MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2041734497 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0050591

Genotoxic Agents Promote the Nuclear Accumulation of Annexin A2: Role of Annexin A2 in Mitigating DNA Damage

2012· article· en· W2041734497 on OpenAlexafffund
Patrícia A. Madureira, Richard Hill, Patrick W.K. Lee, David M. Waisman

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicS100 Proteins and Annexins
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaTerry Fox FoundationEuropean CommissionBeatrice Hunter Cancer Research InstituteCancer Research Institute
KeywordsAnnexin A2DNA damageNuclear export signalAnnexinMolecular biologyCell biologyBiologyCell nucleusDNABiochemistryCytoplasm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Annexin A2 is an abundant cellular protein that is mainly localized in the cytoplasm and plasma membrane, however a small population has been found in the nucleus, suggesting a nuclear function for the protein. Annexin A2 possesses a nuclear export sequence (NES) and inhibition of the NES is sufficient to cause nuclear accumulation. Here we show that annexin A2 accumulates in the nucleus in response to genotoxic agents including gamma-radiation, UV radiation, etoposide and chromium VI and that this event is mediated by the nuclear export sequence of annexin A2. Nuclear accumulation of annexin A2 is blocked by the antioxidant agent N-acetyl cysteine (NAC) and stimulated by hydrogen peroxide (H₂O₂), suggesting that this is a reactive oxygen species dependent event. In response to genotoxic agents, cells depleted of annexin A2 show enhanced phospho-histone H2AX and p53 levels, increased numbers of p53-binding protein 1 nuclear foci and increased levels of nuclear 8-oxo-2'-deoxyguanine, suggesting that annexin A2 plays a role in protecting DNA from damage. This is the first report showing the nuclear translocation of annexin A2 in response to genotoxic agents and its role in mitigating DNA damage.

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 score0.034
Threshold uncertainty score0.412

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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.220 · 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

Citations51
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONESame topicS100 Proteins and AnnexinsFrench-language works237,207