MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4385741269 · doi:10.3389/fnins.2023.1225226

BRCA1 heterozygosity promotes DNA damage-induced senescence in a sex-specific manner following repeated mild traumatic brain injury

2023· article· en· W4385741269 on OpenAlexafffund
Emily Leung, Daria Taskina, Nicole Schwab, Lili‐Naz Hazrati

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Neuroscience · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTelomeres, Telomerase, and Senescence
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of Toronto
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsDNA damageSenescenceDNA repairBiologyTraumatic brain injuryGenome instabilityMedicineCell biologyGeneticsGeneDNAPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Emerging evidence suggests cellular senescence, as a consequence of excess DNA damage and deficient repair, to be a driver of brain dysfunction following repeated mild traumatic brain injury (rmTBI). This study aimed to further investigate the role of deficient DNA repair, specifically BRCA1-related repair, on DNA damage-induced senescence. BRCA1, a repair protein involved in maintaining genomic integrity with multiple roles in the central nervous system, was previously reported to be significantly downregulated in post-mortem brains with a history of rmTBI. Here we examined the effects of impaired BRCA1-related repair on DNA damage-induced senescence and outcomes 1-week post-rmTBI using mice with a heterozygous knockout for BRCA1 in a sex-segregated manner. Altered BRCA1 repair with rmTBI resulted in altered anxiety-related behaviours in males and females using elevated zero maze and contextual fear conditioning. Evaluating molecular markers associated with DNA damage signalling and senescence-related pathways revealed sex-specific differences attributed to BRCA1, where females exhibited elevated DNA damage, impaired DNA damage signalling, and dampened senescence onset compared to males. Overall, the results from this study highlight sex-specific consequences of aberrant DNA repair on outcomes post-injury, and further support a need to develop sex-specific treatments following rmTBI.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.250 · 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 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

Citations3
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in NeuroscienceSame topicTelomeres, Telomerase, and SenescenceFrench-language works237,207