MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

SWI/SNF Complex Mutations in Gynecologic Cancers: Molecular Mechanisms and Models

2020· review· en· W3002554121 on OpenAlexafffund
Yemin Wang, Lien Hoang, Jennifer X. Ji, David G. Huntsman

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnual Review of Pathology Mechanisms of Disease · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicChromatin Remodeling and Cancer
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchNational Institutes of HealthNational Cancer InstituteBC Cancer Foundation
KeywordsSWI/SNFSMARCA4BiologySMARCB1ChromatinChromatin remodelingGeneticsHistoneTranscription factorGeneCancer researchContext (archaeology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ch/Sucrose NonFermentable) chromatin remodeling complexes interact with histones and transcription factors to modulate chromatin structure and control gene expression. These evolutionarily conserved multisubunit protein complexes are involved in regulating many biological functions, such as differentiation and cell proliferation. Genomic studies have revealed frequent mutations of genes encoding multiple subunits of the SWI/SNF complexes in a wide spectrum of cancer types, including gynecologic cancers. These SWI/SNF mutations occur at different stages of tumor development and are restricted to unique histologic types of gynecologic cancers. Thus, SWI/SNF mutations have to function in the appropriate tissue and cell context to promote gynecologic cancer initiation and progression. In this review, we summarize the current knowledge of SWI/SNF mutations in the development of gynecologic cancers to provide insights into both molecular pathogenesis and possible treatment implications for these diseases.

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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.330
Teacher spread0.301 · 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

Citations81
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnual Review of Pathology Mechanisms of DiseaseSame topicChromatin Remodeling and CancerFrench-language works237,207