MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4285823231 · doi:10.32604/or.2022.03529

cGAS regulates the DNA damage response to maintain proliferative signaling in gastric cancer cells

2021· article· en· W4285823231 on OpenAlexaff
Bin Liu, HAIPENG LIU, Feifei Ren, Hangfan Liu, Ihtisham Bukhari, YUMING FU, WANQING WU, MINGHAI ZHAO, SHAOGONG ZHU, Hui Mo, Fazhan Li, MICHAEL B. ZHENG, Youcai Tang, Pengyuan Zheng, Yang Mi

Bibliographic record

VenueOncology Research Featuring Preclinical and Clinical Cancer Therapeutics · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicRNA modifications and cancer
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersNational Key Research and Development Program of ChinaZhengzhou University
KeywordsCancerGenome instabilityCancer researchDNA damageCancer cellBiologyGene silencingEctopic expressionCell growthDownregulation and upregulationMetastasisTumor progressionCell biologyCell cultureDNAGeneticsGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The activation of some oncogenes promote cancer cell proliferation and growth, facilitate cancer progression and metastasis by induce DNA replication stress, even genome instability. Activation of the cyclic GMP-AMP synthase (cGAS) mediates classical DNA sensing, is involved in genome instability, and is linked to various tumor development or therapy. However, the function of cGAS in gastric cancer remains elusive. In this study, the TCGA database and retrospective immunohistochemical analyses revealed substantially high cGAS expression in gastric cancer tissues and cell lines. By employing cGAS high-expression gastric cancer cell lines, including AGS and MKN45, ectopic silencing of cGAS caused a significant reduction in the proliferation of the cells, tumor growth, and mass in xenograft mice. Mechanistically, database analysis predicted a possible involvement of cGAS in the DNA damage response (DDR), further data through cells revealed protein interactions of the cGAS and MRE11-RAD50-NBN (MRN) complex, which activated cell cycle checkpoints, even increased genome instability in gastric cancer cells, thereby contributing to gastric cancer progression and sensitivity to treatment with DNA damaging agents. Furthermore, the upregulation of cGAS significantly exacerbated the prognosis of gastric cancer patients while improving radiotherapeutic outcomes. Therefore, we concluded that cGAS is involved in gastric cancer progression by fueling genome instability, implying that intervening in the cGAS pathway could be a practicable therapeutic approach for gastric cancer.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.495
Threshold uncertainty score0.636

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.158
GPT teacher head0.497
Teacher spread0.339 · 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

Citations8
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOncology Research Featuring Preclinical and Clinical Cancer TherapeuticsSame topicRNA modifications and cancerFrench-language works237,207