Up-regulation of the proapoptotic caspase 2 splicing isoform by a candidate tumor suppressor, RBM5
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Similar to many genes involved in programmed cell death (PCD), the caspase 2 (casp-2) gene generates both proapoptotic and antiapoptotic isoforms by alternative splicing. Using a yeast RNA-protein interaction assay, we identified RBM5 (also known as LUCA-15) as a protein that binds to casp-2 pre-mRNA. In both transfected cells and in vitro splicing assay, RBM5 enhances the formation of proapoptotic Casp-2L. RBM5 binds to a U/C-rich sequence immediately upstream of the previously identified In100 splicing repressor element. Our mutagenesis experiments demonstrate that RBM5 binding to this intronic sequence regulates the ratio of proapoptotic/antiapoptotic casp-2 splicing isoforms, suggesting that casp-2 splicing regulation by RBM5 may contribute to its tumor suppressor activity. Our work has uncovered a player in casp-2 alternative splicing regulation and revealed a link between the alternative splicing regulator and the candidate tumor suppressor gene. Together with previous studies, our work suggests that splicing control of cell death genes may be an important aspect in tumorigenesis. Enhancing the expression or activities of splicing regulators that promote the production of proapoptotic splicing isoforms might provide a therapeutic approach to cancer.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".