MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2016031589 · doi:10.1002/hep.21693

Which gene, Reg2 or Ref3β, was targeted that affected liver regeneration?

2007· letter· en· W2016031589 sur OpenAlexaffabout
Jun‐Li Liu, Wei Cui

Notice bibliographique

RevueHepatology · 2007
Typeletter
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueLiver physiology and pathology
Établissements canadiensMcGill University Health Centre
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésLiver regenerationBiologyRegeneration (biology)GeneMolecular biologyCancer researchCell biologyGenetics

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

In a recent report, H-T Lieu et al.1 created a Reg2/RegIIIβ gene deficiency (marked as Reg2−/−) through homologous recombination. The knockout mice were normal except for impaired hepatocyte survival and regeneration when challenged by induced hepatitis or hepatectomy. Thus, in response to Fas-induced acute hepatitis, Reg2−/− mice had decreased survival; after a two-thirds hepatectomy, they exhibited increased mortality, delayed liver mass restoration, and decreased bromodeoxyuridine incorporation into their DNA. The authors even presented evidence that endogenous Reg2 gene expression and protein production were induced during liver regeneration. It was concluded that Reg2/HIP/PAP is a critical mitogenic and antiapoptotic factor for the liver. Although we welcome the data and interpretation, it is totally unclear on which gene, Reg2 or Reg3β, was actually targeted that affected liver regeneration. According to the article, “Reg2, also called RegIIIβ, is the mouse homolog of human hepatocarcinoma-intestine-pancreas/pancreatic-associated protein (HIP/PAP), whose cDNA has been cloned in different species under different names: human HIP/PAP or Reg3A; rat Reg2, PAPI, or peptide 23; mouse Reg2/RegIIIβ; and hamster islet neogenesis associated protein or INGAP, respectively”, and the target gene to these underlined proteins could be Reg2, Reg3α, Reg3β, or INGAP,1 respectively. This is impossible because they represent independent genes encoding unique proteins, assuming only one gene was targeted. Similar confusing terminology has been used in another article from the same laboratory where HIP/PAP was referred to as human Reg-2, in the abstract, but Reg2 has only been found in mice so far.2 We have reason to believe that the actual target was mouse Reg3β (also known as Reg IIIβ; or PAP, PAP1 and HIP in other species).3-5 As shown in Fig. 1, the polymerase chain reaction (PCR) primers used to genotype the knockout offspring were perfectly matched to the genomic sequence of mouse Reg3β gene (access number D63360), which would generate a product of 687 base pairs, similar to the 600 base pairs reported.1 The primer sequences were also found in the mouse Reg3β cDNA (NM_011036) at nucleotide positions 295-315 and 376-395, respectively. Moreover, the same genomic DNA (D63360) has a unique EcoR V site at position 2175-2180 of the intron 2, exactly as illustrated in figure 1A of the article.1 The antibody used to detect Reg2 using immunohistochemistry was raised against human HIP/PAP which should correspond to mouse Reg3β.1, 2 Partial genomic sequence of mouse Reg3β showing the EcoR V site and locations of the PCR primers. The sequence was retrieved from the GenBank using access number D63360.5 The 3 underlined regions, from top to bottom, illustrate EcoR V (nt position 2175-2180), Reg2 sense (2909-2929), and Reg2 anti-sense (3576-3595, in complement strand) primers. We also have evidence to exclude other Reg genes as the target. The mouse genome has been sequenced and much information is available from Web sites such as www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov or www.informatics.jax.org. In addition to Reg3β, we explored 3 other possible candidates, as listed in Table 1. The PCR primers were not matched to any other genomic or cDNA sequences (by access numbers in Table 2). The Reg2 locus has no EcoR V site, Reg2 ispredominately expressed in the pancreatic islets,6 and a homologous Reg2 gene has not been found in human or rats. The Reg3α locus has an EcoR V site in intron 4, instead of intron 2 as reported;1 the Reg3δ gene (mouse homolog of INGAP, also known as INGAP-rp) has an EcoR V site in intron 1, instead of intron 2. The current terminology used for mammalian Reg family genes/proteins is very confusing and should be unified through debates. According to our search, there seem to be 7 Reg family genes in the mouse (Table 2). Similar and more detailed classifications need to be done for human and rat in the future. Thus, unless the authors provide further evidence, we urge appropriate corrections to be made to this and the previous articles, where Reg2 and HIP/PAP should be referred to as Reg3β. Jun-Li Liu*, Wei Cui*, * Fraser Laboratories for Diabetes Research, McGill University Health Centre, Montreal, Canada.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesMéta-épidémiologie (sens strict), Intégrité de la recherche, Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)
Catégories consensuellesIntégrité de la recherche, Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: Sans objet
GenreSignal candidat: Commentaire · Signal consensuel: Commentaire
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,127
Score d'incertitude au seuil1,000

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0020,000
Bibliométrie0,0010,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0050,003
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0030,001

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,047
Tête enseignante GPT0,289
Écart entre enseignants0,242 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; les deux têtes enseignantes s’accordent sur ce qui est montré ici.

Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreCommentaire

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations16
Publié2007
Routes d'admission2
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueHepatologyMême sujetLiver physiology and pathologyTravaux en français237 207