MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1998192314 · doi:10.4161/23723548.2014.964037

Key regulators of apoptosis execution as biomarker candidates in melanoma

2014· review· en· W1998192314 on OpenAlexaff
Émilie Charles, Markus Rehm

Bibliographic record

VenueMolecular & Cellular Oncology · 2014
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMelanoma and MAPK Pathways
Canadian institutionsRoyal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsApoptosisMelanomaBiomarkerCancer researchProgrammed cell deathBiologyCancerDiseaseBioinformaticsMedicineInternal medicineGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Resistance to apoptosis is frequently detected in malignant melanoma, a skin cancer with rapidly growing incidence rates. Apoptosis resistance may develop with disease progression and may be associated with the poor responsiveness of metastatic melanoma to apoptosis-inducing treatments, such as genotoxic chemotherapy and radiotherapy. Likewise, the efficacy of novel treatment options (targeted kinase inhibitors and immunotherapeutics) that indirectly lead to cell death may depend on the susceptibility of melanoma to apoptosis. At its core, apoptosis execution is regulated by the interplay between a comparatively small number of pro- and anti-apoptotic proteins, and consequently numerous studies have investigated the potential of these players as biomarker candidates. Here, we provide a comprehensive overview of biomarker discovery studies focusing on key regulators of apoptosis execution, critically review the findings of these studies, and outline strategies that address current limitations and challenges in exploiting regulators of apoptosis execution as prognostic or predictive biomarkers in melanoma.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.279 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations18
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMolecular & Cellular OncologySame topicMelanoma and MAPK PathwaysFrench-language works237,207