MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2101683986 · doi:10.4161/23723548.2014.965638

Necroptosis: Fifty shades of RIPKs

2014· article· en· W2101683986 on OpenAlexaff
Gabriel Ichim, Stephen W. G. Tait

Bibliographic record

VenueMolecular & Cellular Oncology · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCell death mechanisms and regulation
Canadian institutionsInstitute of Cancer Research
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNecroptosisRIPK1Programmed cell deathCell biologyApoptosisBiologyKinaseBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Apoptosis and necroptosis are 2 major, yet distinct, forms of regulated cell death. Whereas apoptosis requires caspase protease function, necroptosis requires activation of the receptor interacting protein kinases 1 (RIPK1) and RIPK3. Following activation, RIPK3 phosphorylates mixed-lineage kinase domain-like (MLKL), leading to cell death. Apoptosis and necroptosis are deeply intertwined such that a given death stimulus can often engage either form of cell death. Recent studies published in Cell Death and Differentiation by the Han, Oberst, and Vaux laboratories provide exciting new insights into necroptosis and how it interconnects with apoptosis. As we will discuss, their findings address key questions including: How does a cell choose between apoptosis or necroptosis? How can RIPK3 also induce apoptosis? What is the nature of the RIPK1-3 signaling cascade leading to necroptosis? Finally, data from the Oberst and Han groups strongly argue that RIPK1 is not only involved in executing necroptosis, but also protects against this process in some settings.

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)0.002
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.004
Scholarly communication0.0040.006
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.227 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations4
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMolecular & Cellular OncologySame topicCell death mechanisms and regulationFrench-language works237,207