MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2102099949 · doi:10.3389/fphar.2013.00028

Mechanisms and insights into drug resistance in cancer

2013· article· en· W2102099949 on OpenAlexaff
Hiba Zahreddine, Katherine L. B. Borden

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Pharmacology · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCancer therapeutics and mechanisms
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalInstitute for Research in Immunology and Cancer
FundersNational Cancer InstituteNational Institutes of HealthCentre National de la Recherche ScientifiqueLeukemia and Lymphoma Society
KeywordsDrug resistanceMechanism (biology)CancerDrugMedicineComputational biologyMultiple drug resistanceBioinformaticsCancer drugsBiologyPharmacologyGeneticsInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cancer drug resistance continues to be a major impediment in medical oncology. Clinically, resistance can arise prior to or as a result of cancer therapy. In this review, we discuss different mechanisms adapted by cancerous cells to resist treatment, including alteration in drug transport and metabolism, mutation and amplification of drug targets, as well as genetic rewiring which can lead to impaired apoptosis. Tumor heterogeneity may also contribute to resistance, where small subpopulations of cells may acquire or stochastically already possess some of the features enabling them to emerge under selective drug pressure. Making the problem even more challenging, some of these resistance pathways lead to multidrug resistance, generating an even more difficult clinical problem to overcome. We provide examples of these mechanisms and some insights into how understanding these processes can influence the next generation of cancer therapies.

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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.255 · 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

Citations660
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in PharmacologySame topicCancer therapeutics and mechanismsFrench-language works237,207