DNA-damage response network at the crossroads of cell-cycle checkpoints, cellular senescence and apoptosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Tissue homeostasis requires a carefully-orchestrated balance between cell proliferation, cellular senescence and cell death. Cells proliferate through a cell cycle that is tightly regulated by cyclin-dependent kinase activities. Cellular senescence is a safeguard program limiting the proliferative competence of cells in living organisms. Apoptosis eliminates unwanted cells by the coordinated activity of gene products that regulate and effect cell death. The intimate link between the cell cycle, cellular senescence, apoptosis regulation, cancer development and tumor responses to cancer treatment has become eminently apparent. Extensive research on tumor suppressor genes, oncogenes, the cell cycle and apoptosis regulatory genes has revealed how the DNA damage-sensing and -signaling pathways, referred to as the DNA-damage response network, are tied to cell proliferation, cell-cycle arrest, cellular senescence and apoptosis. DNA-damage responses are complex, involving "sensor" proteins that sense the damage, and transmit signals to "transducer" proteins, which, in turn, convey the signals to numerous "effector" proteins implicated in specific cellular pathways, including DNA repair mechanisms, cell-cycle checkpoints, cellular senescence and apoptosis. The Bcl-2 family of proteins stands among the most crucial regulators of apoptosis and performs vital functions in deciding whether a cell will live or die after cancer chemotherapy and irradiation. In addition, several studies have now revealed that members of the Bcl-2 family also interface with the cell cycle, DNA repair/recombination and cellular senescence, effects that are generally distinct from their function in apoptosis. In this review, we report progress in understanding the molecular networks that regulate cell-cycle checkpoints, cellular senescence and apoptosis after DNA damage, and discuss the influence of some Bcl-2 family members on cell-cycle checkpoint regulation.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".