Integration of cancer-related genetic landscape of Eph receptors and ephrins with proteomics identifies a crosstalk between EPHB6 and EGFR
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Eph receptors and their ephrin ligands are viewed as promising targets for cancer treatment; however, targeting them is hindered by their context-dependent functionalities. To circumvent this, we explore molecular landscapes underlying their pro- and anti-malignant activities. Using unbiased bioinformatics approaches, we construct a cancer-related network of genetic interactions (GIs) of all Ephs and ephrins to assist in their therapeutic manipulation. We also apply genetic screening and BioID proteomics and integrate them with machine learning approaches to select the most relevant GIs of one Eph receptor, EPHB6. This identifies a crosstalk between EPHB6 and EGFR, and further experiments confirm the ability of EPHB6 to modulate EGFR signaling, enhancing the proliferation of cancer cells and tumor development. Taken together, our observations show EPHB6 involvement in EGFR action, suggesting its targeting might be beneficial in EGFR-dependent tumors, and confirm that the Eph family genetic interactome presented here can be effectively exploited in developing cancer treatment approaches.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".