MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1986000110 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0002721

TAF6δ Controls Apoptosis and Gene Expression in the Absence of p53

2008· article· en· W1986000110 on OpenAlexafffund
Emmanuelle Wilhelm, François‐Xavier Pellay, Arndt Benecke, Brendan Bell

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer-related Molecular Pathways
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaEuropean Hematology Association
KeywordsBiologyGene expressionTAF1GeneMolecular biologyCell biologyRegulation of gene expressionRNA polymerase IIActivator (genetics)Transcription factor II DTranscription factorPromoterGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Life and death decisions of metazoan cells hinge on the balance between the expression of pro- versus anti-apoptotic gene products. The general RNA polymerase II transcription factor, TFIID, plays a central role in the regulation of gene expression through its core promoter recognition and co-activator functions. The core TFIID subunit TAF6 acts in vitro as an essential co-activator of transcription for the p53 tumor suppressor protein. We previously identified a splice variant of TAF6, termed TAF6delta that can be induced during apoptosis. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: To elucidate the impact of TAF6delta on cell death and gene expression, we have employed modified antisense oligonucleotides to enforce expression of endogenous TAF6delta. The induction of endogenous TAF6delta triggered apoptosis in tumor cell lines, including cells devoid of p53. Microarray experiments revealed that TAF6delta activates gene expression independently of cellular p53 status. CONCLUSIONS: Our data define TAF6delta as a pivotal node in a signaling pathway that controls gene expression programs and apoptosis in the absence of p53.

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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.196

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.191 · 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

Citations14
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONESame topicCancer-related Molecular PathwaysFrench-language works237,207