MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401063257 · doi:10.60087/jklst.v3.n4.p11

Precision Gene Editing Strategies with CRISPR-Cas9 for Advancing Cancer Immunotherapy and Alzheimer's Disease

2024· article· en· W4401063257 on OpenAlexaff
Priyanka Gupte, Karan Dhingra, Saloni

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Knowledge Learning and Science Technology ISSN 2959-6386 (online) · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCRISPR and Genetic Engineering
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCRISPRGenome editingDiseaseImmunotherapyComputational biologyCancerCancer immunotherapyGeneMedicineBiologyGeneticsInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Precision medicine approaches such as gene editing via clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeat (CRISPR) and their associated protein (Cas-9) are revolutionizing treatment strategies for complex diseases such as Alzheimer and cancer. In this review, we explore the application of CRISPR-Cas9 in advancing therapies for these conditions, as well as its potential in targeting senescent cells. Since the risk of Alzheimer’s disease is strongly associated with genetic mutations and variations, the use of gene editing technologies to rectify these genetic errors by modifying disease-associated proteins becomes relevant. For cancer, to enhance immunotherapy approaches, modification of immune cells have been utilized to improve their anti-tumor efficacy. Additionally, the review also investigates the role of CRISPR-Cas9 in targeting senescent cells, which are implicated in both aging-related disorders and cancer progression. While challenges remain in introducing delivery methods and specificity, CRISPR-Cas9 represents a significant advancement in developing targeted, personalized treatments for these challenging health issues.

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)0.000
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 score0.306
Threshold uncertainty score0.539

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.350
Teacher spread0.342 · 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.

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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Knowledge Learning and Science Technology ISSN 2959-6386 (online)Same topicCRISPR and Genetic EngineeringFrench-language works237,207