MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3160462781 · doi:10.1111/febs.15963

Oncohistones: a roadmap to stalled development

2021· review· en· W3160462781 on OpenAlexafffund
Shriya Deshmukh, Adam Ptack, Brian Krug, Nada Jabado

Bibliographic record

VenueFEBS Journal · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicEpigenetics and DNA Methylation
Canadian institutionsMcGill University Health CentreMcGill University
FundersNational Cancer InstituteCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsEpigeneticsBiologyChromatinHistoneCarcinogenesisHistone H3GeneticsComputational biologyDNA methylationEpigenesisGenomeCell biologyDNAGeneGene expression

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Since the discovery of recurrent mutations in histone H3 variants in paediatric brain tumours, so-called 'oncohistones' have been identified in various cancers. While their mechanism of action remains under active investigation, several studies have shed light on how they promote genome-wide epigenetic perturbations. These findings converge on altered post-translational modifications on two key lysine (K) residues of the H3 tail, K27 and K36, which regulate several cellular processes, including those linked to cell differentiation during development. We will review how these oncohistones affect the methylation of cognate residues, but also disrupt the distribution of opposing chromatin marks, creating genome-wide epigenetic changes which participate in the oncogenic process. Ultimately, tumorigenesis is promoted through the maintenance of a progenitor state at the expense of differentiation in defined cellular and developmental contexts. As these epigenetic disruptions are reversible, improved understanding of oncohistone pathogenicity can result in needed alternative therapies.

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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.003

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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.373
Teacher spread0.318 · 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

Citations48
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFEBS JournalSame topicEpigenetics and DNA MethylationFrench-language works237,207