MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3138474425 · doi:10.1038/s41416-021-01321-0

Achieving clinical success with BET inhibitors as anti-cancer agents

2021· review· en· W3138474425 on OpenAlexafffund
Tatiana Shorstova, William D. Foulkes, Michael Witcher

Bibliographic record

VenueBritish Journal of Cancer · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicProtein Degradation and Inhibitors
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityJewish General Hospital
FundersFonds de Recherche du Québec - SantéCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchGovernment of Canada
KeywordsMedicineCancerOncologyBioinformaticsInternal medicineBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The transcriptional upregulation of oncogenes is a driving force behind the progression of many tumours. However, until a decade ago, the concept of 'switching off' these oncogenic pathways represented a formidable challenge. Research has revealed that members of the bromo- and extra-terminal domain (BET) motif family are key activators of oncogenic networks in a spectrum of cancers; their function depends on their recruitment to chromatin through two bromodomains (BD1 and BD2). The advent of potent inhibitors of BET proteins (BETi), which target either one or both bromodomains, represents an important step towards the goal of suppressing oncogenic networks within tumours. Here, we discuss the biology of BET proteins, advances in BETi design and highlight potential biomarkers predicting their activity. We also outline the logic of incorporating BETi into combination therapies to enhance its efficacy. We suggest that understanding mechanisms of activity, defining predictive biomarkers and identifying potent synergies represents a roadmap for clinical success using BETi.

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)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.003

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.405
Teacher spread0.364 · 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

Citations354
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBritish Journal of CancerSame topicProtein Degradation and InhibitorsFrench-language works237,207