MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2043279207 · doi:10.4161/cc.3.3.768

Family Feud in Chemosensitvity: p73 and Mutant p53

2004· article· en· W2043279207 on OpenAlexaff
Meredith S. Irwin

Bibliographic record

VenueCell Cycle · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer-related Molecular Pathways
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyDNA damageCancer researchApoptosisMutantCell cycleCancerGeneCancer cellGenome instabilityGeneticsDNA

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The importance of p53 in chemotherapy-induced apoptosis of cancer cells is well established. p53 plays a critical role in the cellular response to DNA damage by regulating genes involved in cell cycle progression, apoptosis, and genomic stability. As a result, p53 tumor status is a critical determinant of both responses to anti-cancer treatment and clinical prognosis. Interestingly, tumors expressing certain mutant forms of p53 ("gain of function") are particularly resistant to chemotherapy, even when compared to cells that lack any detectable p53. Until recently, the explanation for this enhanced chemoresistance was not clear. Recent studies have shown that the p53 homologues, p73 and p63, are also activated by chemotherapies, leading to tumor cell death. Now the discovery that mutant p53 interacts with p73, and that regulation of this interaction by a p53 polymorphism can modulate chemosensitvity provide a new model for how p53-family interactions can influence the response of tumors to anti-cancer therapies. Since p53 mutations are found in more than 50% of human tumors, strategies aimed at manipulating these interactions may prove useful in enhancing the chemotherapy response, and perhaps, overcoming chemoresistance.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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 integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.209 · 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 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

Citations63
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCell CycleSame topicCancer-related Molecular PathwaysFrench-language works237,207