Cited by 633Effects of Radiation ExposureDNA Repair MechanismsRadiation Therapy and Dosimetry

The Complexity of DNA Damage: Relevance to Biological Consequences

Ward, J.F.·1994·International Journal of Radiation Biology

Abstract

Ionizing radiation causes both singly and multiply damaged sites in DNA when the range of radical migration is limited by the presence of hydroxyl radical scavengers (e.g. within cells). Multiply damaged sites are considered to be more biologically relevant because of the challenges they present to cellular repair mechanisms. These sites occur in the form of DNA double-strand breaks (dsb) but also as other multiple damages that can be converted to dsb during attempted repair. The presence of a dsb can lead to loss of base sequence information and/or can permit the two ends of a break to separate and rejoin with the wrong partner. (Multiply damaged sites may also be the biologically relevant type of damage caused by other agents, such as UVA, B and/or C light, and some antitumour antibiotics.) The quantitative data available from radiation studies of DNA are shown to support the proposed mechanisms for the production of complex damage in cellular DNA, i.e. via scavengable and non-scavengable mechanisms. The yields of complex damages can in turn be used to support the conclusion that cellular mutations are a consequence of the presence of these damages within a gene. Literature data are used to support these statements and to develop overall mechanisms connecting the production of primary species to the production of biologically relevant damages. The consequences of the LET of the radiation on multiplicity of damage are discussed and suggestions made for the cause of the decre…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/09553009414551401

Cites

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?

  • DNA damage is a good indicator of radiation clustering properties and therefore of radiation quality.

    “Albeit not exhaustive of cellular endpoints, DNA damage is here chosen as a good indicator of radiation clustering properties and therefore of radiation quality.”

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Ward, J. F.
Affiliations
University of California San Diego (US)
Corresponding author
Ward, J.F.
Venue
International Journal of Radiation Biology
Published
1994-01
Volume
66
Issue
5
Pages
427-432
ISSN
  • 0955-3002 (ISSN-L)
  • 1362-3095
OpenAlex
W2068449224
Cited by
633
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 10 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 14 · 2022: 20 · 2021: 23 · 2020: 20 · 2019: 30 · 2018: 34 · 2017: 17 · 2016: 19 · 2015: 20 · 2014: 29 · 2013: 14 · 2012: 28
FWCI
2.10
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • International Journal of Radiation Biology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • U.S. Department of Energy
  • National Cancer Institute (CA-46295, R01CA046295)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Effects of Radiation Exposure
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › DNA Repair Mechanisms
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine › Radiation Therapy and Dosimetry
Keywords
DNA damage, ionizing radiation, DNA double-strand breaks, hydroxyl radical scavengers, DNA repair, radiation-induced mutations, LET, oxygen enhancement ratio, UVA, antitumor antibiotics
MeSH terms
DNA Damage, DNA Repair, Mutation, Oxygen, Hydroxyl Radical, Linear Energy Transfer

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