Cited by 649DNA Repair MechanismsCRISPR and Genetic EngineeringEffects of Radiation Exposure

Homology-directed repair is a major double-strand break repair pathway in mammalian cells

Open access
Liang, Feng, Han, Mingguang, Romanienko, Peter J., Jasin, Maria·1998·Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences

Abstract

Mammalian cells have been presumed to repair potentially lethal chromosomal double-strand breaks (DSBs) in large part by processes that do not require homology to the break site. This contrasts with Saccharomyces cerevisiae where the major DSB repair pathway is homologous recombination. Recently, it has been determined that DSBs in genomic DNA in mammalian cells can stimulate homologous recombination as much as 3 or 4 orders of magnitude, suggesting that homology-directed repair may play an important role in the repair of chromosomal breaks. To determine whether mammalian cells use recombinational repair at a significant level, we have analyzed the spectrum of repair events at a defined chromosomal break by using direct physical analysis of repair products. When an endonuclease-generated DSB is introduced into one of two direct repeats, homologous repair is found to account for 30–50% of observed repair events. Both noncrossover and deletional homologous repair products are detected, at approximately a 1:3 ratio. These results demonstrate the importance of homologous recombination in the repair of DSBs in mammalian cells. In the remaining observed repair events, DSBs are repaired by nonhomologous processes. The nonhomologous repair events generally result in small deletions or insertions at the break site, although a small fraction of events result in larger chromosomal rearrangements. Interestingly, in two insertions, GT repeats were integrated at one of the broken chromosome ends, suggesting that DSB repair can contribute to the spread of microsatellite sequences in mammalian genomes.

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 · 10.1073/pnas.95.9.5172

Cites

27 of 29 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?

  • HDR repairs double-strand breaks using a sister chromatid as a repair template and is considered an error-free system.

    “Alternatively, the HDR pathway is capable of repairing DSBs using a sister chromatid as a repair template, and for this reason, it is considered an error‐free system.”

    From CRISPR/Cas9 Ribonucleoprotein Nucleofection for Genome Editing in Primary Human Keratinocytes: Knockouts, Deletions, and Homology‐Directed Repair Mutagenesis (2024) · cites this paper as Liang et al., 1998

    The Discussion says sister chromatids can provide a homologous repair template. But the paper does not characterize HDR as uniformly error-free: the Abstract distinguishes conservative gene conversion from nonconservative repair and reports deletional homologous repair products. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

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

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. [1]Petes T D, Malone R E, Symington L S. Recombination in Yeast. Plainview, NY: Cold Spring Harbor Lab. Press; 1991. [Google Scholar]
  2. [19]Lin F-L, Sperle K, Sternberg N. Mol Cell Biol. 1990;10:103–112. doi: 10.1128/mcb.10.1.103-112.1990. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] · DOI
  3. [27]Schichman S A, Caligiuri M A, Strout M P, Carter S L, Gu Y, Canaani E, Bloomfield C D, Croce C M. Cancer Res. 1994;54:4277–4280. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Liang, F., Han, M., Romanienko, P. J., & Jasin, M.
Affiliations
Cornell University (US)
Corresponding author
Jasin, Maria
Venue
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
Published
1998-04-28
Volume
95
Issue
9
Pages
5172-5177
ISSN
  • 0027-8424 (ISSN-L)
  • 1091-6490
OpenAlex
W2168809955
Cited by
649
References
27
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 18 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 21 · 2021: 25 · 2020: 19 · 2019: 17 · 2018: 13 · 2017: 16 · 2016: 13 · 2015: 13 · 2014: 12 · 2013: 11 · 2012: 13
FWCI
15.73
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • American Cancer Society
  • National Institutes of Health
  • National Institute of General Medical Sciences (GM54688)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › DNA Repair Mechanisms
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › CRISPR and Genetic Engineering
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Effects of Radiation Exposure
Keywords
homology-directed repair, DNA double-strand break repair, homologous recombination, non-homologous end joining, mammalian cells, chromosomal breaks, chromosomal rearrangements
MeSH terms
Animals, Cells, Cultured, DNA Damage, DNA Repair, Gene Conversion, Cricetinae, Recombination, Genetic, Sequence Homology, Nucleic Acid, Restriction Mapping, CHO Cells, Sequence Deletion

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