 gene of Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 94, 8010–8015 (1997). · DOI
- Lee, Y. A., Durandin, A., Dedon, P. C., Geacintov, N. E. & Shafirovich, V. Oxidation of guanine in G, GG, and GGG sequence contexts by aromatic pyrenyl radical cations and carbonate radical anions: relationship between kinetics and distribution of alkali-labile lesions. J. Phys. Chem. B 112, 1834–1844 (2008). · DOI
- Sugiyama, H. & Saito, I. Theoretical studies of GG-specific photocleavage of DNA via electron transfer: significant lowering of ionization potential and 5′-localization of HOMO of stacked GG bases in B-form DNA. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 118, 7063–7068 (1996). · DOI
- Allgayer, J., Kitsera, N., von der Lippen, C., Epe, B. & Khobta, A. Modulation of base excision repair of 8-oxoguanine by the nucleotide sequence. Nucleic Acids Res. 41, 8559–8571 (2013). · DOI
- Friedman, J. I. & Stivers, J. T. Detection of damaged DNA bases by DNA glycosylase enzymes. Biochemistry 49, 4957–4967 (2010). · DOI
- Lutsenko, E. & Bhagwat, A. S. Principal causes of hot spots for cytosine to thymine mutations at sites of cytosine methylation in growing cells. A model, its experimental support and implications. Mutat. Res. 437, 11–20 (1999). · DOI
- Shen, J. C., Rideout, W. M. 3rd & Jones, P. A. The rate of hydrolytic deamination of 5-methylcytosine in double-stranded DNA. Nucleic Acids Res. 22, 972–976 (1994). · DOI
- Waters, T. R. & Swann, P. F. Thymine-DNA glycosylase and G to A transition mutations at CpG sites. Mutat Res. 462, 137–147 (2000). · DOI
- Sanders, M. A. et al. MBD4 guards against methylation damage and germ line deficiency predisposes to clonal hematopoiesis and early-onset AML. Blood 132, 1526–1534 (2018). · DOI
- Mol, C. D. et al. Crystal structure and mutational analysis of human uracil-DNA glycosylase: structural basis for specificity and catalysis. Cell 80, 869–878 (1995). · DOI
- Grolleman, J. E. et al. Mutational signature analysis reveals NTHL1 deficiency to cause a multi-tumor phenotype. Cancer Cell 35, 256–266.e5 (2019). · DOI
- Genschel, J. & Modrich, P. Mechanism of 5′-directed excision in human mismatch repair. Mol. Cell 12, 1077–1086 (2003). · DOI
- Bolderson, E. et al. Phosphorylation of Exo1 modulates homologous recombination repair of DNA double-strand breaks. Nucleic Acids Res. 38, 1821–1831 (2010). · DOI
- Mattiroli, F. et al. RNF168 ubiquitinates K13–15 on H2A/H2AX to drive DNA damage signaling. Cell 150, 1182–1195 (2012). · DOI
- Bohgaki, M. et al. RNF168 ubiquitylates 53BP1 and controls its response to DNA double-strand breaks. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 110, 20982 (2013). · DOI
- Doil, C. et al. RNF168 binds and amplifies ubiquitin conjugates on damaged chromosomes to allow accumulation of repair proteins. Cell 136, 435–446 (2009). · DOI
- Stewart, G. S. et al. The RIDDLE syndrome protein mediates a ubiquitin-dependent signaling cascade at sites of DNA damage. Cell 136, 420–434 (2009). · DOI
- Gupta, S., Gellert, M. & Yang, W. Mechanism of mismatch recognition revealed by human MutSβ bound to unpaired DNA loops. Nat. Struct. Mol. Biol. 19, 72–78 (2012). · DOI
- Palombo, F. et al. GTBP, a 160-kilodalton protein essential for mismatch-binding activity in human cells. Science 268, 1912–1914 (1995). · DOI
- Warren, J. J. et al. Structure of the human MutSα DNA lesion recognition complex. Mol. Cell 26, 579–592 (2007). · DOI
- Andrianova, M. A., Bazykin, G. A., Nikolaev, S. I. & Seplyarskiy, V. B. Human mismatch repair system balances mutation rates between strands by removing more mismatches from the lagging strand. Genome Res. 27, 1336–1343 (2017). · DOI
- Lujan, S. A. et al. Mismatch repair balances leading and lagging strand DNA replication fidelity. PLoS Genet. 8, e1003016 (2012). · DOI
- Morganella, S. et al. The topography of mutational processes in breast cancer genomes. Nat. Commun. 7, 11383 (2016). · DOI
