MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411874454 · doi:10.3390/genes16070771

The Primary Role of Noncoding RNA in the Pathogenesis of Cancer

2025· review· en· W4411874454 on OpenAlexaff
Amil Shah

Bibliographic record

VenueGenes · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicRNA Research and Splicing
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCarcinogenesisBiologyComputational biologyGeneNon-coding RNAGeneticsRNAmicroRNACancerSuppressor

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The discovery of oncogenes and tumor suppressor genes provided important insights into the molecular pathogenesis of cancer but also revealed some contradictions in the prevailing somatic mutation theory. The evidence that noncoding RNAs (ncRNAs) form an elaborate network that regulates the flow of genetic information in eukaryotic cells offers an explanation for the inconsistencies. ncRNAs comprise a wide variety of molecules that interact with one another as well as with other RNAs, DNA, and proteins, over whose activities they exert a regulatory influence. The outcome of the dynamic interactions of the cell's biomolecules is the emergence of higher-order states of equilibrium, called attractor states, which correspond to the gene-expression configurations of distinct cell types. Attractor states are relatively stable systems, but they are susceptible to perturbation by a disturbing force, such as mutation. Mutations that disrupt the ncRNA network can enable the cell to undergo a state transition towards a potentially neoplastic one. This is the crux of tumorigenesis. An inquiry into the architecture of the ncRNA network and its role in tumorigenesis is required to complement our knowledge of the well-known cancer genes as well as serve as a guide in the design of new anticancer therapeutics.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.992
Threshold uncertainty score0.265

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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.338
Teacher spread0.318 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGenesSame topicRNA Research and SplicingFrench-language works237,207