MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2146777763 · doi:10.1158/0008-5472.can-12-0939

Genetic Screening for Synthetic Lethal Partners of Polynucleotide Kinase/Phosphatase: Potential for Targeting SHP-1–Depleted Cancers

2012· article· en· W2146777763 on OpenAlexafffund
Todd R. Mereniuk, Robert A. Maranchuk, Anja Schindler, Jonathan Penner-Chea, Gary K. Freschauf, Samar A. Hegazy, Raymond Lai, Edan Foley, Michael Weinfeld

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer Research · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicDNA Repair Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNational Institute on AgingCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsDNA damageCancer researchDNA repairTensinBiologyPhosphataseApoptosisKinaseDNAMolecular biologyCell biologyBiochemistryPhosphorylationPTEN

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A genetic screen using a library of 6,961 siRNAs led to the identification of SHP-1 (PTPN6), a tumor suppressor frequently mutated in malignant lymphomas, leukemias, and prostate cancer, as a potential synthetic lethal partner of the DNA repair protein polynucleotide kinase/phosphatase (PNKP). After confirming the partnership with SHP-1, we observed that codepletion of PNKP and SHP-1 induced apoptosis. A T-cell lymphoma cell line that is SHP-1 deficient (Karpas 299) was shown to be sensitive to a chemical inhibitor of PNKP, but resistance was restored by expression of wild-type SHP-1 in these cells. We determined that while SHP-1 depletion does not significantly impact DNA strand-break repair, it does amplify the level of reactive oxygen species (ROS) and elevate endogenous DNA damage. The ROS scavenger WR1065 afforded protection to SHP-1-depleted cells treated with the PNKP inhibitor. We propose that codisruption of SHP-1 and PNKP leads to an increase in DNA damage that escapes repair, resulting in the accumulation of cytotoxic double-strand breaks and induction of apoptosis. This supports an alternative paradigm for synthetic lethal partnerships that could be exploited therapeutically.

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 score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.780

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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.383
Teacher spread0.329 · 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

Citations39
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancer ResearchSame topicDNA Repair MechanismsFrench-language works237,207