- Aboul-ela, F., Koh, D., Tinoco, I. Jr. & Martin, F. H. Base–base mismatches. Thermodynamics of double helix formation for dCA3XA3G + dCT3YT3G (X, Y = A,C,G,T). Nucleic Acids Res. 13, 4811–4824 (1985). · DOI
- Mazurek, A., Berardini, M. & Fishel, R. Activation of human MutS homologs by 8-oxo-guanine DNA damage. J. Biol. Chem. 277, 8260–8266 (2002). · DOI
- Morikawa, M. et al. Analysis of guanine oxidation products in double-stranded DNA and proposed guanine oxidation pathways in single-stranded, double-stranded or quadruplex DNA. Biomolecules 4, 140–159 (2014). · DOI
- Pavlov, Y. I., Newlon, C. S. & Kunkel, T. A. Yeast origins establish a strand bias for replicational mutagenesis. Mol. Cell 10, 207–213 (2002). · DOI
- Mudrak, S. V., Welz-Voegele, C. & Jinks-Robertson, S.The polymerase η translesion synthesis DNA polymerase acts independently of the mismatch repair system to limit mutagenesis caused by 7,8-dihydro-8-oxoguanine in yeast. Mol. Cell. Biol. 29, 5316–5326 (2009). · DOI
- Meier, B. et al. Mutational signatures of DNA mismatch repair deficiency in C. elegans and human cancers. Genome Res. 28, 666–675 (2018). · DOI
- Drummond, J. T., Li, G. M., Longley, M. J. & Modrich, P.Isolation of an hMSH2-p160 heterodimer that restores DNA mismatch repair to tumor cells. Science 268, 1909–1912 (1995). · DOI
- Palombo, F. et al. hMutSβ, a heterodimer of hMSH2 and hMSH3, binds to insertion/deletion loops in DNA. Curr. Biol. 6, 1181–1184 (1996). · DOI
- Wind, Nd et al. HNPCC-like cancer predisposition in mice through simultaneous loss of Msh3 and Msh6 mismatch-repair protein functions. Nat. Genet. 23, 359–362 (1999). · DOI
- Poulogiannis, G., Frayling, I. M. & Arends, M. J. DNA mismatch repair deficiency in sporadic colorectal cancer and Lynch syndrome. Histopathology 56, 167–179 (2010). · DOI
- Heinen, C. D. Mismatch repair defects and Lynch syndrome: the role of the basic scientist in the battle against cancer. DNA Repair 38, 127–134 (2016). · DOI
- Agu, C. A. et al. Successful generation of human induced pluripotent stem cell lines from blood samples held at room temperature for up to 48 hr. Stem Cell Rep. 5, 660–671 (2015). · DOI
- Ni Huang, M. et al. MSIseq: software for assessing microsatellite instability from catalogs of somatic mutations. Sci. Rep. 5, 13321 (2015). · DOI
- Niu, B. et al. MSIsensor: microsatellite instability detection using paired tumor-normal sequence data. Bioinformatics 30, 1015–1016 (2013). · DOI
- Wang, C. & Liang, C. MSIpred: a python package for tumor microsatellite instability classification from tumor mutation annotation data using a support vector machine. Sci. Rep. 8, 17546 (2018). · DOI
- Cortes-Ciriano, I., Lee, S., Park, W.-Y., Kim, T.-M. & Park, P. J. A molecular portrait of microsatellite instability across multiple cancers. Nat. Commun. 8, 15180 (2017). · DOI
- Salipante, S. J., Scroggins, S. M., Hampel, H. L., Turner, E. H. & Pritchard, C. C. Microsatellite instability detection by next generation sequencing. Clin. Chem. 60, 1192–1199 (2014). · DOI
- Hause, R. J., Pritchard, C. C., Shendure, J. & Salipante, S. J.Classification and characterization of microsatellite instability across 18 cancer types. Nat. Med. 22, 1342–1350 (2016). · DOI
- Fujimoto, A. et al. Comprehensive analysis of indels in whole-genome microsatellite regions and microsatellite instability across 21 cancer types. Genome Res. 30, 334–346 (2020). · DOI
- Campbell, B. B. et al. Comprehensive analysis of hypermutation in human cancer. Cell 171, 1042–1056.e10 (2017). · DOI
- Bressan, R. B. et al. Efficient CRISPR/Cas9-assisted gene targeting enables rapid and precise genetic manipulation of mammalian neural stem cells. Development 144, 635–648 (2017). · DOI
- Tate, P. H. & Skarnes, W. C. Bi-allelic gene targeting in mouse embryonic stem cells. Methods 53, 331–338 (2011). · DOI
