MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1971592184 · doi:10.1210/me.2011-1095

CtBP1 Interacts with Ikaros and Modulates Pituitary Tumor Cell Survival and Response to Hypoxia

2012· article· en· W1971592184 on OpenAlexafffund
Katie Dorman, Zhongyi Shen, Caimei Yang, Shereen Ezzat, L. Sylvia

Bibliographic record

VenueMolecular Endocrinology · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicKruppel-like factors research
Canadian institutionsUniversity Health NetworkSystems, Applications & Products in Data Processing (Canada)University of TorontoOntario Institute for Cancer Research
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsBiologyCancer researchCorticotropic cellCell biologyChromatin remodelingEndocrinologyChromatinInternal medicinePituitary glandBiochemistryHormoneMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

C-terminal binding protein (CtBP) is a transcriptional corepressor that plays an important role in mammalian development and tumorigenesis. We demonstrate that CtBP is expressed in adenohypophyseal cells and is expressed at high levels in human corticotroph, somatotroph, and lactotroph pituitary adenomas. CtBP interacts with Ikaros isoforms in GH4 and AtT20 pituitary tumor cells. Ikaros and CtBP1 expression is coordinately induced by hypoxia, and this response is abrogated by CtBP1 deficiency. Forced reduction of CtBP1 leads to reduced cell growth, up-regulation of Sprouty 2, and down-regulation of ectonucleotide pyrophosphatase phosphodiesterase 2 (Enpp2). Consistent with diminished Enpp2 activity, CtBP1-deficient pituitary cells are more susceptible to hypoxia-induced apoptosis, which is rescued by Enpp2-derived lysophosphatidic acid treatment. These results identify putative oncogenic properties of CtBP1 and provide new insights into the overlapping functions of two members of the chromatin remodeling network in the response to hypoxic pituitary tumor cell drive.

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 score0.052
Threshold uncertainty score0.976

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 science0.0000.001
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.248 · 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

Citations25
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMolecular EndocrinologySame topicKruppel-like factors researchFrench-language works237,207