The ‘vulnerability code’: Is cell identity the architect of its own decay?

References

[1] Lopez-Otin C, Blasco MA, Partridge L, Serrano M, Kroemer G. Hallmarks of aging: an expanding universe. Cell. 2023; 186: 243-278.

[2] Schumacher B, Pothof J, Vijg J, Hoeijmakers JHJ. The central role of DNA damage in the ageing process. Nature. 2021; 592: 695-703.

[3] Roadmap Epigenomics C, Kundaje A, Meuleman W, et al. Integrative analysis of 111 reference human epigenomes. Nature. 2015; 518: 317-330.

[4] Dabin J, Fortuny A, Polo SE. Epigenome maintenance in response to DNA damage. Mol Cell. 2016; 62: 712-727.

[5] Poetsch AR, Boulton SJ, Luscombe NM. Genomic landscape of oxidative DNA damage and repair reveals regioselective protection from mutagenesis. Genome Biol. 2018; 19: 215.

[6] Yang JH, Hayano M, Griffin PT, et al. Loss of epigenetic information as a cause of mammalian aging. Cell. 2023; 186: 305-326 e327.

[7] Dileep V, Boix CA, Mathys H, et al. Neuronal DNA double-strand breaks lead to genome structural variations and 3D genome disruption in neurodegeneration. Cell. 2023; 186: 4404-4421.

[8] Xiong X, James BT, Boix CA, et al. Epigenomic dissection of Alzheimer's disease pinpoints causal variants and reveals epigenome erosion. Cell. 2023; 186: 4422-4437.

[9] Bai D, Cao Z, Attada N, Song J, Zhu C. Single-cell parallel analysis of DNA damage and transcriptome reveals selective genome vulnerability. Nat Methods. 2025; 22: 962-972.

[10] Lu YR, Tian X, Sinclair DA. The information theory of aging. Nat Aging. 2023; 3: 1486-1499.

RIGHTS & PERMISSIONS

2025 The Author(s). Clinical and Translational Medicine published by John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd on behalf of Shanghai Institute of Clinical Bioinformatics.