MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Decreased expression of the INK4 family of cyclin‐dependent kinase inhibitors in Wilms tumor

2000· article· en· W2066825817 on OpenAlexaff
Mayi Arcellana‐Panlilio, R. Maarten Egeler, Eva Ujack, Alfredo Pinto, Doug Demetrick, Stephen M. Robbins, Max J. Coppes

Bibliographic record

VenueGenes Chromosomes and Cancer · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicRenal and related cancers
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryAlberta Children's Hospital
FundersNational Cancer InstituteU.S. Public Health ServiceNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsWilms' tumorCDKN2BCDKN2ABiologyCancer researchCyclin-dependent kinaseCell cycleKinaseCancerGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cyclin-dependent kinase (CDK) inhibitors represented by the INK4 family (including p16(INK4a, CDKN2A), p15(INK4b, CDKN2B), p18(INK4c, CDKN2C), and p19(INK4d, CDKN2D)) are regulators of the cell cycle shown to be aberrant in many types of human cancer. We tested the hypothesis that these CDK inhibitors are a target for altered gene expression in Wilms tumor. Using RT-PCR, gene expression of the INK4 family was found to be decreased in 9 of 38 Wilms tumor samples obtained from the National Wilms Tumor Study Group (NWTSG) tissue bank. All the affected tumor samples were of favorable histology. Methylation-specific PCR revealed that methylation in the p16 promoter region may be responsible for altered expression. The incidence of loss of p16 expression may increase with increasing tumor stage, i.e., 1/10 (10%) with stage I/II FH Wilms tumor, 2/10 (20%) with stage III FH Wilms tumor, and 4/10 (40%) with stage IV FH Wilms tumor. Thus, determining the expression status of the INK4 family may have potential prognostic value in the management of Wilms tumor.

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 score0.039
Threshold uncertainty score0.271

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.217 · 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

Citations34
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGenes Chromosomes and CancerSame topicRenal and related cancersFrench-language works237,207