Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 1,526

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

MISMATCH REPAIR IN REPLICATION FIDELITY, GENETIC RECOMBINATION, AND CANCER BIOLOGY

Modrich, Paul, Lahue, Robert·1996·Annual Review of Biochemistry

Abstract

Mismatch repair stabilizes the cellular genome by correcting DNA replication errors and by blocking recombination events between divergent DNA sequences. The reaction responsible for strand-specific correction of mispaired bases has been highly conserved during evolution, and homologs of bacterial MutS and MutL, which play key roles in mismatch recognition and initiation of repair, have been identified in yeast and mammalian cells. Inactivation of genes encoding these activities results in a large increase in spontaneous mutability, and in the case of mice and men, predisposition to tumor development.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1146/annurev.bi.65.070196.000533

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Cited by

See all 1,526

Metadata

Authors
Modrich, P., & Lahue, R.
Venue
Annual Review of Biochemistry
Published
1996-06
Volume
65
Issue
1
Pages
101-133
ISSN
  • 0066-4154 (ISSN-L)
  • 1545-4509
OpenAlex
W2141798197
Cited by
1,526
References
0
FWCI
37.73
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: MISMATCH REPAIR IN REPLICATION FIDELITY, GENETIC RECOMBINATION, AND CANCER BIOLOGY. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1146/annurev.bi.65.070196.000533
The paper
Modrich, P., & Lahue, R. (1996). MISMATCH REPAIR IN REPLICATION FIDELITY, GENETIC RECOMBINATION, AND CANCER BIOLOGY. Annual Review of Biochemistry. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.bi.65.070196.000533

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.