MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2090379679 · doi:10.2174/138945009788185095

Modulators of Inhibitor of Growth (ING) Family Expression in Development and Disease

2009· review· en· W2090379679 on OpenAlexafffund
Stacey K. Maher, Caren C. Helbing

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Drug Targets · 2009
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicEpigenetics and DNA Methylation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMichael Smith Health Research BC
KeywordsBiologyContext (archaeology)Cell cycleCell biologyCell growthGene expressionRegulation of gene expressionSenescenceGeneGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The inhibitor of growth (ING) gene family proteins regulate many critical cellular processes such as cell proliferation and growth, apoptosis, DNA repair, senescence, angiogenesis, and drug resistance. Their transcripts and proteins are differentially expressed in health and disease and there is evidence for developmental regulation. The vast majority of studies have characterized ING levels in the context of cancer. However, relatively little attention has been paid to the expression of ING family members in other contexts. This review summarizes the findings from human and animal model systems that provide insight into the factors influencing the expression of these important proteins. We examine the influence of cell cycle and aging as well as genotoxic stress on ING expression levels and evaluate several emerging areas of inquiry demonstrating that ING gene activity may be modulated by factors such as the p53 tumor suppressor, DNA methylation, and ING proteins themselves with external factors such as hormones, reactive oxygen species, TGFbeta signalling, and other proteins of pathological significance also influencing ING levels. We then briefly discuss the influence of post-translational modification and changes in subcellular localization as it pertains to modulation of ING expression. Understanding how ING expression is modulated represents a vital aspect of effective drug targeting strategies.

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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

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)0.0020.003

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 head0.307
Teacher spread0.280 · 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

Citations8
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent Drug TargetsSame topicEpigenetics and DNA MethylationFrench-language works237,207