MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2093805839 · doi:10.1002/path.2047

Senescence and serration: a new twist to an old tale

2006· review· en· W2093805839 on OpenAlexaff
Parham Minoo, J R Jass

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Pathology · 2006
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTelomeres, Telomerase, and Senescence
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSenescenceCarcinogenesisBiologyMicrosatellite instabilityCancer researchKRASTelomerePhenotypeDNA methylationGene silencingOncogeneGeneticsCell cycleMutationCancerGeneGene expression

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Interest in the role of oncogene-induced senescence in tumorigenesis is mounting. Raf-associated senescence in cutaneous nevi has been advanced as an example of this process occurring in the context of a human tumour. In this model, conversion from a senescent nevus to a malignant melanoma is accompanied by loss of expression of p16. Serrated polyps of the colorectum may provide a further example of oncogene-induced senescence. BRAF and KRAS mutation may initiate different pathways of senescence-associated serrated neoplasia in the colorectum, the former linked to CpG island methylator phenotype (CIMP)-high (CIMP1) and microsatellite instability (MSI)-high status and the latter with CIMP-low (CIMP2) and MSI-low status. The role of methylation in both Raf- and Ras-associated pathways is to drive tumorigenesis by silencing pro-apoptotic and cell cycle inhibitory genes. Both pathways are associated with mutation of Ras-induced senescence 1 (RIS1), but the biological role of RIS1 requires further elucidation.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.060
GPT teacher head0.363
Teacher spread0.303 · 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

Citations41
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of PathologySame topicTelomeres, Telomerase, and SenescenceFrench-language works237,207