MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2091194126 · doi:10.1038/sj.bjc.6603304

Roles for the coactivators CBP and p300 and the APC/C E3 ubiquitin ligase in E1A-dependent cell transformation

2006· review· en· W2091194126 on OpenAlexafffund
Andrew S. Turnell, Joe S. Mymryk

Bibliographic record

VenueBritish Journal of Cancer · 2006
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicUbiquitin and proteasome pathways
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchUniversity of BirminghamCancer Research UK
KeywordsUbiquitin ligaseBiologyCell biologyEmbryonic stem cellTransformation (genetics)Malignant transformationUbiquitinGeneticsGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Adenovirus early region 1A (E1A) possesses potent transforming activity when expressed in concert with activated ras or E1B genes in in vitro tissue culture systems such as embryonic human retinal neuroepithelial cells or embryonic rodent epithelial and fibroblast cells. Early region 1A has thus been used extensively and very effectively as a tool to determine the molecular mechanisms that underlie the basis of cellular transformation. In this regard, roles for the E1A-binding proteins pRb, p107, p130, cyclic AMP response element-binding protein (CBP)/p300, p400, TRRAP and CtBP in cellular transformation have been established. However, the mechanisms by which E1A promotes transformation through interaction with these partner proteins are not fully delineated. In this review, we focus on recent advances in our understanding of CBP/p300 function, particularly with regard to its relationship to the anaphase-promoting complex/cyclosome E3 ubiquitin ligase, which has recently been shown to interact and affect the activity of CBP/p300 through interaction domains that are evolutionarily conserved in E1A.

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)0.001
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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.997
Threshold uncertainty score0.477

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.272 · 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 designOther design
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

Citations56
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBritish Journal of CancerSame topicUbiquitin and proteasome pathwaysFrench-language works237,207