Tieing together loose ends: telomere instability in cancer and aging
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Telomere maintenance is essential for maintaining genome integrity in both normal and cancer cells. Without functional telomeres, chromosomes lose their protective structure and undergo fusion and breakage events that drive further genome instability, including cell arrest or death. One means by which this loss can be overcome in stem cells and cancer cells is via re-addition of G-rich telomeric repeats by the telomerase reverse transcriptase (TERT). During aging of somatic tissues, however, insufficient telomerase expression leads to a proliferative arrest called replicative senescence, which is triggered when telomeres reach a critically short threshold that induces a DNA damage response. Cancer cells express telomerase but do not entirely escape telomere instability as they often possess short telomeres; hence there is often selection for genetic alterations in the TERT promoter that result in increased telomerase expression. In this review, we discuss our current understanding of the consequences of telomere instability in cancer and aging, and outline the opportunities and challenges that lie ahead in exploiting the reliance of cells on telomere maintenance for preserving genome stability.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".