MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Review of mutant p53 protein and the p53 targeting therapy in cancer treatment

2023· article· en· W4400835559 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueTheoretical and Natural Science · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer-related Molecular Pathways
Canadian institutionsBishop's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMutantP53 proteinCancerCancer researchCancer therapyMedicineBiologyInternal medicineGeneticsGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cancer in humans is a disease that has been difficult to treat due to properties it is able to obtain after being introduced to an organism and has been one of the most prominent points of research in drug development. Since cancers can take on a multitude of forms, a popular strategy employed to find therapies for it is by identifying common features among cancers. A well-known alteration in half of all human cancers is TP53 mutations, of which there are more than 500. This literary review first discusses the additional capabilities cancer cells obtain, then a discussion of the various functions of p53 and the mutations it can take on. The central focus of this review will be an elucidation of the major approaches attempted in the development of cancer treatment through p53: viruses, targeting gain-of-function mutant p53, structural reactivation of mutant p53 to restore wild type activity, the depletion of mutant p53, and targeting mutant p53 through synthetic lethal inhibitors. Through exploring the different therapies, it is a universal goal to elicit one single treatment for mutant p53 that can impact the greatest amount of p53 mutations while retaining the ability to suppress or even prevent and inhibit cancer.

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.

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 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 score0.322
Threshold uncertainty score0.804

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.289 · 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