MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2562289595 · doi:10.1158/1538-7445.am2015-3034

Abstract 3034: A high-content screen to identify novel chromosome instability genes

2015· article· en· W2562289595 on OpenAlexaff
Laura L. Thompson, Allison K. Baergen, Zelda Lichtensztejn, Kirk J. McManus

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer Research · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicRNA modifications and cancer
Canadian institutionsResearch ManitobaUniversity of WinnipegUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyGeneChromosome instabilityGene silencingGeneticsCarcinogenesisCandidate genePhenotypeGenome instabilityTelomereChromosomeMolecular biologyDNADNA damage

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Chromosome instability (CIN) is defined as an increase in the rate at which whole chromosomes or large chromosomal fragments are gained or lost. It is a characteristic of virtually all cancer types that is frequently observed in highly aggressive, drug resistant tumors. Despite this, the majority of human CIN genes have yet to be elucidated, highlighting the need for studies aimed at identifying the defective genes that underlie CIN. In this study we developed image-based approaches capable of detecting CIN-associated phenotypes following RNAi-based silencing of candidate CIN genes. The first assay involves quantifying nuclear areas following silencing, where changes in mean nuclear area relative to controls act as a surrogate marker of CIN. The second approach monitors micronucleus (MN) formation where increases in the number of micronuclei are indicative of CIN. These assays were employed in a high-content screen of 164 human candidate CIN genes in two unrelated cell lines, HT1080 and hTERT. In HT1080, the nuclear area and MN enumeration assays identified 43 and 83 putative CIN genes, respectively. In hTERT, the nuclear area and MN assays identified 55 and 48 putative CIN genes, respectively. Preliminary data collected through Western blotting, mitotic spreads and flow cytometry, has provided evidence to support the validation of a subset of these putative CIN genes (e.g. SKP1), as bona fide human CIN genes. Identifying novel CIN genes will provide critical insights into CIN and tumorigenesis, as well as identify potential targets that could be exploited for the development of superior therapeutic strategies. Citation Format: Laura L. Thompson, Allison Baergen, Zelda Lichtensztejn, Kirk J. McManus. A high-content screen to identify novel chromosome instability genes. [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 106th Annual Meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research; 2015 Apr 18-22; Philadelphia, PA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2015;75(15 Suppl):Abstract nr 3034. doi:10.1158/1538-7445.AM2015-3034

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.257
GPT teacher head0.447
Teacher spread0.190 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancer Research→Same topicRNA modifications and cancer→French-language works237,207→