Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33166394›Full record

ReviewNucleic acids research2020

A unified model for the G1/S cell cycle transition.

Samuel Hume, Grigory L Dianov, Kristijan Ramadan

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Nucleic acids research, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 114 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
114citing papers in PubMed
8.2field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

114 citing papers in PubMed, 187 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Lidocaine enhances antitumor effects of sorafenib and GW5074 in colorectal cancer cells.Journal of enzyme inhibition and medicinal chemistry · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Dual-target carbonic anhydrase inhibitors in cancer therapy: progress, challenges, and opportunities.Medicinal chemistry research : an international journal for rapid communications on design and mechanisms of action of biologically active agents · 2026
    Review
  4. Article
  5. CDK4/6 Inhibition Induces CD8Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2026
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Journal of functional biomaterials · 2026
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Repurposing Cell Cycle Oscillators for Multiciliated Cell Differentiation.Advances in experimental medicine and biology · 2026
    Review
  13. CDK2-Mediated Phosphorylation ofResearch (Washington, D.C.) · 2026
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. The YYR (YY1- RKIP) Regulatory Axis in the pathogenesis of Cancer and Immune Evasion.Journal of experimental & clinical cancer research : CR · 2025
    Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

54 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Samuel HumeMedical Research Council Oxford Institute for Radiation Oncology, Department of Oncology, University of Oxford, Oxford OX3 7DQ, UK.
Grigory L DianovMedical Research Council Oxford Institute for Radiation Oncology, Department of Oncology, University of Oxford, Oxford OX3 7DQ, UK.
Kristijan RamadanMedical Research Council Oxford Institute for Radiation Oncology, Department of Oncology, University of Oxford, Oxford OX3 7DQ, UK.
University of Oxford · GBNovosibirsk State University · RU

Funding

Medical Research Council MC_EX_MR/K022830/1Medical Research Council MC_UU_00001/1Medical Research Council MC_UU_00001/3
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Efficient S phase entry is essential for development, tissue repair, and immune defences. However, hyperactive or expedited S phase entry causes replication stress, DNA damage and oncogenesis, highlighting the need for strict regulation. Recent paradigm shifts and conflicting reports demonstrate the requirement for a discussion of the G1/S transition literature. Here, we review the recent studies, and propose a unified model for the S phase entry decision. In this model, competition between mitogen and DNA damage signalling over the course of the mother cell cycle constitutes the predominant control mechanism for S phase entry of daughter cells. Mitogens and DNA damage have distinct sensing periods, giving rise to three Commitment Points for S phase entry (CP1-3). S phase entry is mitogen-independent in the daughter G1 phase, but remains sensitive to DNA damage, such as single strand breaks, the most frequently-occurring lesions that uniquely threaten DNA replication. To control CP1-3, dedicated hubs integrate the antagonistic mitogenic and DNA damage signals, regulating the stoichiometric cyclin: CDK inhibitor ratio for ultrasensitive control of CDK4/6 and CDK2. This unified model for the G1/S cell cycle transition combines the findings of decades of study, and provides an updated foundation for cell cycle research.

Indexed as

Cell CycleCell Cycle CheckpointsCell DivisionDNA DamageDNA ReplicationG1 PhaseHumansSignal TransductionS Phase

Identifiers

PMID33166394
PMCPMC7736809
OpenAlexW3102445403

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.