MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2940740131 · doi:10.1016/j.isci.2019.04.023

Identification of Kinases Responsible for p53-Dependent Autophagy

2019· article· en· W2940740131 on OpenAlexaff
Stephanie L. Celano, Lisette Yco, Matthew G. Kortus, Abigail R. Solitro, Hakan Günaydin, M.L. Scott, E. T. C. Spooner, Rónán C. O’Hagan, Peter H. Fuller, Katie R. Martin, Stuart D. Shumway, Jeffrey P. MacKeigan

Bibliographic record

VenueiScience · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAutophagy in Disease and Therapy
Canadian institutionsGilead Sciences (Canada)
FundersNational Cancer InstituteMerck
KeywordsAutophagyCell biologyKinaseBiologyProteasomeUbiquitinDNA damageEffectorBAG3Cancer researchBiochemistryApoptosisDNA

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In cancer, autophagy is upregulated to promote cell survival and tumor growth during times of nutrient stress and can confer resistance to drug treatments. Several major signaling networks control autophagy induction, including the p53 tumor suppressor pathway. In response to DNA damage and other cellular stresses, p53 is stabilized and activated, while HDM2 binds to and ubiquitinates p53 for proteasome degradation. Thus blocking the HDM2-p53 interaction is a promising therapeutic strategy in cancer; however, the potential survival advantage conferred by autophagy induction may limit therapeutic efficacy. In this study, we leveraged an HDM2 inhibitor to identify kinases required for p53-dependent autophagy. Interestingly, we discovered that p53-dependent autophagy requires several kinases, including the myotonic dystrophy protein kinase-like alpha (MRCKα). MRCKα is a CDC42 effector reported to activate actin-myosin cytoskeletal reorganization. Overall, this study provides evidence linking MRCKα to autophagy and reveals additional insights into the role of kinases in p53-dependent autophagy.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.053
Threshold uncertainty score0.174

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.302 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations6
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueiScienceSame topicAutophagy in Disease and TherapyFrench-language works237,207