MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2801693495 · doi:10.1016/j.celrep.2018.04.031

A General Framework for Interrogation of mRNA Stability Programs Identifies RNA-Binding Proteins that Govern Cancer Transcriptomes

2018· article· en· W2801693495 on OpenAlexafffund
Gabrielle Perron, Pouria Jandaghi, Shraddha Solanki, Maryam Safisamghabadi, Cristina Storoz, Mehran Karimzadeh, Andreas I. Papadakis, Madeleine Arseneault, Ghislaine Scélo, Rosamonde E. Banks, Jörg Tost, Mark Lathrop, Simon Tanguay, Alvis Brāzma, Sidong Huang, Fadi Brimo, Hamed S. Najafabadi, Yasser Riazalhosseini

Bibliographic record

VenueCell Reports · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicRNA Research and Splicing
Canadian institutionsMcGill University Health CentreMcGill UniversityMcGill University and Génome Québec Innovation CentreMcGill Genome Centre
FundersFonds de Recherche du Québec - SantéCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchWorld Health OrganizationMinistère de l'Enseignement Supérieur, de la Recherche, de la Science et de la TechnologieCompute CanadaSeventh Framework ProgrammeMcGill UniversityGénome Québec
KeywordsTranscriptomeRNA-binding proteinBiologyGene expressionMessenger RNAGeneComputational biologyRegulation of gene expressionCancerGeneticsCell biology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Widespread remodeling of the transcriptome is a signature of cancer; however, little is known about the post-transcriptional regulatory factors, including RNA-binding proteins (RBPs) that regulate mRNA stability, and the extent to which RBPs contribute to cancer-associated pathways. Here, by modeling the global change in gene expression based on the effect of sequence-specific RBPs on mRNA stability, we show that RBP-mediated stability programs are recurrently deregulated in cancerous tissues. Particularly, we uncovered several RBPs that contribute to the abnormal transcriptome of renal cell carcinoma (RCC), including PCBP2, ESRP2, and MBNL2. Modulation of these proteins in cancer cell lines alters the expression of pathways that are central to the disease and highlights RBPs as driving master regulators of RCC transcriptome. This study presents a framework for the screening of RBP activities based on computational modeling of mRNA stability programs in cancer and highlights the role of post-transcriptional gene dysregulation in RCC.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.314
Teacher spread0.280 · 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

Citations114
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCell ReportsSame topicRNA Research and SplicingFrench-language works237,207