MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2334642181 · doi:10.1242/jcs.155440

aPKC alters TGFβ response in NSCLC cells via both Smad-dependent and Smad-independent pathways

2014· article· en· W2334642181 on OpenAlexafffund
Adrian Gunaratne, Eddie Chan, Tarek H. El-Chabib, David Carter, Gianni M. Di Guglielmo

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Cell Science · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicTGF-β signaling in diseases
Canadian institutionsRobarts Clinical TrialsWestern University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsSMADBiologyTransforming growth factorSmad2 ProteinCell biologyCancer research

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Transforming growth factor b (TGFb) signaling controls many cellular responses including proliferation, epithelial to mesenchymal transition and apoptosis, through the activation of canonical (Smad) as well as non-canonical (e.g., Par6) pathways. Previous studies from our lab have demonstrated that aPKC inhibition regulates TGFb receptor trafficking and signaling. Here, we report that downstream TGFb-dependent transcriptional responses in aPKC-silenced NSCLC cells were reduced compared with those of control cells, despite a temporal extension of Smad2 phosphorylation. We assessed SARA–Smad2–Smad4 association and observed that knockdown of aPKC increased SARA (also known as ZFYVE9) levels and SARA–Smad2 complex formation, increased cytoplasmic retention of Smad2 and reduced Smad2–Smad4 complex formation, which correlated with reduced Smad2 nuclear translocation. Interestingly, we also detected an increase in p38 MAPK phosphorylation and apoptosis in aPKC-silenced cells, which were found to be TRAF6-dependent. Taken together, our results suggest that aPKC isoforms regulate Smad and non-Smad TGFb pathways and that aPKC inhibition sensitizes NSCLC cells to undergo TGFb dependent apoptosis.

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)0.003
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 score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.517

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.219 · 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

Citations19
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Cell ScienceSame topicTGF-β signaling in diseasesFrench-language works237,207