Candidate nsSNPs that can affect the functions and interactions of cell cycle proteins
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Nonsynonymous single nucleotide polymorphisms (nsSNPs) alter the encoded amino acid sequence, and are thus likely to affect the function of the proteins, and represent potential disease-modifiers. There is an enormous number of nsSNPs in the human population, and the major challenge lies in distinguishing the functionally significant and potentially disease-related ones from the rest. In this study, we analyzed the genetic variations that can alter the functions and the interactions of a group of cell cycle proteins (n = 60) and the proteins interacting with them (n = 26) using computational tools. As a result, we extracted 249 nsSNPs from 77 cell cycle proteins and their interaction partners from public SNP databases. Only 31 (12.4%) of the nsSNPs were validated. The majority (64.5%) of the validated SNPs were rare (minor allele frequencies < 5%). Evolutionary conservation analysis using the SIFT tool suggested that 16.1% of the validated nsSNPs may disrupt the protein function. In addition, 58% of the validated nsSNPs were located in functional protein domains/motifs, which together with the evolutionary conservation analysis enabled us to infer possible biological consequences of the nsSNPs in our set. Our study strongly suggests the presence of naturally occurring genetic variations in the cell cycle proteins that may affect their interactions and functions with possible roles in complex human diseases, such as cancer.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".