MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2057287073 · doi:10.4161/cbt.18921

Selective tumor killing based on specific DNA-damage response deficiencies

2012· review· en· W2057287073 on OpenAlexaff
Michael Biss, Wei Xiao

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer Biology & Therapy · 2012
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicDNA Repair Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsSaskatoon Medical ImagingUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDNA damageGenome instabilityCarcinogenesisBiologyCancer researchDNA repairDNACancerGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Organisms constantly undergo various stresses within their life span, which can damage their DNA. In order to maintain genomic stability and counteract the development of unwanted genomic mutations, organisms have evolved a DNA-damage response (DDR) to protect their genome. Due to the critical roles played by DDR in genomic stability, its defects can lead to cellular transformation and potentially tumorigenesis. Consequently, this also provides the opportunity to specifically target tumor cells due to a weakened ability to tolerate genotoxic stresses. In this lies a treatment strategy in which the inhibition of remaining DDR pathways can hyper-sensitize tumors to chemotherapeutic agents while minimizing deleterious effects to healthy cells. Therefore it is important to understand the genotypic background of specific tumors to determine which DDR pathways remain and can be targeted for inhibition. Tumor therapies based on the DDR are ideal not only as a means of increasing the effectiveness of current chemotherapies but also as a means to selectively target tumor cells while leaving healthy cells unharmed. Thus, targeting DDR components as a means of increasing effectiveness and discrimination of current chemotherapeutic tumor treatments is currently the focus of many studies and clinical trials.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.970
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.335
Teacher spread0.280 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations12
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancer Biology & TherapySame topicDNA Repair MechanismsFrench-language works237,207