MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2013599934 · doi:10.1093/jnci/93.19.1433-a

MEMORANDUM FOR: Science Writers and Editors on the Journal Press List: DNA Repair Pathway Found To Be Involved in Resistance to Chemotherapy Drug

2001· article· en· W2013599934 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
K. Arnold, D. Eckstein

Bibliographic record

VenueJNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicScience, Research, and Medicine
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMemorandumDrugResistance (ecology)Library scienceMedicinePolitical sciencePharmacologyComputer scienceBiologyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

September 27, 2001 (EMBARGOED FOR RELEASE 4 P.M. EDT October 2) A new study has found that a common DNA repair mechanism plays a role in resistance to the chemotherapy drug melphalan. The results suggest that interfering with this repair process may sensitize cancer cells to melphalan treatment, conclude Zhi-Min Wang, Lawrence C. Panasci, M.D., and colleagues from the Lady Davis Institute for Medical Research at McGill University’s Sir Mortimer B. Davis-Jewish General Hospital, Montreal, Canada. Their research appears in the Oct. 3 issue of the Journal of the National Cancer Institute. Melphalan is in a group of drugs called nitrogen mustards, which are alkylating agents. The drug is used to treat some breast cancers and ovarian cancers. Melphalan treatment results in toxic DNA damage—interstrand cross-links and double-strand breaks—which leads to cell cycle arrest and cell death. Certain DNA repair mechanisms will reverse this damage, which may make the cells resistant to the therapy. There are two major pathways involved in repairing these types of damage—homologous recombinational repair, in which the undamaged sister chromatid is used to repair the DNA, and nonhomologous DNA endjoining (NHEJ), in which proteins simply fuse together ends of damaged DNA.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.112
Threshold uncertainty score0.376

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0050.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0060.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1120.090

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 head0.096
GPT teacher head0.381
Teacher spread0.285 · 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
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJNCI Journal of the National Cancer InstituteSame topicScience, Research, and MedicineFrench-language works237,207