MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2015401913 · doi:10.1073/pnas.1001647107

A conserved tetraspanin subfamily promotes Notch signaling in <i>Caenorhabditis elegans</i> and in human cells

2010· article· en· W2015401913 on OpenAlexaff
Cory D. Dunn, Maria Luisa Sulis, Adolfo A. Ferrando, Iva Greenwald

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicDevelopmental Biology and Gene Regulation
Canadian institutionsPediatric Oncology Group
FundersNational Cancer InstituteHoward Hughes Medical Institute
KeywordsNotch signaling pathwayCaenorhabditis elegansTetraspaninNotch proteinsCell biologyBiologyTranscription factorHes3 signaling axisSignal transductionTransmembrane proteinGeneticsGeneCellReceptor

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The cytosolic domain of Notch is a membrane-tethered transcription factor. Ligand binding ultimately leads to gamma-secretase cleavage within the transmembrane domain, allowing the intracellular domain to translocate to the nucleus and activate target gene transcription. Constitutive Notch signaling has been associated with human cancers such as T cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia (T-ALL). As tetraspanins have been implicated in many different signaling processes, we assessed their potential contribution to Notch signaling. We used a genetic assay in Caenorhabditis elegans to identify TSP-12 as a positive factor for Notch activity in several cellular contexts. Then, using a cell culture system, we showed that two human TSP-12 orthologs, TSPAN33 and TSPAN5, promote Notch activity and are likely to act at the gamma-secretase cleavage step. We also acquired evidence for functional redundancy among tetraspanins in both C. elegans and human cells. Selective inhibition of tetraspanins may constitute an anti-NOTCH therapeutic approach to reduce gamma-secretase activity.

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)0.001
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 score0.166
Threshold uncertainty score0.186

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.251 · 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

Citations62
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the National Academy of SciencesSame topicDevelopmental Biology and Gene RegulationFrench-language works237,207