MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2026173368 · doi:10.1515/hsz-2014-0129

Putative kallikrein substrates and their (patho)biological functions

2014· review· en· W2026173368 on OpenAlexaff
Yijing Yu, Ioannis Prassas, Eleftherios P. Diamandis

Bibliographic record

VenueBiological Chemistry · 2014
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCoagulation, Bradykinin, Polyphosphates, and Angioedema
Canadian institutionsMount Sinai Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputational biologyBiologyKallikreinGeneHuman genomeGenomeGeneticsEnzymeBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Human tissue kallikreins (KLKs) represent the largest contiguous group of protease genes within our genome. All 15 KLK genes co-localize within approximately 260 kb in human chromosome 19q13.3-13.4 (14 640 kb→274 990 kb). They are widely expressed in several tissues and mediate a wide range of critical physiological and pathological processes. Despite the recent developments in KLK research, elucidation of their physiological substrate repertoires remains a largely unfulfilled goal. Phage display, positional scanning and combinatorial peptide library screens have provided some valuable insights into the preferred specificities of these powerful enzymes. More recently, advances in proteomic technologies have enabled more systemic approaches towards identification of KLK substrates in a physiological setting. The advent of degradomic technologies has brought to light several putative physiological substrates and has allowed a deeper appreciation of the in vivo functional roles of KLKs. The aim of this review is to provide an overview of the different techniques that have been utilized towards the elucidation of the substrate specificities of these enzymes and elaborate on their emerging in vivo substrates.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.094
GPT teacher head0.325
Teacher spread0.230 · 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

Citations19
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiological ChemistrySame topicCoagulation, Bradykinin, Polyphosphates, and AngioedemaFrench-language works237,207