MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Diet-Dependent Metabolic Regulation of DNA Double-Strand Break Repair in Cancer: More Choices on the Menu

2021· review· en· W3123498216 on OpenAlexafffund
Anna de Polo, David P. Labbé

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer Prevention Research · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicRNA modifications and cancer
Canadian institutionsMcGill University Health Centre
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsEpigeneticsDNA methylationBiologyDNA damageDNA repairCancerCarcinogenesisGenome instabilityHistoneDNAMethionineCancer researchCell biologyGeneticsGeneGene expression

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Despite several epidemiologic and preclinical studies supporting the role of diet in cancer progression, the complexity of the diet-cancer link makes it challenging to deconvolute the underlying mechanisms, which remain scantly elucidated. This review focuses on genomic instability as one of the cancer hallmarks affected by diet-dependent metabolic alterations. We discuss how altered dietary intake of metabolites of the one-carbon metabolism, including methionine, folate, and vitamins B and C, can impact the methylation processes and thereby tumorigenesis. We present the concept that the protumorigenic effect of certain diets, such as the Western diet, is in part due to a diet-induced erosion of the DNA repair capacity caused by altered epigenetic and epitranscriptomic landscapes, while the protective effect of other dietary patterns, such as the Mediterranean diet, can be partly explained by their ability to sustain a proficient DNA repair. In particular, considering that diet-dependent alterations of the one-carbon metabolism can impact the rate of methylation processes, changes in dietary patterns can affect the activity of writers and erasers of histone and RNA methyl marks and consequently impair their role in ensuring a proficient DNA damage repair.

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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

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 integrity0.0010.003
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 head0.159
GPT teacher head0.473
Teacher spread0.314 · 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

Citations4
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancer Prevention ResearchSame topicRNA modifications and cancerFrench-language works237,207