MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2972330631 · doi:10.1016/j.celrep.2019.08.041

Dual Processing of R-Loops and Topoisomerase I Induces Transcription-Dependent DNA Double-Strand Breaks

2019· article· en· W2972330631 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Agnese Cristini, Giulia Ricci, Sébastien Britton, Simona Salimbeni, Shar-yin N. Huang, Jessica Marinello, Patrick Calsou, Yves Pommier, Gilles Favre, Giovanni Capranico, Natalia Gromak, Olivier Sordet

Bibliographic record

VenueCell Reports · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCancer therapeutics and mechanisms
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Cancer InstituteNational Institutes of HealthAssociazione Italiana per la Ricerca sul CancroFondation pour la Recherche MédicaleMedical Research CouncilRoyal SocietyMotor Neurone Disease AssociationLigue Contre le CancerFondation pour la recherche juridiqueNational Cancer Research Institute
KeywordsTopoisomeraseDNA damageBiologyGenome instabilityTranscription (linguistics)DNA repairDNACell biologyXRCC1Cleavage (geology)Molecular biologyGeneticsGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Although accumulation of DNA damage and genomic instability in resting cells can cause neurodegenerative disorders, our understanding of how transcription produces DNA double-strand breaks (DSBs) is limited. Transcription-blocking topoisomerase I cleavage complexes (TOP1ccs) are frequent events that prime DSB production in non-replicating cells. Here, we report a mechanism of their formation by showing that they arise from two nearby single-strand breaks (SSBs) on opposing DNA strands: one SSB from the removal of transcription-blocking TOP1ccs by the TDP1 pathway and the other from the cleavage of R-loops by endonucleases, including XPF, XPG, and FEN1. Genetic defects in TOP1cc removal (TDP1, PNKP, and XRCC1) or in the resolution of R-loops (SETX) enhance DSB formation and prevent their repair. Such deficiencies cause neurological disorders. Owing to the high frequency of TOP1cc trapping and the widespread distribution of R-loops, these persistent transcriptional DSBs could accumulate over time in neuronal cells, contributing to the neurodegenerative diseases.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.222 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations167
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCell ReportsSame topicCancer therapeutics and mechanismsFrench-language works237,207