MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2077356468 · doi:10.2174/156652409788167050

Tumor Hypoxia as a Modifier of DNA Strand Break and Cross-Link Repair

2009· review· en· W2077356468 on OpenAlexafffund
Norman Chan, Cameron J. Koch, Robert G. Bristow

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Molecular Medicine · 2009
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCancer, Hypoxia, and Metabolism
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreUniversity of Toronto
FundersU.S. Public Health ServiceTerry Fox Foundation
KeywordsHomologous recombinationDNA repairDNA damageDNARadiosensitivityHomologous chromosomePoly ADP ribose polymeraseCancer researchHomology directed repairHypoxia (environmental)BiologyMolecular biologyChemistryDNA mismatch repairGeneticsRadiation therapyOxygenMedicinePolymeraseInternal medicineGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Hypoxia is a common characteristic of many solid tumors and is associated with poor prognosis. Cells with low oxygen levels can have altered sensitivity to radiotherapy and chemotherapy secondary to changes in the incidence of DNA single- and double-strand breaks (DNA-ssb, DNA-dsb), DNA base damage, DNA-DNA cross-links and DNA-protein cross-links. Recent evidence also supports that cells exposed to chronic hypoxia have a decreased capacity of DNA-dsb repair. This review will examine the influence of short-term and prolonged hypoxia on the two major pathways of DNA-dsb repair: homologous recombination (HR) and non-homologous end-joining (NHEJ). Novel treatment strategies designed to exploit the hypoxic tumor microenvironment are also discussed. Modification of DNA damage sensing and repair due to fluctuating oxygen levels within a dynamic tumor microenvironment may have profound implications for tumor progression and treatment.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.003

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.353
Teacher spread0.325 · 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 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

Citations36
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent Molecular MedicineSame topicCancer, Hypoxia, and MetabolismFrench-language works237,207