Eph receptor function is modulated by heterooligomerization of A and B type Eph receptors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Eph receptors interact with ephrin ligands on adjacent cells to facilitate tissue patterning during normal and oncogenic development, in which unscheduled expression and somatic mutations contribute to tumor progression. EphA and B subtypes preferentially bind A- and B-type ephrins, respectively, resulting in receptor complexes that propagate via homotypic Eph-Eph interactions. We now show that EphA and B receptors cocluster, such that specific ligation of one receptor promotes recruitment and cross-activation of the other. Remarkably, coexpression of a kinase-inactive mutant EphA3 with wild-type EphB2 can cause either cross-activation or cross-inhibition, depending on relative expression. Our findings indicate that cellular responses to ephrin contact are determined by the EphA/EphB receptor profile on a given cell rather than the individual Eph subclass. Importantly, they imply that in tumor cells coexpressing different Ephs, functional mutations in one subtype may cause phenotypes that are a result of altered signaling from heterotypic rather from homotypic Eph clusters.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
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.
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".