MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405987481 · doi:10.1101/2024.12.31.630944

Structural conservation and divergence across the Receptor Tyrosine Kinase superfamily

2025· preprint· en· W4405987481 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Anna Bakhman, Rachel Kolodny, Mickey Kosloff

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2025
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHER2/EGFR in Cancer Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of HaifaAzrieli FoundationIsrael Science FoundationInternational Development Research CentreCouncil for Higher EducationUnited States-Israel Binational Science FoundationNational Science Foundation
KeywordsSUPERFAMILYTyrosine kinaseReceptor tyrosine kinaseDivergence (linguistics)ROR1Platelet-derived growth factor receptorReceptorCell biologyBiologyKinaseGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Members of the Receptor Tyrosine Kinase (RTK) superfamily are regulators of cellular signaling, playing essential roles in cellular growth, differentiation, and survival. Dysregulation of RTKs leads to diseases such as cancer, diabetes, and inflammatory disorders, making them important therapeutic targets. Despite extensive research on RTKs, the structural diversity and evolutionary relationships across the superfamily are not fully understood. Here, we systematically compared structural conservation and divergence among 245 extracellular domains from 54 RTKs, across 18 RTK families. Using experimentally-resolved structures and AlphaFold2 models, we conducted an all-versus-all structural alignment to explore domain architecture and quantify significant structural similarities within the RTK superfamily. We curated a comprehensive database encompassing PDB structures, 3D folds, ligand-binding properties, and sequence information of all RTK domains analyzed ( https://fasslero.github.io/RTK-domains ). Our analysis revealed numerous inter-family similarities and remote evolutionary connections, in particular among ligand-binding domains (LBDs), and distinct structural domain types and unexpected dissimilarities among domains previously classified as related. Our work highlights the intricate balance between structural conservation and divergence in RTKs and sheds light on the evolutionary mechanisms shaping this critical superfamily.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.271 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)Same topicHER2/EGFR in Cancer ResearchFrench-language works237,207