MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2089267023 · doi:10.1074/jbc.m005432200

Molecular Cloning of the Human Kallikrein 15 Gene (KLK15)

2001· article· en· W2089267023 on OpenAlexaff
George M. Yousef, Andreas Scorilas, Klaus Jung, Linda K. Ashworth, Eleftherios P. Diamandis

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Biological Chemistry · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCoagulation, Bradykinin, Polyphosphates, and Angioedema
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoMount Sinai Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsKallikreinCloning (programming)GeneMolecular cloningGeneticsBiologyMolecular biologyComputational biologyComplementary DNABiochemistryEnzymeComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Kallikreins are a subgroup of serine proteases with diverse physiological functions. Growing evidence suggests that many kallikreins are implicated in carcinogenesis. By using molecular cloning techniques, we identified a new human kallikrein gene, tentatively named KLK15 (for kallikrein 15 gene). This new gene maps to chromosome 19q13.4 and is located between the KLK1 and KLK3 genes. KLK15 is formed of five coding exons and four introns, and shows structural similarity to other kallikreins and kallikrein-like genes. KLK15 has three alternatively spliced forms and is primarily expressed in the thyroid gland and to a lower extent in the prostate, salivary, and adrenal glands and in the colon testis and kidney. Our preliminary results indicate that the expression of KLK15 is up-regulated by steroid hormones in the LNCaP prostate cancer cell line. The KLK15 gene is also up-regulated, at the mRNA level, in prostate cancer in comparison to normal prostatic tissue. KLK15 up-regulation was found to be associated with more aggressive forms of prostate cancer. This newly discovered gene has the potential of being used as a diagnostic and/or prognostic marker for prostate cancer.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.371

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.251 · 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

Citations120
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Biological ChemistrySame topicCoagulation, Bradykinin, Polyphosphates, and AngioedemaFrench-language works237,207