RAD51 as a potential surrogate marker for DNA repair capacity in solid malignancies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Targeting deficient mechanisms of cellular DNA repair still represents the basis for the treatment of the majority of solid tumors, and increased DNA repair capacity is a hallmark mechanism of resistance not only to DNA-damaging treatments such as cytotoxic drugs and radiotherapy, but also to small molecule targeted drugs such as inhibitors of poly-ADP ribose polymerase (PARP). Hence, there is substantial medical need for potent and convenient biomarkers of individual response to DNA-targeted treatment in personalized cancer care. RAD51 is a highly conserved protein that catalyzes DNA repair via homologous recombination, a major DNA repair pathway which directly modulates cellular sensitivity to DNA-damaging treatments. The clinical and biological significance of RAD51 protein expression is still under investigation. Pre-clinical studies consistently show the important role of nuclear RAD51 immunoreactivity in chemo- and radioresistance. Validating data from clinical trials however is limited at present, and some clinical studies show controversial results. This review gives a comprehensive overview on the current knowledge about the prognostic and predictive value of RAD51 protein expression and genetic variability in patients with solid malignancies.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
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".