MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2150834451 · doi:10.1073/pnas.0407512102

c-Myc induces chromosomal rearrangements through telomere and chromosome remodeling in the interphase nucleus

2005· article· en· W2150834451 on OpenAlexaff
Sherif F. Louis, Bart J. Vermolen, Yuval Garini, Ian Young, Amanda Guffei, Zelda Lichtensztejn, Fabien Kuttler, Tony Chuang, Sharareh Moshir, Virginie Mougey, Alice Chuang, Paul Kerr, Thierry Fest, Petra Boukamp, Sabine Mai

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTelomeres, Telomerase, and Senescence
Canadian institutionsHealth Sciences Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInterphaseTelomereChromosomal translocationBiologyChromosome instabilityNucleusChromosomeGenome instabilityCell biologyCell cycleGeneticsCellDNAGeneDNA damage

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In previous work, we showed that telomeres of normal cells are organized within the 3D space of the interphase nucleus in a nonoverlapping and cell cycle-dependent manner. This order is distorted in tumor cell nuclei where telomeres are found in close association forming aggregates of various numbers and sizes. Here we show that c-Myc overexpression induces telomeric aggregations in the interphase nucleus. Directly proportional to the duration of c-Myc deregulation, we observe three or five cycles of telomeric aggregate formation in interphase nuclei. These cycles reflect the onset and propagation of breakage-bridge-fusion cycles that are initiated by end-to-end telomeric fusions of chromosomes. Subsequent to initial chromosomal breakages, new fusions follow and the breakage-bridge-fusion cycles continue. During this time, nonreciprocal translocations are generated. c-Myc-dependent remodeling of the organization of telomeres thus precedes the onset of genomic instability and subsequently leads to chromosomal rearrangements. Our findings reveal that c-Myc possesses the ability to structurally modify chromosomes through telomeric fusions, thereby reorganizing the genetic information.

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 score0.437
Threshold uncertainty score0.302

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.066
GPT teacher head0.340
Teacher spread0.274 · 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

Citations162
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the National Academy of SciencesSame topicTelomeres, Telomerase, and SenescenceFrench-language works237,207