MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2566444561 · doi:10.1038/srep38968

A CRISPR/Cas9 Functional Screen Identifies Rare Tumor Suppressors

2016· article· en· W2566444561 on OpenAlexafffund
Alexandra Katigbak, Regina Cencic, Françis Robert, Patrick Sénécha, Claudio Scuoppo, Jerry Pelletier

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Reports · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCRISPR and Genetic Engineering
Canadian institutionsMontreal Clinical Research InstituteOccupational Cancer Research CentreInstitute for Research in Immunology and CancerMcGill University
FundersCanadian Cancer Society Research Institute
KeywordsCRISPRSuppressorCas9Computational biologyBiologyComputer scienceGeneticsGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An enormous amount of tumor sequencing data has been generated through large scale sequencing efforts. The functional consequences of the majority of mutations identified by such projects remain an open, unexplored question. This problem is particularly complicated in the case of rare mutations where frequency of occurrence alone or prediction of functional consequences are insufficient to distinguish driver from passenger or bystander mutations. We combine genome editing technology with a powerful mouse cancer model to uncover previously unsuspected rare oncogenic mutations in Burkitt's lymphoma. We identify two candidate tumor suppressors whose loss cooperate with MYC over-expression to accelerate lymphomagenesis. Our results highlight the utility of in vivo CRISPR/Cas9 screens combined with powerful mouse models to identify and validate rare oncogenic modifier events from tumor mutational data.

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)0.000
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 score0.066
Threshold uncertainty score0.446

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 science0.0000.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.257 · 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

Citations39
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific ReportsSame topicCRISPR and Genetic EngineeringFrench-language works237,207