MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1840578899 · doi:10.1002/gcc.22205

Different <i>TP53</i> mutations are associated with specific chromosomal rearrangements, telomere length changes, and remodeling of the nuclear architecture of telomeres

2014· article· en· W1840578899 on OpenAlexafffund
Oumar Samassékou, Nathalie Bastien, Daniel Lichtensztejn, Ju Yan, Sabine Mai, Régen Drouin

Bibliographic record

VenueGenes Chromosomes and Cancer · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTelomeres, Telomerase, and Senescence
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaCancerCare ManitobaUniversité de Sherbrooke
FundersFondation des Etoiles
KeywordsTelomereBiologyGeneticsDNA

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

TP53 mutations are the most common mutations in human cancers, and TP53-R175H and TP53-R273H are the most frequent. The impact of these mutations on genomic instability after tumor initiation is still uncovered. To gain insight into this, we studied the effects of three specific TP53 mutants (TP53-V143A, TP53-R175H, and TP53-R273H) on genomic instability using four isogenic lines of LoVo cells. Multicolor fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH), three-dimensional (3D) quantitative FISH (Q-FISH) on interphase and Q-FISH on metaphases were used to investigate genomic instability. We found that LoVo cells expressing mutant TP53-R175H displayed the highest level of chromosomal instability among the LoVo cell lines. Furthermore, we observed that mutant TP53-R175H and TP53-V143A showed more alterations in their 3D nuclear architecture of telomeres than the mutant TP53-R273H and the wild type. Moreover, we noted an association between some chromosomal abnormalities and telomere elongation in the mutant TP53-R175H. Taken together, our results indicate that the mutation TP53-R175H is more likely to cause higher levels of genomic instability than the other TP53 mutations. We proposed that the type of TP53 mutations and the genetic background of a cancer cell are major determinants of the TP53-dependent genomic instability.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.636
Threshold uncertainty score0.683

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.205 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations20
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGenes Chromosomes and CancerSame topicTelomeres, Telomerase, and SenescenceFrench-language works237,207