MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402673472 · doi:10.7554/elife.101075.1.sa4

eLife Assessment: Stabilization of GTSE1 by cyclin D1-CDK4/6 promotes cell proliferation: relevance in cancer prognosis

2024· peer-review· en· W4402673472 on OpenAlexaff
Ivan Topisirović

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepeer-review
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCancer Research and Treatments
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCyclin D1Relevance (law)CancerCancer researchCell growthCell cycleCyclinChemistryBiologyPolitical scienceGeneticsBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cyclin D1 is the activating subunit of the cell cycle kinases CDK4 and CDK6, and its dysregulation is a well-known oncogenic driver in many human cancers. The biological function of cyclin D1 has been primarily studied by focusing on the phosphorylation of the retinoblastoma (RB) gene product. Here, using an integrative approach combining bioinformatic analyses and biochemical experiments, we show that GTSE1 (G2 and S phases expressed protein 1), a protein positively regulating cell cycle progression, is a previously unknown substrate of cyclin D1-CDK4/6. The phosphorylation of GTSE1 mediated by cyclin D1-CDK4/6 inhibits GTSE1 degradation, leading to high levels of GTSE1 also during the G1 phase of the cell cycle. Functionally, the phosphorylation of GTSE1 promotes cellular proliferation and is associated with poor prognosis within a pan-cancer cohort. Our findings provide insights into cyclin D1’s role in cell cycle control and oncogenesis beyond RB phosphorylation.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Editorial · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.097
Threshold uncertainty score0.326

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0050.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0970.043

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.380
Teacher spread0.356 · 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
GenreEditorial

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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCancer Research and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207