MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3000843925 · doi:10.1242/jcs.234914

CSB cooperates with SMARCAL1 to maintain telomere stability in ALT cells

2020· article· en· W3000843925 on OpenAlexafffund
Emily Feng, Nicole L. Batenburg, John R. Walker, Angus Ho, Taylor R. H. Mitchell, Qin Jian, Xu‐Dong Zhu

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Cell Science · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTelomeres, Telomerase, and Senescence
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsBiologyTelomereCell biologyGeneticsCancer researchDNA

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Elevated replication stress is evident at telomeres of about 10-15% of cancer cells, which maintain their telomeres via a homologous recombination (HR)-based mechanism, referred to as alternative lengthening of telomeres (ALT). How ALT cells resolve replication stress to support their growth remains incompletely characterized. Here, we report that CSB (also known as ERCC6) promotes recruitment of HR repair proteins (MRN, BRCA1, BLM and RPA32) and POLD3 to ALT telomeres, a process that requires the ATPase activity of CSB and is controlled by ATM- and CDK2-dependent phosphorylation. Loss of CSB stimulates telomeric recruitment of MUS81 and SLX4, components of the structure-specific MUS81-EME1-SLX1-SLX4 (MUS-SLX) endonuclease complex, suggesting that CSB restricts MUS-SLX-mediated processing of stalled forks at ALT telomeres. Loss of CSB coupled with depletion of SMARCAL1, a chromatin remodeler implicated in catalyzing regression of stalled forks, synergistically promotes not only telomeric recruitment of MUS81 but also the formation of fragile telomeres, the latter of which is reported to arise from fork stalling. These results altogether suggest that CSB-mediated HR repair and SMARCAL1-mediated fork regression cooperate to prevent stalled forks from being processed into fragile telomeres in ALT cells.

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)0.001
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 score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.444

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.232 · 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

Citations23
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Cell ScienceSame topicTelomeres, Telomerase, and SenescenceFrench-language works237,207