Cited by 5Ovarian cancer diagnosis and treatmentCancer Mechanisms and TherapyPARP inhibition in cancer therapy

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 39 of the 39 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; 31 of the 37 sources its claims cite were checked for support.

Ovarian Cancers with Low CIP2A Tumor Expression Constitute an APR-246–Sensitive Disease Subtype

Open access

Published version of a preprint

Abstract

Identification of ovarian cancer patient subpopulations with increased sensitivity to targeted therapies could offer significant clinical benefit. We report that 22% of the high-grade ovarian cancer tumors at diagnosis express CIP2A oncoprotein at low levels. Furthermore, regardless of their significantly lower likelihood of disease relapse after standard chemotherapy, a portion of relapsed tumors retain their CIP2A-deficient phenotype. Through a screen for therapeutics that would preferentially kill CIP2A-deficient ovarian cancer cells, we identified reactive oxygen species inducer APR-246, tested previously in ovarian cancer clinical trials. Consistent with CIP2A-deficient ovarian cancer subtype in humans, CIP2A is dispensable for development of MISIIR-Tag–driven mouse ovarian cancer tumors. Nevertheless, CIP2A-null ovarian cancer tumor cells from MISIIR-Tag mice displayed APR-246 hypersensitivity both in vitro and in vivo. Mechanistically, the lack of CIP2A expression hypersensitizes the ovarian cancer cells to APR-246 by inhibition of NF-κB activity. Accordingly, combination of APR-246 and NF-κB inhibitor compounds strongly synergized in killing of CIP2A-positive ovarian cancer cells. Collectively, the results warrant consideration of clinical testing of APR-246 for CIP2A-deficient ovarian cancer tumor subtype patients. Results also reveal CIP2A as a candidate APR-246 combination therapy target for ovarian cancer.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1158/1535-7163.mct-21-0622

Cites

39 of 39 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

31 of 37 cited sources checked · 16 supported · 0 flagged · accuracy not yet measured

  • Interpretationcitation

    CIP2A associates with more aggressive ovarian cancer disease.

    “It is dispensable for both human and mouse OvCa tumorigenesis, but associates with more aggressive disease (8)(Supplementary Table S1), and drives resistance to APR-246 therapy.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [8] Bockelman, 2011, Prognostic role of CIP2A expression in serous ovarian cancer, Br J Cancer source
  • Findingown data

    APR-246 plus NF-kB inhibition was also effective in patient-derived ovarian cancer cell line OC002.

    “Finally, the combined action of APR-246 and NF-kB inhibition was validated in patient-derived OvCa cell line OC002 derived from a patient with disseminated disease (Fig. 4I)(11).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [11] Kaipio, 2020, ALDH1A1-related stemness in high-grade serous ovarian cancer is a negative prognostic indicator but potentially targetable by EGFR/mTOR-PI3K/aurora kinase inhibitors, J Pathol source

      The drug-sensitivity testing section reports results for patient-derived lines M019i, M068i, and M022i, but does not report an APR-246/NF-κB inhibitor combination in OC002. Searches for APR-246, OC002, and NF-κB inhibition found no passage describing the claimed validation; the NF-κB mention is in a reference to a different study (References; page unavailable). (LLM, conf=0.76)

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Interpretationreasoning

    The APR-246 hypersensitivity of CIP2A-silenced ovarian cancer cells is unlikely to be mediated solely by mutant TP53 reactivation because the sensitive cell lines have varying TP53 status.

    “Therefore, it is unlikely that the cell killing effects by APR-246 in the tested OvCa cells would be mediated solely by its mutant TP53 reactivating activity.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [25] Yoshikawa, 2016, PRIMA-1MET induces apoptosis through accumulation of intracellular reactive oxygen species irrespective of p53 status and chemo-sensitivity in epithelial ovarian cancer cells, Oncol Rep source

      The Discussion reports that PRIMA-1MET killed ovarian cancer cell lines regardless of TP53 status, and the ROS-scavenger results support a mechanism beyond mutant-p53 reactivation. However, the source does not study CIP2A-silenced cells or establish that their APR-246 hypersensitivity has the same mechanism. (LLM, conf=0.84)

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Findingcitation

    MISIIR-TAg mice with wild-type and homozygous CIP2A deficiency show similar ovarian tumor development.

