Mutually Exclusive Cyclin-Dependent Kinase 4/Cyclin D1 and Cyclin-Dependent Kinase 6/Cyclin D2 Pairing Inactivates Retinoblastoma Protein and Promotes Cell Cycle Dysregulation in Multiple Myeloma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Multiple myeloma, the second most common hematopoietic cancer, ultimately becomes refractory to treatment when self-renewing multiple myeloma cells begin unrestrained proliferation by unknown mechanisms. Here, we show that one, but not more than one, of the three early G(1) D cyclins is elevated in each case of multiple myeloma. Cyclin D1 or D3 expression does not vary in the clinical course, but that alone is insufficient to promote cell cycle progression unless cyclin-dependent kinase 4 (cdk4) is also elevated, in the absence of cdk6, to phosphorylate the retinoblastoma protein (Rb). By contrast, cyclin D2 and cdk6 are coordinately increased, thereby overriding the inhibition by cdk inhibitors p18(INK4c) and p27(Kip1) and phosphorylating Rb in conjunction with the existing cdk4. Thus, cyclin D1 pairs exclusively with cdk4 and cdk6 pairs only with cyclin D2, although cyclin D2 can also pair with cdk4 in multiple myeloma cells. The basis for this novel and specific cdk/D cyclin pairing lies in differential transcriptional activation. In addition, cyclin D1- or cyclin D3-expressing multiple myeloma cells are uniformly distributed in the bone marrow, whereas cdk6-specific phosphorylation of Rb occurs in discrete foci of bone marrow multiple myeloma cells before proliferation early in the clinical course and is then heightened with proliferation and disease progression. Mutually exclusive cdk4/cyclin D1 and cdk6/cyclin D2 pairing, therefore, is likely to be a critical determinant for cell cycle reentry and progression and may play a pivotal role in the expansion of self-renewing multiple myeloma cells.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".