MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2887054120 · doi:10.1080/15384101.2018.1502567

Targeting the cell cycle in breast cancer: towards the next phase

2018· review· en· W2887054120 on OpenAlexafffund
Kelsie L. Thu, Isabel Soria‐Bretones, TW Mak, DW Cescon

Bibliographic record

VenueCell Cycle · 2018
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAdvanced Breast Cancer Therapies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreUniversity Health Network
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchCampbell Family Institute for Breast Cancer Research
KeywordsCell cycleBiologyCancerBreast cancerCancer researchCancer cellCell growthBioinformaticsGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Deregulation of the cell cycle is a hallmark of cancer that enables limitless cell division. To support this malignant phenotype, cells acquire molecular alterations that abrogate or bypass control mechanisms in signaling pathways and cellular checkpoints that normally function to prevent genomic instability and uncontrolled cell proliferation. Consequently, therapeutic targeting of the cell cycle has long been viewed as a promising anti-cancer strategy. Until recently, attempts to target the cell cycle for cancer therapy using selective inhibitors have proven unsuccessful due to intolerable toxicities and a lack of target specificity. However, improvements in our understanding of malignant cell-specific vulnerabilities has revealed a therapeutic window for preferential targeting of the cell cycle in cancer cells, and has led to the development of agents now in the clinic. In this review, we discuss the latest generation of cell cycle targeting anti-cancer agents for breast cancer, including approved CDK4/6 inhibitors, and investigational TTK and PLK4 inhibitors that are currently in clinical trials. In recognition of the emerging population of ER+ breast cancers with acquired resistance to CDK4/6 inhibitors we suggest new therapeutic avenues to treat these patients. We also offer our perspective on the direction of future research to address the problem of drug resistance, and discuss the mechanistic insights required for the successful implementation of these strategies.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.351
Teacher spread0.306 · 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
GenreReview

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

Citations201
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCell CycleSame topicAdvanced Breast Cancer TherapiesFrench-language works237,207