- Hodgkins, A. et al. WGE: a CRISPR database for genome engineering. Bioinformatics 31, 3078–3080 (2015). · DOI
- Li, H. Aligning sequence reads, clone sequences and assembly contigs with BWA-MEM. Preprint at https://arxiv.org/abs/1303.3997 (2013). · arXiv
- Jones, D. et al. cgpCaVEManWrapper: simple execution of CaVEMan in order to detect somatic single nucleotide variants in NGS data. Curr. Protoc. Bioinformatics 56, 15.10.1–15.10.18 (2016). · DOI
- Raine, K. M. et al. cgpPindel: identifying somatically acquired insertion and deletion events from paired end sequencing. Curr. Protoc. Bioinformatics 52, 15.7.1–15.7.12 (2015). · DOI
- Cradick, T. J., Qiu, P., Lee, C. M., Fine, E. J. & Bao, G. COSMID: a web-based tool for identifying and validating CRISPR/Cas off-target sites. Mol. Ther. Nucleic Acids 3, e214 (2014). · DOI · Paper page
- The Encode Project Consortium et al.An integrated encyclopedia of DNA elements in the human genome. Nature 489, 57–74 (2012). · DOI · Paper page
- Quinlan, A. R. & Hall, I. M. BEDTools: a flexible suite of utilities for comparing genomic features. Bioinformatics 26, 841–842 (2010). · DOI · Paper page
- Wickham, H. ggplot2: Elegant Graphics for Data Analysis (Springer, 2009). · DOI · Paper page
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Somatic mutation rates scale with lifespan across mammals
Cagan, A., Baez-Ortega, A., Brzozowska, N., Abascal, F., Coorens, T. H. H., Sanders, M. A., Lawson, A. R. J., Harvey, L. M. R., Bhosle, S., Jones, D., et al. (2022) · Nature · doi:10.1038/s41586-022-04618-z · Cited by 481
Rouhani, F. J., Zou, X., Danecek, P., Badja, C., Amarante, T. D., Koh, G., Wu, Q., Memari, Y., Durbin, R., Martincorena, I., et al. (2022) · Nature Genetics · doi:10.1038/s41588-022-01147-3 · Cited by 105
Metadata
- Authors
- Zou, X., Koh, G. C. C., Nanda, A. S., Degasperi, A., Urgo, K., Roumeliotis, T. I., Agu, C. A., Badja, C., Momen, S., Young, J., Amarante, T. D., Side, L., Brice, G., Perez-Alonso, V., Rueda, D., Gomez, C., Bushell, W., Harris, R., Choudhary, J. S., Genomics England Research Consortium, Ambrose, J. C., Arumugam, P., Baple, E. L., Bleda, M., Boardman-Pretty, F., Boissiere, J. M., Boustred, C. R., Brittain, H., Caulfield, M. J., Chan, G. C., Craig, C. E. H., Daugherty, L. C., de Burca, A., Devereau, A., Elgar, G., Foulger, R. E., Fowler, T., Furió-Tarí, P., Giess, A., Hackett, J. M., Halai, D., Hamblin, A., Henderson, S., Holman, J. E., Hubbard, T. J. P., ibáñez, K., Jackson, R., Jones, L. J., Kasperaviciute, D., Kayikci, M., Kousathanas, A., Lahnstein, L., Lawson, K., Leigh, S. E. A., Leong, I. U. S., Lopez, J. F., Maleady-Crowe, F., Mason, J., McDonagh, E. M., Moutsianas, L., Mueller, M., Murugaesu, N., Need, A. C., O’Donovan, P., Odhams, C. A., Orioli, A., Patch, C., Pereira, M. B., Perez-Gil, D., Polychronopoulos, D., Pullinger, J., Rahim, T., Rendon, A., Riesgo-Ferreiro, P., Rogers, T., Ryten, M., Savage, K., Sawant, K., Scott, R. H., Siddiq, A., Sieghart, A., Smedley, D., Smith, K. R., Smith, S. C., Sosinsky, A., Spooner, W., Stevens, H. E., Stuckey, A., Sultana, R., Tanguy, M., Thomas, E. R. A., Thompson, S. R., Tregidgo, C., Tucci, A., Walsh, E., Watters, S. A., Welland, M. J., Williams, E., Witkowska, K., Wood, S. M., Zarowiecki, M., Jiricny, J., Skarnes, W. C., & Nik-Zainal, S.
- Venue
- Nature Cancer
- Published
- 2021-04-26
- Volume
- 2
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 643-657
- ISSN
- 2662-1347
- PMC
- PMC7611045
- Cited by
- 164
- References
- 13
- Language
- en
- Licence
- Funders
- Cancer Research UK (C60100/A23916, C309/A25144)
- Wellcome Trust (Wellcome Sanger Institute 4-year PhD Fellowships, WT101126)
- DH | National Institute for Health Research
- NHS England
- Dr Josef Steiner Cancer Research Award 2019 Medical Research Council (MRC) Grant-in-Aid to the MRC Cancer unit CRUK Pioneer Award NIHR-BRC Cambridge core grant
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