Cited by 278DNA Repair MechanismsEffects of Radiation ExposureRadiation Therapy and Dosimetry

Induction and Repair of Clustered DNA Lesions: What Do We Know So Far?

Georgakilas, Alexandros G., O'Neill, Peter, Stewart, Robert D.·2013·Radiation Research

Abstract

The accumulated evidence in the literature indicates that a cluster of two or more lesions within one or two helical turns of the DNA is more challenging to repair than individual, widely dispersed lesions. The biological importance of clustered DNA lesions, especially complex double-strand breaks (DSB) and some types of non-DSB clusters (e.g., opposed bases that are oxidized), are now well known within the radiation research community. Still, many details of the induction and biological processing of complex clusters remain to be elucidated, especially in human cells. In this mini-review, we discuss recent advances in our understanding of the pathway(s) used by the mammalian cells to process and efficiently repair complex clusters other than the DSB. The effects of radiation quality and hypoxia on cluster induction and complexity are also briefly reviewed and discussed. Additional research is needed to better understand and quantify the multi-scale physiochemical and biological processes ultimately responsible for radiation-induced mutagenesis and genomic instability. New information and models to better quantify intermediate events (outcomes) related to the biological processing of non-DSB clusters are also important for ongoing efforts to assess the human health risks of terrestrial and space radiation environments and to guide the radiation therapy treatment planning process, especially for protons and carbon ions.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1667/rr3041.1

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.”

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 113 · Cited by 278

Authors
Georgakilas, A. G., O'Neill, P., & Stewart, R. D.
Affiliations
  • East Carolina University (US)
  • University of Washington (US)
Corresponding author
Georgakilas, Alexandros G.
Venue
Radiation Research
Published
2013-07
Volume
180
Issue
1
Pages
100-109
ISSN
  • 0033-7587 (ISSN-L)
  • 1938-5404
OpenAlex
W1996315957
Cited by
278
References
113
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 13 · 2024: 22 · 2023: 21 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 34 · 2020: 26 · 2019: 24 · 2018: 16 · 2017: 25 · 2016: 25 · 2015: 29 · 2014: 20 · 2013: 5
FWCI
2.48
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Radiation Research (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • BioOne Complete (BioOne) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › DNA Repair Mechanisms
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Effects of Radiation Exposure
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine › Radiation Therapy and Dosimetry
Keywords
clustered DNA lesions, DNA repair, radiation-induced DNA damage, hypoxia, radiation quality, radiation mutagenesis, genomic instability, space radiation, human cells
MeSH terms
Animals, DNA Damage, DNA Repair, Humans, Oxidation-Reduction, Radiation, Ionizing, Radiotherapy, DNA Breaks, Double-Stranded

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