MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

p53-Dependent Transcriptional Control of Cellular Prion by Presenilins

2009· article· en· W2028767213 on OpenAlexaff
Bruno Vincent, Claire Sunyach, Hans‐Dieter Orzechowski, Peter St George‐Hyslop, Frédéric Checler

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neuroscience · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicPrion Diseases and Protein Misfolding
Canadian institutionsOccupational Cancer Research Centre
FundersWellcome Trust
KeywordsPresenilinTransactivationTranscription (linguistics)IntracellularAmyloid precursor proteinCell biologyTranscription factorBiologySenile plaquesChemistryMolecular biologyGeneBiochemistryAlzheimer's diseaseInternal medicineMedicineDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The presenilin-dependent gamma-secretase processing of the beta-amyloid precursor protein (betaAPP) conditions the length of the amyloid beta peptides (Abeta) that accumulate in the senile plaques of Alzheimer's disease-affected brains. This, together with an additional presenilin-mediated epsilon-secretase cleavage, generates intracellular betaAPP-derived fragments named amyloid intracellular domains (AICDs) that regulate the transcription of several genes. We establish that presenilins control the transcription of cellular prion protein (PrP(c)) by a gamma-secretase inhibitor-sensitive and AICD-mediated process. We demonstrate that AICD-dependent control of PrP(c) involves the tumor suppressor p53. Thus, p53-deficiency abolishes the AICD-mediated control of PrP(c) transcription. Furthermore, we show that p53 directly binds to the PrP(c) promoter and increases its transactivation. Overall, our study unravels a transcriptional regulation of PrP(c) by the oncogene p53 that is directly driven by presenilin-dependent formation of AICD. Furthermore, it adds support to previous reports linking secretase activities involved in betaAPP metabolism to the physiology of PrP(c).

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)0.000
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 score0.057
Threshold uncertainty score0.230

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.235 · 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

Citations57
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of NeuroscienceSame topicPrion Diseases and Protein MisfoldingFrench-language works237,207