MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Role of E2F transcription factor in oral cancer: Recent insight and advancements

2023· review· en· W4324135698 on OpenAlexaff
Amal Kassab, Ishita Gupta, Ala‐Eddin Al Moustafa

Bibliographic record

VenueSeminars in Cancer Biology · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer-related Molecular Pathways
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersQatar National LibraryQatar National Research FundQatar University
KeywordsE2FBiologyE2F1Cell cycleCancer researchTranscription factorEpigeneticsCancerGeneticsGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The family of mammalian E2F transcription factors (E2Fs) comprise of 8 members (E2F1-E2F8) classified as activators (E2F1-E2F3) and repressors (E2F4-E2F8) primarily regulating the expression of several genes related to cell proliferation, apoptosis and differentiation, mainly in a cell cycle-dependent manner. E2F activity is frequently controlled via the retinoblastoma protein (pRb), cyclins, p53 and the ubiquitin-proteasome pathway. Additionally, genetic or epigenetic changes result in the deregulation of E2F family genes expression altering S phase entry and apoptosis, an important hallmark for the onset and development of cancer. Although studies reveal E2Fs to be involved in several human malignancies, the mechanisms underlying the role of E2Fs in oral cancer lies nascent and needs further investigations. This review focuses on the role of E2Fs in oral cancer and the etiological factors regulating E2Fs activity, which in turn transcriptionally control the expression of their target genes, thus contributing to cell proliferation, metastasis, and drug/therapy resistance. Further, we will discuss therapeutic strategies for E2Fs, which may prevent oral tumor growth, metastasis, and drug resistance.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.071
GPT teacher head0.395
Teacher spread0.324 · 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

Citations65
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSeminars in Cancer BiologySame topicCancer-related Molecular PathwaysFrench-language works237,207