MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3163192401 · doi:10.3390/cells10051262

A Potential Role for HUWE1 in Modulating Cisplatin Sensitivity

2021· review· en· W3163192401 on OpenAlexafffund
Stijn Wenmaekers, Bastiaan J. Viergever, Gunjan Kumar, Onno Kranenburg, Peter C. Black, Mads Daugaard, Richard P. Meijer

Bibliographic record

VenueCells · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicDNA Repair Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsCisplatinSensitivity (control systems)NeuroscienceMedicineBiologyInternal medicineEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cisplatin is a widely used antineoplastic agent, whose efficacy is limited by primary and acquired therapeutic resistance. Recently, a bladder cancer genome-wide CRISPR/Cas9 knock-out screen correlated cisplatin sensitivity to multiple genetic biomarkers. Among the screen's top hits was the HECT domain-containing ubiquitin E3 ligase (HUWE1). In this review, HUWE1 is postulated as a therapeutic response modulator, affecting the collision between platinum-DNA adducts and the replication fork, the primary cytotoxic action of platins. HUWE1 can alter the cytotoxic response to platins by targeting essential components of the DNA damage response including BRCA1, p53, and Mcl-1. Deficiency of HUWE1 could lead to enhanced DNA damage repair and a dysfunctional apoptotic apparatus, thereby inducing resistance to platins. Future research on the relationship between HUWE1 and platins could generate new mechanistic insights into therapy resistance. Ultimately, HUWE1 might serve as a clinical biomarker to tailor cancer treatment strategies, thereby improving cancer care and patient outcomes.

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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.271 · 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

Citations14
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCellsSame topicDNA Repair MechanismsFrench-language works237,207