MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7132885204

Identification and Characterization of Small Molecule Inhibitors of Polynucleotide Kinase 3'-Phosphatase

2012· dissertation· en· W7132885204 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Nathalie Moatti

Bibliographic record

VenueTSpace · 2012
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCancer therapeutics and mechanisms
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of Alberta
KeywordsDNASmall moleculeDNA damageTopoisomeraseDNA repairKinaseCamptothecinDNA polymeraseEnzyme
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

DNA lesions arise constantly in cells and are repaired by a variety of DNA repair pathways. Polynucleotide kinase 3’-phosphatase (PNKP) aids repair by phosphorylating 5’-hydroxyl DNA termini and dephosphorylating 3’-phosphate DNA termini for the completion of repair by DNA ligases. This activity is critical in vivo because DNA breaks do not usually possess ligatable termini. PNKP knockdown sensitizes cells to several DNA damaging agents, including the topoisomerase I (TOP1) inhibitor camptothecin - analogs of which are being developed into chemotherapeutic drugs - because the resolution of stalled TOP1-DNA complexes requires processing by PNKP. We hypothesize that small molecule inhibitors of PNKP could bolster the effects of radio- and chemotherapies on cancer cells. I have identified eight compounds that effectively inhibit human PNKP and, with reduced potency, T4 PNK in vitro. These compounds act by reversibly inhibiting the substrate-enzyme interaction but they do not appear to sensitize U2OS cells to camptothecin.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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 integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.282 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTSpaceSame topicCancer therapeutics and mechanismsFrench-language works237,207