MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W17827422 · doi:10.1096/fasebj.20.4.a510

IGF‐1 and IGF‐2 mediated expression and regulation of ornithine decarboxylase and spermidine/spermine N‐1 acetyltransferase in H‐ras transformed cells

2006· article· en· W17827422 on OpenAlexafffund
Robert A. R. Hurta, Michael D Matchett

Bibliographic record

VenueThe FASEB Journal · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicPolyamine Metabolism and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Prince Edward Island
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsOrnithine decarboxylaseSpermineSpermidineOrnithine decarboxylase antizymeAcetyltransferasePolyamineBiologyCell biologyKinaseCell growthBiochemistryGeneEnzymeAcetylation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Polyamines play roles in both cellular proliferation and differentiation. Polyamine biosynthesis and catabolism are regulated by ornithine decarboxylase ( ODC ) and spermidine/spermine N‐1 acetyltransferase ( SSAT ) activities, respectively. The insulin‐like growth factor ( IGF ) system plays important roles in many processes including growth regulation and is implicated in tumorigenesis. This study investigated the possible link between IGF‐mediated signaling during H‐ras mediated cellular transformation and the expression of ODC and SSAT . ODC and SSAT protein expression levels are differentially induced in response to IGF‐1 / IGF‐2 in H‐ras transformed cells ( NR3 cells ) while no apparent induction was observed in the untransformed parental cells. Studies further elucidated the involvement of protein kinase‐C and MAP kinase mediated events playing critical regulatory roles in this inductive process evident in H‐ras transformed cells. These results suggest that the IGF‐1 / IGF‐2 mediated induction of ODC and SSAT constitutes a part of the altered cellular growth regulatory program which results following H‐ras mediated cellular transformation. (NSERC funded)

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.307

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.206 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations0
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe FASEB JournalSame topicPolyamine Metabolism and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207