MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2134267224 · doi:10.1093/gerona/62.1.3

Progeria of Stem Cells: Stem Cell Exhaustion in Hutchinson-Gilford Progeria Syndrome

2007· review· en· W2134267224 on OpenAlexaff
Julius Halaschek-Wiener, Angela Brooks‐Wilson

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journals of Gerontology Series A · 2007
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicNuclear Structure and Function
Canadian institutionsCanada's Michael Smith Genome Sciences Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProgeriaLaminLMNAStem cellBiologyPremature agingNuclear laminaCell biologyStem cell theory of agingGeneticsGeneNuclear proteinStem cell factorProgenitor cell

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Hutchinson-Gilford progeria syndrome (HGPS) is a rare, fatal genetic disorder that is characterized by segmental accelerated aging. The major causal mutation associated with HGPS triggers abnormal messenger RNA splicing of the lamin A gene leading to changes in the nuclear architecture. To date, two models have been proposed to explain how mutations in the lamin A gene could lead to HGPS, structural fragility and altered gene expression. We favor a compatible model that links HGPS to stem cell-driven tissue regeneration. In this model, nuclear fragility of lamin A-deficient cells increases apoptotic cell death to levels that exhaust tissues' ability for stem cell-driven regeneration. Tissue-specific differences in cell death or regenerative potential, or both, result in the tissue-specific segmental aging pattern seen in HGPS. We propose that the pattern of aging-related conditions present or absent in HGPS can provide insight into the genetic and environmental factors that contribute to normal aging.

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)0.000
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 score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.003

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 head0.062
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.264 · 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

Citations97
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journals of Gerontology Series ASame topicNuclear Structure and FunctionFrench-language works237,207