MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Chromothripsis: A New Mechanism for Rapid Karyotype Evolution

2015· review· en· W2104154956 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnual Review of Genetics · 2015
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenomic variations and chromosomal abnormalities
Canadian institutionsPediatric Oncology Group
FundersNational Institute of General Medical SciencesHoward Hughes Medical InstituteNational Institutes of HealthNational Science Foundation
KeywordsChromothripsisBiologyGeneticsKaryotypeChromosomeMechanism (biology)Computational biologyDNAGenome instabilityGeneDNA damage

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Chromosomal rearrangements are generally thought to accumulate gradually over many generations. However, DNA sequencing of cancer and congenital disorders uncovered a new pattern in which multiple rearrangements arise all at once. The most striking example, chromothripsis, is characterized by tens or hundreds of rearrangements confined to a single chromosome or to local regions over a few chromosomes. Genomic analysis of chromothripsis and the search for its biological mechanism have led to new insights on how chromosome segregation errors can generate mutagenesis and changes to the karyotype. Here, we review the genomic features of chromothripsis and summarize recent progress on understanding its mechanism. This includes reviewing new work indicating that one mechanism to generate chromothripsis is through the physical isolation of chromosomes in abnormal nuclear structures (micronuclei). We also discuss connections revealed by recent genomic analysis of cancers between chromothripsis, chromosome bridges, and ring chromosomes.

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.898
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.289 · 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