MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2790859354 · doi:10.15252/emmm.201808928

Co‐targeting driver pathways in prostate cancer: two birds with one stone

2018· letter· en· W2790859354 on OpenAlexaff
Amina Zoubeidi, Martin Gleave

Bibliographic record

VenueEMBO Molecular Medicine · 2018
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicProstate Cancer Treatment and Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProstate cancerCancer researchCancerProstateMedicineBiologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Co‐targeting strategies strive to improve cancer outcomes by combining therapies under contextualized genetic and environmental conditions that selectively target exploitable alterations in tumor cells. Adaptive survival pathways triggered by inhibition of driver genes in the androgen receptor (AR) or PI3K/AKT pathways are of great interest, since they are among the most frequently altered in castrate‐resistant prostate cancer (CRPC). Unfortunately, negative feedback loops exist between the AR and PI3K/AKT pathways such that targeting AR leads to activation of PI3K/AKT signaling, while PI3K/AKT pathway inhibition leads to increased AR transcriptional activity. Hence, targeting both pathways provides an opportunity for conditional lethality and a high therapeutic index. In this issue of EMBO Molecular Medicine , Yan et al (2018) present an elegant study showing that histone deacetylase 3 (HDAC3) acts as a common upstream activator of both AR and AKT signaling pathways, and use HDAC3 inhibitors as a monotherapy to co‐target two major pathways driving CRPC growth.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0140.023
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.003

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.318
Teacher spread0.294 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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

Citations6
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEMBO Molecular MedicineSame topicProstate Cancer Treatment and ResearchFrench-language works237,207