MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3117492839 · doi:10.1111/jnc.15280

The multi‐functional RNA‐binding protein G3BP1 and its potential implication in neurodegenerative disease

2020· review· en· W3117492839 on OpenAlexafffund
Hadjara Sidibé, Alicia Dubinski, Christine Vande Velde

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neurochemistry · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicRNA Research and Splicing
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
FundersFonds de Recherche du Québec - SantéCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchALS Association
KeywordsDiseaseRNA-binding proteinPlasma protein bindingNeuroscienceBiologyRNAComputational biologyMedicineCell biologyBiochemistryInternal medicineGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ras-GTPase-activating protein (GAP)-binding protein 1 (G3BP1) is a multi-functional protein that is best known for its role in the assembly and dynamics of stress granules. Recent studies have highlighted that G3BP1 also has other functions related to RNA metabolism. In the context of disease, G3BP1 has been therapeutically targeted in cancers because its over-expression is correlated with proliferation of cancerous cells and metastasis. However, evidence suggests that G3BP1 is essential for neuronal development and possibly neuronal maintenance. In this review, we will examine the many functions that are carried out by G3BP1 in the context of neurons and speculate how these functions are critical to the progression of neurodegenerative diseases. Additionally, we will highlight the similarities and differences between G3BP1 and the closely related protein G3BP2, which is frequently overlooked. Although G3BP1 and G3BP2 have both been deemed important for stress granule assembly, their roles may differ in other cellular pathways, some of which are specific to the CNS, and presents an opportunity for further exploration.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.933
Threshold uncertainty score0.707

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.286 · 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
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

Citations85
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of NeurochemistrySame topicRNA Research and SplicingFrench-language works237,207