MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1992316647 · doi:10.1054/bjoc.2001.1844

p53 missense but not truncation mutations are associated with low levels of p21CIP1/WAF1mRNA expression in primary human sarcomas

2001· article· en· W1992316647 on OpenAlexaff
Spyro Mousses, Nalan Gökgöz, Jay S. Wunder, H Ozçelik, Shelley B. Bull, Robert S. Bell, Irene L. Andrulis

Bibliographic record

VenueBritish Journal of Cancer · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer-related Molecular Pathways
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoLunenfeld-Tanenbaum Research InstituteMount Sinai Hospital
FundersNational Cancer Institute
KeywordsBiologyMissense mutationCancer researchExonNonsense mutationCyclin-dependent kinaseGeneMutationTumor suppressor geneGeneticsCell cycleCarcinogenesis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Many growth-suppressing signals converge to control the levels of the CDK inhibitor p21(CIP1/WAF1). Some human cancers exhibit low levels of expression of p21(CIP1/WAF1) and mutations in p53 have been implicated in this down-regulation. To evaluate whether the presence of p53 mutations was related to the in vivo expression of p21(CIP1/WAF1) mRNA in sarcomas we measured the p21(CIP1/WAF1) mRNA levels for a group of 71 primary bone and soft tissue tumours with known p53 status. As expected, most tumours with p53 mutations expressed low levels of p21(CIP1/WAF1)mRNA. However, we identified a group of tumours with p53 gene mutations that exhibited normal or higher levels of p21(CIP1/WAF1) mRNA. The p53 mutations in the latter group were not the common missense mutations in exons 4-9, but were predominantly nonsense mutations predicted to result in truncation of the p53 protein. The results of this study suggest that different types of p53 mutations can have different effects on the expression of downstream genes such as p21(CIP1/WAF1) in human sarcomas.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.856
Threshold uncertainty score0.593

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.259 · 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

Citations8
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBritish Journal of CancerSame topicCancer-related Molecular PathwaysFrench-language works237,207