MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1956266937 · doi:10.1038/ncomms8871

Crystal structure, biochemical and cellular activities demonstrate separate functions of MTH1 and MTH2

2015· article· en· W1956266937 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Megan Carter, Ann‐Sofie Jemth, Anna Hagenkort, Brent D. G. Page, Robert Gustafsson, Julia J. Griese, Helge Gad, Nicholas C.K. Valerie, Matthieu Desroses, Johan Boström, Ulrika Warpman Berglund, Thomas Helleday, Pål Stenmark

Bibliographic record

VenueNature Communications · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicDNA Repair Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchVetenskapsrådetKnut och Alice Wallenbergs StiftelseCancerfondenEuropean Synchrotron Radiation FacilityWenner-Gren Stiftelserna
KeywordsNucleotideBiochemistryDNAEnzymeOxidative phosphorylationChemistryHEK 293 cellsSubstrate (aquarium)Cell cultureBiologyCell biologyGeneGenetics

Abstract

Deregulated redox metabolism in cancer leads to oxidative damage to cellular components including deoxyribonucleoside triphosphates (dNTPs). Targeting dNTP pool sanitizing enzymes, such as MTH1, is a highly promising anticancer strategy. The MTH2 protein, known as NUDT15, is described as the second human homologue of bacterial MutT with 8-oxo-dGTPase activity. We present the first NUDT15 crystal structure and demonstrate that NUDT15 prefers other nucleotide substrates over 8-oxo-dGTP. Key structural features are identified that explain different substrate preferences for NUDT15 and MTH1. We find that depletion of NUDT15 has no effect on incorporation of 8-oxo-dGTP into DNA and does not impact cancer cell survival in cell lines tested. NUDT17 and NUDT18 were also profiled and found to have far less activity than MTH1 against oxidized nucleotides. We show that NUDT15 is not a biologically relevant 8-oxo-dGTPase, and that MTH1 is the most prominent sanitizer of the cellular dNTP pool known to date.

Stored with the screening record, where it is evidence for the labels above.

How this classification was reachedexpand

The three-model screen

all 5,600 screened works →

All three models called this out of scope.

stratum: fund_new · design weight: 1678.90 (the sample is stratified; any rate computed without the weight is wrong)
Claude Opus 4.8OUT
genre: empirical
about Canada: no
confidence: high

Structural and cellular study separating the functions of MTH1 and MTH2/NUDT15; the object is enzyme biology.

GPT-5.6 (high)OUT
genre: empirical
about Canada: no
confidence: high

The study investigates molecular functions in cancer biology rather than research itself.

Grok 4.5OUT
genre: empirical
about Canada: no
confidence: high

Structural and cellular biochemistry of MTH1/MTH2 enzymes; cancer biology domain research.

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.000

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.250 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations115
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNature CommunicationsSame topicDNA Repair MechanismsFrench-language works237,207