MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Detection of the Senescence-Associated Secretory Phenotype (SASP)

2012· article· en· W179797905 on OpenAlexafffund
Françis Rodier

Bibliographic record

VenueMethods in molecular biology · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTelomeres, Telomerase, and Senescence
Canadian institutionsCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de Montréal
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchInstitut Du Cancer de Montréal
KeywordsSenescencePhenotypeSecretionParacrine signallingCell biologyBiologyCellCell typeCancer cellCancerGeneticsGeneBiochemistryReceptor

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cellular senescence suppresses cancer by eliminating potentially oncogenic cells, participates in tissue repair, contributes to cancer therapy, and promotes organismal aging. Numerous activities of senescent cells depend on the aptitude of these cells to secrete myriads of bioactive molecules, a behavior termed the senescence-associated secretory phenotype (SASP). The SASP supports cell-autonomous functions like the senescence-associated growth arrest, and mediates paracrine interactions between senescent cells and their surrounding microenvironment. The biological functions and the regulation of the SASP are beginning to emerge, and current SASP assessment techniques include the analysis of SASP factors at the mRNA level, the direct measurement of factors inside or outside the cell (i.e., secreted), and the detection of SASP-provoked cellular responses. Here, we focus on a simple approach to collect SASP-conditioned media in order to directly measure secreted SASP factors using sandwich enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. As an example, we discuss the assessment of the major SASP factor interleukin-6 in senescent human fibroblasts. Supplemental notes are provided to easily adapt this procedure to other SASP factors, change cell types, or scale the techniques for different volumes or high-throughput measurements. These techniques should facilitate the discovery of novel functions and regulators of the SASP.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.212
Threshold uncertainty score0.401

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.367
Teacher spread0.341 · 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

Citations58
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMethods in molecular biologySame topicTelomeres, Telomerase, and SenescenceFrench-language works237,207