MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2067663003 · doi:10.1080/09553000110097208

Implication of PBP74/mortalin/GRP75 in the radio-adaptive response

2002· article· en· W2067663003 on OpenAlexaff
Jan E. Carette, Shirley Lehnert, Terry Chow

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Radiation Biology · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicHeat shock proteins research
Canadian institutionsMontreal General HospitalMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTransfectionAdaptive responseCell cultureClonogenic assayIonizing radiationBiologyMolecular biologyCell biologyChemistryIrradiationPhysicsGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: To investigate the relationship between expression of the human peptide-binding protein PBP74 and the occurrence of an adaptive response to ionizing radiation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Human tumour cell lines HT29 and MCF-7 were transfected with a PBP74 or PBP74 antisense construct. For demonstration of an adaptive response, cells lines were irradiated with a conditioning dose of 0.25 Gy cobalt-60 gamma-rays followed by a second dose of 4.0 Gy after an interval of 4.5 h. Response was measured in terms of clonogenic survival. RESULTS: Transfection of a PBP74 plasmid caused transient overexpression of PBP74 mRNA in both cell lines. The optimal dose for the induction of PBP74 in the cell lines investigated was 0.1-0.25Gy and PBP74 induction occurred within 30 min of irradiation. For both cell lines, the adaptive response was repressed when cells were transfected with the anti-PBP plasmid. However, the converse, an enhancement of the adaptive response in cell lines transfected with the PBP74 construct, was seen only for HT29 cells under certain experimental conditions. CONCLUSIONS: The results support the view that while PBP74 is necessary to the adaptive response, it may not by itself be sufficient for the adaptive response to occur.

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)0.001
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 score0.314
Threshold uncertainty score0.211

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.339
Teacher spread0.314 · 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

Citations44
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Radiation BiologySame topicHeat shock proteins researchFrench-language works237,207