How does a protein with dual mitotic spindle and extracellular matrix receptor functions affect tumor susceptibility and progression?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The mechanisms responsible for the oncogenic effects of the hyaluronan (HA) receptor and mitotic spindle binding protein, RHAMM, are poorly understood. On one hand, extracellular RHAMM interacts with HA and cellsurface receptors such as CD44 to coordinately activate the MAPK/ERK1,2 pathway, thus contributing to the spread and proliferation of tumor cells. On the other hand, intracellular RHAMM decorates mitotic spindles and is necessary for spindle formation and progression through G2/M and overexpression or loss of RHAMM can result in multipole spindles and chromosome missegregation. The deregulation of these intracellular functions could lead to genomic instability and fuel tumor progression. This suggests that both extracellular and intracellular RHAMM can promote tumor progression. Intracellular RHAMM can bind directly to ERK1 to form complexes with ERK2, MEK1 and ERK1,2 substrates, and we present a model whereby RHAMM's function is as a scaffold protein, controlling activation and targeting of ERK1,2 to specific substrates.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".