MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2953167359 · doi:10.1002/pro.3667

The role of protein complexes in human genetic disease

2019· review· en· W2953167359 on OpenAlexfundno aff
L. Therese Bergendahl, Lukas Gerasimavicius, Jamilla Miles, Lewis Macdonald, Jonathan N. Wells, Julie P. I. Welburn, Joseph A. Marsh

Bibliographic record

VenueProtein Science · 2019
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenomics and Rare Diseases
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMedical Research CouncilLister Institute of Preventive MedicineMedical Research Council CanadaWellcome Trust
KeywordsHuman diseaseDiseaseGeneticsComputational biologyChemistryBiologyEvolutionary biologyMedicineGeneInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Many human genetic disorders are caused by mutations in protein-coding regions of DNA. Taking protein structure into account has therefore provided key insight into the molecular mechanisms underlying human genetic disease. Although most studies have focused on the intramolecular effects of mutations, the critical role of the assembly of proteins into complexes is being increasingly recognized. Here, we review multiple ways in which consideration of protein complexes can help us to understand and explain the effects of pathogenic mutations. First, we discuss disorders caused by mutations that perturb intersubunit interactions in homomeric and heteromeric complexes. Second, we address how protein complex assembly can facilitate a dominant-negative mechanism, whereby mutated subunits can disrupt the activity of wild-type protein. Third, we show how mutations that change protein expression levels can lead to damaging stoichiometric imbalances. Finally, we review how mutations affecting different subunits of the same heteromeric complex often cause similar diseases, whereas mutations in different interfaces of the same subunit can cause distinct phenotypes.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.003

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.290 · 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

Citations100
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProtein ScienceSame topicGenomics and Rare DiseasesFrench-language works237,207