Cited by 447DNA Repair MechanismsCarcinogens and Genotoxicity AssessmentGenetic factors in colorectal cancer

Subpathways of nucleotide excision repair and their regulation

Hanawalt, Philip C·2002·Oncogene

Abstract

Nucleotide excision repair provides an important cellular defense against a large variety of structurally unrelated DNA alterations. Most of these alterations, if unrepaired, may contribute to mutagenesis, oncogenesis, and developmental abnormalities, as well as cellular lethality. There are two subpathways of nucleotide excision repair; global genomic repair (GGR) and transcription coupled repair (TCR), that is selective for the transcribed DNA strand in expressed genes. Some of the proteins involved in the recognition of DNA damage (including RNA polymerase) are also responsive to natural variations in the secondary structural features of DNA. Gratuitous repair events in undamaged DNA might then contribute to genomic instability. However, damage recognition enzymes for GGR are normally maintained at very low levels unless the cells are genomically stressed. GGR is controlled through the SOS stress response in E. coli and through the activated p53 tumor suppressor in human cells. These inducible responses in human cells are important, as they have been shown to operate upon chemical carcinogen DNA damage at levels to which humans are environmentally exposed. Interestingly, most rodent tissues are deficient in the p53-dependent GGR pathway. Since rodents are used as surrogates for environmental cancer risk assessment, it is essential that we understand how they differ from humans with respect to DNA repair and oncogenic responses to environmental genotoxins. In the case of terminally differentiated mammalian cells, a new paradigm has appeared in which GGR is attenuated but both strands of expressed genes are repaired efficiently.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/sj.onc.1206096

Cites

61 of 61 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

1 of the 62 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Hanawalt, P. C.
Affiliations
Stanford University (US)
Corresponding author
Hanawalt, Philip C
Venue
Oncogene
Published
2002-12-16
Volume
21
Issue
58
Pages
8949-8956
ISSN
  • 0950-9232 (ISSN-L)
  • 1476-5594
OpenAlex
W1979123830
Cited by
447
References
62
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 11 · 2016: 14 · 2015: 20 · 2014: 20 · 2013: 24 · 2012: 24
FWCI
1.74
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Oncogene (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
National Cancer Institute (CA91456, R01CA077712, CA90915, R01CA090915, CA-44349, R35CA044349, CA-77712, R01CA091456)
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
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pathology and Forensic Medicine › Genetic factors in colorectal cancer
Keywords
nucleotide excision repair, transcription-coupled repair, DNA damage recognition, RNA polymerase, genomic instability, SOS response, p53, cancer risk assessment, terminally differentiated cells, mutagenesis
MeSH terms
Animals, Cell Differentiation, DNA Damage, DNA Repair, Escherichia coli, Humans, Neurons, Oncogenic Viruses, Species Specificity, Gene Expression Regulation, Bacterial, Tumor Suppressor Protein p53

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