MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2162735751 · doi:10.2174/156652306775515538

Targeting DNA Repair Proteins: A Promising Avenue for Cancer Gene Therapy

2006· review· en· W2162735751 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Gene Therapy · 2006
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicDNA Repair Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsMontreal General Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDNA repairHomologous recombinationGenetic enhancementCancerCancer researchBiologyGeneDNACancer cellDNA damageGenome instabilityRadiation therapyMedicineGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Enhanced DNA repair in many cancer cells can be correlated to the resistance to cancer treatment, and thus contributes to a poor prognosis. Ionizing radiation and many anti-cancer drugs induce DNA double-strand breaks (DSBs), which are usually regarded as the most toxic types of DNA damages. Repair of DNA DSBs is vital for maintaining genomic stability and hence crucial for survival and propagation of all cellular organisms. Therefore, reducing the capacity of cancer cells to repair DSBs could sensitize tumors to radio/chemotherapy. Many investigators have used gene therapy strategies to down-regulate or inactivate proteins involved in the repair of DSBs in order to reduce the survival of cancer cells. Herein, are reviewed several protein candidates that have been targeted by different gene therapy approaches. Results obtained from in vitro and in vivo experiments are presented and discussed in the perspective of potential gene therapy clinical trials.

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.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.903
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.062
GPT teacher head0.357
Teacher spread0.296 · 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