MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2620315612 · doi:10.1038/s41598-017-02829-3

Expanded CCUG repeat RNA expression in Drosophila heart and muscle trigger Myotonic Dystrophy type 1-like phenotypes and activate autophagocytosis genes

2017· article· en· W2620315612 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Estefanía Cerro-Herreros, Mouli Chakraborty, Manuel Pérez‐Alonso, Rubén Artero, Beatriz Llamusí

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Reports · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicGenetic Neurodegenerative Diseases
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersInstitute of GeneticsInstituto de Salud Carlos IIIEuropean Regional Development FundE-Rare
KeywordsMyotonic dystrophyBiologyTrinucleotide repeat expansionGeneIntronRNARNA splicingUntranslated regionGeneticsPhenotypeRNA-binding proteinGene expressionModel organismCell biologyAllele

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Myotonic dystrophies (DM1-2) are neuromuscular genetic disorders caused by the pathological expansion of untranslated microsatellites. DM1 and DM2, are caused by expanded CTG repeats in the 3'UTR of the DMPK gene and CCTG repeats in the first intron of the CNBP gene, respectively. Mutant RNAs containing expanded repeats are retained in the cell nucleus, where they sequester nuclear factors and cause alterations in RNA metabolism. However, for unknown reasons, DM1 is more severe than DM2. To study the differences and similarities in the pathogenesis of DM1 and DM2, we generated model flies by expressing pure expanded CUG ([250]×) or CCUG ([1100]×) repeats, respectively, and compared them with control flies expressing either 20 repeat units or GFP. We observed surprisingly severe muscle reduction and cardiac dysfunction in CCUG-expressing model flies. The muscle and cardiac tissue of both DM1 and DM2 model flies showed DM1-like phenotypes including overexpression of autophagy-related genes, RNA mis-splicing and repeat RNA aggregation in ribonuclear foci along with the Muscleblind protein. These data reveal, for the first time, that expanded non-coding CCUG repeat-RNA has similar in vivo toxicity potential as expanded CUG RNA in muscle and heart tissues and suggests that specific, as yet unknown factors, quench CCUG-repeat toxicity in DM2 patients.

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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.250 · 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

Citations20
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific Reports→Same topicGenetic Neurodegenerative Diseases→French-language works237,207→