MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4297151058 · doi:10.3390/cancers14194623

The Drivers, Mechanisms, and Consequences of Genome Instability in HPV-Driven Cancers

2022· review· en· W4297151058 on OpenAlexafffund
Vanessa Porter, Marco A. Marra

Bibliographic record

VenueCancers · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCervical Cancer and HPV Research
Canadian institutionsCanada's Michael Smith Genome Sciences CentreUniversity of British Columbia
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsGenome instabilityGenomeBiologyCarcinogenesisChromosome instabilityTelomereDNA damageGeneDNA repairGeneticsCancerCancer researchDNAChromosome

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Human papillomavirus (HPV) is the causative driver of cervical cancer and a contributing risk factor of head and neck cancer and several anogenital cancers. HPV's ability to induce genome instability contributes to its oncogenicity. HPV genes can induce genome instability in several ways, including modulating the cell cycle to favour proliferation, interacting with DNA damage repair pathways to bring high-fidelity repair pathways to viral episomes and away from the host genome, inducing DNA-damaging oxidative stress, and altering the length of telomeres. In addition, the presence of a chronic viral infection can lead to immune responses that also cause genome instability of the infected tissue. The HPV genome can become integrated into the host genome during HPV-induced tumorigenesis. Viral integration requires double-stranded breaks on the DNA; therefore, regions around the integration event are prone to structural alterations and themselves are targets of genome instability. In this review, we present the mechanisms by which HPV-dependent and -independent genome instability is initiated and maintained in HPV-driven cancers, both across the genome and at regions of HPV integration.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.997
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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)0.0040.000

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 head0.090
GPT teacher head0.377
Teacher spread0.287 · 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.

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

Citations75
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancersSame topicCervical Cancer and HPV ResearchFrench-language works237,207