MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2075066807 · doi:10.3747/co.v16i2.428

Development of Cell-Cycle Inhibitors for Cancer Therapy

2009· article· en· W2075066807 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mark A. Dickson, Gary K. Schwartz

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Oncology · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer-related Molecular Pathways
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCyclin-dependent kinaseCell cycleMedicineCancer researchKinaseCancerCancer cellPalbociclibPharmacologyBiologyCell biologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The cell cycle governs the transition from quiescence through cell growth to proliferation. The key parts of the cell cycle machinery are the cyclin-dependent kinases (CDKS) and the regulatory proteins called cyclins. The CDKS are rational targets for cancer therapy because their expression in cancer cells is often aberrant and their inhibition can induce cell death. Inhibitors of CDKS can also block transcription.Several drugs targeting the cell cycle have entered clinical trials. These agents include flavopiridol, indisulam, AZD5438, SNS-032, bryostatin-1, seliciclib, PD 0332991, and SCH 727965. Phase i studies have demonstrated that these drugs can generally be administered safely. Phase ii studies have shown little single-agent activity in solid tumors, but combination studies with cytotoxic chemotherapy have been more promising. In hematologic malignancies, reports have shown encouraging single-agent and combination activity. Pharmacodynamic studies show that the dose and schedule of these drugs are crucial to permit maximum therapeutic effect.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.003

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 head0.086
GPT teacher head0.403
Teacher spread0.317 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations244
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent OncologySame topicCancer-related Molecular PathwaysFrench-language works237,207