MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2038019363 · doi:10.1182/blood-2004-04-1508

Identification of cooperative genes for NUP98-HOXA9 in myeloid leukemogenesis using a mouse model

2004· article· en· W2038019363 on OpenAlexaff
Masayuki Iwasaki, Takeshi Kuwata, Yukari Yamazaki, Nancy A. Jenkins, Neal G. Copeland, Motomi Osato, Yoshiaki Ito, Evert Kroon, Guy Sauvageau, Takuro Nakamura

Bibliographic record

VenueBlood · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAcute Myeloid Leukemia Research
Canadian institutionsInstitute for Research in Immunology and Cancer
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyFusion geneMyeloid leukemiaMyeloidCancer researchLeukemiaCarcinogenesisTransgeneGenetically modified mouseChromosomal translocationFusion proteinGeneHaematopoiesisStem cellGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The chromosomal translocation t(7; 11)(p15;p15), observed in human myeloid leukemia, results in a NUP98 and HOXA9 gene fusion. We generated a transgenic mouse line that specifically expressed the chimeric NUP98-HOXA9 gene in the myeloid lineage. While only 20% of the transgenic mice progressed to leukemia after a latency period, myeloid progenitor cells from nonleukemic transgenic mice still exhibited increased proliferative potential. This suggested that the NUP98-HOXA9 fusion induced a preleukemic phase, and other factors were required for complete leukemogenesis. NUP98-HOXA9 expression promoted the onset of retrovirus-induced BXH2 myeloid leukemia. This phenomenon was used to identify cooperative disease genes as common integration sites (CISs). Meis1, a known HOX cofactor, was identified as a CIS with a higher integration frequency in transgenic than in wild-type BXH2 mice. By the same means we identified further 4 candidate cooperative genes, Dnalc4, Fcgr2b, Fcrl, and Con1. These genes cooperated with NUP98-HOXA9 in transforming NIH 3T3 cells. The system described here is a powerful tool to identify cooperative oncogenes and will assist in the clarification of the multistep process of carcinogenesis.

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 score0.041
Threshold uncertainty score0.520

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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.279 · 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

Citations77
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBloodSame topicAcute Myeloid Leukemia ResearchFrench-language works237,207