MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3203666702 · doi:10.1038/s41419-021-04177-7

Negative regulation of TGFβ-induced apoptosis by RAC1B enhances intestinal tumourigenesis

2021· article· en· W3203666702 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Victòria Gudiño, Patrizia Cammareri, Caroline V. Billard, Kevin Myant

Bibliographic record

VenueCell Death and Disease · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGenetic factors in colorectal cancer
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of EdinburghInstitute of GeneticsCancer Research UK
KeywordsIn vivoApoptosisBiologyCancer researchProgrammed cell deathColorectal cancerPTENCell biologySignal transductionCancerPI3K/AKT/mTOR pathwayGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

RAC1B is a tumour-related alternative splice isoform of the small GTPase RAC1, found overexpressed in a large number of tumour types. Building evidence suggests it promotes tumour progression but compelling in vivo evidence, demonstrating a role in driving tumour invasion, is currently lacking. In the present study, we have overexpressed RAC1B in a colorectal cancer mouse model with potential invasive properties. Interestingly, RAC1B overexpression did not trigger tumour invasion, rather it led to an acceleration of tumour initiation and reduced mouse survival. By modelling early stages of adenoma initiation we observed a reduced apoptotic rate in RAC1B overexpressing tumours, suggesting protection from apoptosis as a mediator of this phenotype. RAC1B overexpressing tumours displayed attenuated TGFβ signalling and functional analysis in ex vivo organoid cultures demonstrated that RAC1B negatively modulates TGFβ signalling and confers resistance to TGFβ-driven cell death. This work defines a novel mechanism by which early adenoma cells can overcome the cytostatic and cytotoxic effects of TGFβ signalling and characterises a new oncogenic function of RAC1B in vivo.

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)0.000
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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.091
Threshold uncertainty score0.408

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.242 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations10
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCell Death and DiseaseSame topicGenetic factors in colorectal cancerFrench-language works237,207