MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2052299248 · doi:10.1038/sj.bjc.6605846

Prognostic significance of AMP-activated protein kinase expression and modifying effect of MAPK3/1 in colorectal cancer

2010· article· en· W2052299248 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Yoshifumi Baba, Katsuhiko Nosho, Kaori Shima, Jeffrey A. Meyerhardt, Andrew T. Chan, Jeffrey A. Engelman, Lewis C. Cantley, Massimo Loda, Edward L. Giovannucci, Charles S. Fuchs, Shuji Ogino

Bibliographic record

VenueBritish Journal of Cancer · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMetabolism, Diabetes, and Cancer
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersGary Bennett Family FundNational Institutes of HealthUehara Memorial FoundationNational Cancer InstituteEntertainment Industry Foundation
KeywordsColorectal cancerProtein kinase ACancer researchProtein expressionKinaseOncologyImmunohistochemistryMedicineInternal medicineBiologyCancerCell biologyBiochemistryGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: AMP-activated protein kinase (AMPK, PRKA) has central roles in cellular metabolic sensing and energy balance homeostasis, and interacts with various pathways (e.g., TP53 (p53), FASN, MTOR and MAPK3/1 (ERK)). AMP-activated protein kinase activation is cytotoxic to cancer cells, supporting AMPK as a tumour suppressor and a potential therapeutic target. However, no study has examined its prognostic role in colorectal cancers. METHODS: Among 718 colon and rectal cancers, phosphorylated AMPK (p-AMPK) and p-MAPK3/1 expression was detected in 409 and 202 tumours, respectively, by immunohistochemistry. Cox proportional hazards model was used to compute mortality hazard ratio (HR), adjusting for clinical and tumoral features, including microsatellite instability, CpG island methylator phenotype, LINE-1 methylation, and KRAS, BRAF and PIK3CA mutations. RESULTS: Phosphorylated AMPK expression was not associated with survival among all patients. Notably, prognostic effect of p-AMPK significantly differed by p-MAPK3/1 status (P(interaction)=0.0017). Phosphorylated AMPK expression was associated with superior colorectal cancer-specific survival (adjusted HR 0.42; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.24-0.74) among p-MAPK3/1-positive cases, but not among p-MAPK3/1-negative cases (adjusted HR 1.22; 95% CI: 0.85-1.75). CONCLUSION: Phosphorylated AMPK expression in colorectal cancer is associated with superior prognosis among p-MAPK3/1-positive cases, but not among p-MAPK3/1-negative cases, suggesting a possible interaction between the AMPK and MAPK pathways influencing tumour behaviour.

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 score0.122
Threshold uncertainty score0.509

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.254 · 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

Citations79
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBritish Journal of CancerSame topicMetabolism, Diabetes, and CancerFrench-language works237,207