Mitotic Stability of Small Supernumerary Marker Chromosomes: A Study Based on 93 Immortalized Cell Lines
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Small supernumerary marker chromosomes (sSMC) are known for being present in mosaic form as 47,+mar/46 in >50% of the cases with this kind of extra chromosomes. However, no detailed studies have been done for the mitotic stability of sSMC so far, mainly due to the lack of a corresponding in vitro model system. Recently, we established an sSMC-cell bank (Else Kröner-Fresenius-sSMC-cellbank) with >150 cell lines. Therefore, 93 selected sSMC cases were studied here for the presence of the corresponding marker chromosomes before and after Epstein-Barr virus-induced immortalization. The obtained results showed that dicentric inverted duplicated-shaped sSMC are by far more stable in vitro than monocentric centric minute- or ring-shaped sSMC. Simultaneously, a review of the literature revealed that a comparable shape-dependent mitotic stability can be found in vivo in sSMC carriers. Additionally, a possible impact of the age of the sSMC carrier on mitotic stability was found: sSMC cell lines established from patients between 10-20 years of age were predominantly mitotically unstable. The latter finding was independent of the sSMC shape. The present study shows that in vitro models can lead to new and exciting insights into the biology of this genetically and clinically heterogeneous patient group.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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".