MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2055376801 · doi:10.1038/sj.bjc.6600862

Antitumour effect of cyclin-dependent kinase inhibitors (p16INK4A, p18INK4C, p19INK4D, p21WAF1/CIP1 and p27KIP1) on malignant glioma cells

2003· article· en· W2055376801 on OpenAlexaff
Tadashi Komata, Takao Kanzawa, Hayato Takeuchi, Isabelle M. Germano, Martha Schreiber, Yasuko Kondo, Seiji Kondo

Bibliographic record

VenueBritish Journal of Cancer · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer-related Molecular Pathways
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersNational Cancer Institute
KeywordsCancer researchGliomaBiologyCyclin D1ApoptosisCell cycleKinaseAutophagyCyclin-dependent kinaseCyclin-dependent kinase 4CyclinCell cycle checkpointCell biologyCyclin-dependent kinase 2Genetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cyclin-dependent kinase inhibitors (CDKIs) are considered as novel anticancer agents because of their ability to induce growth arrest or apoptosis in tumour cells. It has not yet been fully determined, however, which CDKI is the best candidate for the treatment of malignant gliomas and whether normal brain tissues are affected by CDKI expression. Using recombinant adenoviral vectors that express CDKIs (p16(INK4A), p18(INK4C), p19(INK4D), p21(WAF1/CIP1) and p27(KIP1)), we compared the antitumour effect of CDKIs on malignant glioma cell lines (A172, GB-1, T98G, U87-MG, U251-MG and U373-MG). p27(KIP1) showed higher ability to suppress the growth of all tumour cells tested than other CDKIs. Interestingly, overexpression of p27(KIP1) induced autophagic cell death, but not apoptosis in tumour cells. On the other hand, p27(KIP1) overexpression did not inhibit the viability of cultured astrocytes (RNB) nor induced autophagy. Overall, our findings suggest that gene transfer of p27(KIP1) may be a promising approach for the therapy of malignant gliomas.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.078
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.252
Teacher spread0.246 · 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.

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

Citations66
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBritish Journal of CancerSame topicCancer-related Molecular PathwaysFrench-language works237,207