MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2106189584 · doi:10.1128/jvi.00796-09

Host Cell Detection of Noncoding Stuffer DNA Contained in Helper-Dependent Adenovirus Vectors Leads to Epigenetic Repression of Transgene Expression

2009· article· en· W2106189584 on OpenAlexaff
P. Joel Ross, Michael A. Kennedy, Robin J. Parks

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Virology · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicVirus-based gene therapy research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyTransgeneChromatinDNA methylationDNAEpigeneticsGene deliveryGenetic enhancementHistoneGenePsychological repressionMolecular biologyGene expressionGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Helper-dependent adenovirus (hdAd) vectors have shown great promise as therapeutic gene delivery vehicles in gene therapy applications. However, the level and duration of gene expression from hdAd can differ considerably depending on the nature of the noncoding stuffer DNA contained within the vector. For example, an hdAd containing 22 kb of prokaryotic DNA (hdAd-prok) expresses its transgene 60-fold less efficiently than a similar vector containing eukaryotic DNA (hdAd-euk). Here we have determined the mechanistic basis of this phenomenon. Although neither vector was subjected to CpG methylation and both genomes associated with cellular histones to similar degrees, hdAd-prok chromatin was actively deacetylated. Insertion of an insulator element between the transgene and the bacterial DNA derepressed hdAd-prok, suggesting that foreign DNA nucleates repressive chromatin structures that spread to the transgene. We found that Sp100B/Sp100HMG and Daxx play a role in repressing transgene expression from hdAd and act independently of PML bodies. Thus, we have identified nuclear factors involved in recognizing foreign DNA and have determined the mechanism by which associated genes are repressed.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.549

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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 head0.297
Teacher spread0.283 · 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 designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations46
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of VirologySame topicVirus-based gene therapy researchFrench-language works237,207