MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3087177675 · doi:10.2217/epi-2020-0186

EZH2 Inhibition: A Promising Strategy to Prevent Cancer Immune Editing

2020· review· en· W3087177675 on OpenAlexafffund
Ning Kang, Mark Eccleston, Pier‐Luc Clermont, Maryam Latarani, David Male, Yuzhuo Wang, Francesco Crea

Bibliographic record

VenueEpigenomics · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicEpigenetics and DNA Methylation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversité Laval
FundersNational Cancer InstituteCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchTerry Fox Research InstituteMitacsCancer Research UK
KeywordsBiologyImmune systemEZH2CancerComputational biologyCancer researchImmunologyBioinformaticsGeneticsEpigeneticsGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Immunotherapies are revolutionizing the clinical management of a wide range of cancers. However, intrinsic or acquired unresponsiveness to immunotherapies does occur due to the dynamic cancer immunoediting which ultimately leads to immune escape. The evolutionarily conserved histone modifier enhancer of zeste 2 (EZH2) is aberrantly overexpressed in a number of human cancers. Accumulating studies indicate that EZH2 is a main driver of cancer cells' immunoediting and mediate immune escape through downregulating immune recognition and activation, upregulating immune checkpoints and creating an immunosuppressive tumor microenvironment. In this review, we overviewed the roles of EZH2 in cancer immunoediting, the preclinical and clinical studies of current pharmacologic EZH2 inhibitors and the prospects for EZH2 inhibitor and immunotherapy combination for cancer treatment.

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 score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.339
Teacher spread0.300 · 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

Citations73
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEpigenomicsSame topicEpigenetics and DNA MethylationFrench-language works237,207