    “we reported recently that there is no difference in OvCa tumorigenesis between MISIIR-TAg X CIP2AWT and MISIIR-TAg X CIP2AHOZ mice (17)(Fig. 2E).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim1 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [17] Laine, 2021, CIP2A interacts with TopBP1 and drives basal-like breast cancer tumorigenesis, Cancer Res source
  • Findingown data

    Even with a non-dephosphorylatable MEKK3S250D/T516D mutant, CIP2A inhibition reduces NF-kB activity.

    “However, CIP2A inhibition was able to blunt NF-kB activity also in cells overexpressing MEK mutant with non-dephoshorylatable serine 250 and threonine 516 (MEKK3S250D/T516D) (34)(Fig. 4E; lane 7 vs. 8).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [34] Sun, 2010, Protein phosphatase 2A acts as a mitogen-activated protein kinase kinase kinase 3 (MEKK3) phosphatase to inhibit lysophosphatidic acid-induced IkappaB kinase beta/nuclear factor-kappaB activation, J Biol Chem source

      The Results (Fig. 1E) test PP2Ac overexpression with a MEKK3 T516E/S520D mutant, not CIP2A inhibition with the stated S250D/T516D mutant. Our copy contains no passage addressing whether CIP2A inhibition reduces NF-κB activity in those cells; the citing sentence assigns that observation to its own Fig. 4E. (LLM, conf=0.78)

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Probably not a substantial claim. 7
  • It may state two separate claims as one. 16
  • The quote only partly states this claim. 3
  • Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

    Premisecitation

    APR-246 kills cancer cells via multiple mechanisms.

    “Current data indicate that APR-246 kills cancer cells via multiple mechanisms (20,21,24–26).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim4 of 5 sources checked
    • cites [20] Perdrix, 2017, PRIMA-1 and PRIMA-1(Met) (APR-246): from mutant/wild type p53 reactivation to unexpected mechanisms underlying their potent anti-tumor effect in combinatorial therapies, Cancers source
    • cites [21] Ceder, 2021, A thiol-bound drug reservoir enhances APR-246-induced mutant p53 tumor cell death, EMBO Mol Med source
    • cites [24] Lambert, 2009, PRIMA-1 reactivates mutant p53 by covalent binding to the core domain, Cancer Cell source
    • cites [25] Yoshikawa, 2016, PRIMA-1MET induces apoptosis through accumulation of intracellular reactive oxygen species irrespective of p53 status and chemo-sensitivity in epithelial ovarian cancer cells, Oncol Rep source
    • cites [26] Tessoulin, 2019, Targeting oxidative stress with auranofin or prima-1(Met) to circumvent p53 or bax/bak deficiency in myeloma cells, Front Oncol source
  • It may state two separate claims as one.

    Interpretationcitation

    CIP2A is dispensable for both human and mouse ovarian cancer tumorigenesis.

    “It is dispensable for both human and mouse OvCa tumorigenesis, but associates with more aggressive disease (8)(Supplementary Table S1), and drives resistance to APR-246 therapy.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [8] Bockelman, 2011, Prognostic role of CIP2A expression in serous ovarian cancer, Br J Cancer source

      The paper’s Discussion reports that cytoplasmic CIP2A positivity is associated with aggressive characteristics in human serous ovarian cancer. It does not establish whether CIP2A is dispensable for tumorigenesis in humans or mice; the passages on ovarian cancer cell lines and clinical associations do not test that claim. (LLM, conf=0.76)

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • It may state two separate claims as one.

    Findingown data

    In a drug screen comparing HEY control and CIP2A-silenced cells, APR-246 was the most apparent sensitizer, reducing viability by more than 50% in CIP2A-silenced cells while control cells were practically insensitive.

    “The most apparent sensitization effect was observed with APR-246 (PRIMA-1Met/Eprenetapopt) (15,19–22). Whereas HEY-CTLshRNA cells were practically insensitive to APR-246, HEY-CIP2AshRNA cells showed a >50% reduction in cell viability (Fig. 1A).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim4 of 5 sources checked
    • cites [15] Bykov, 2005, PRIMA-1(MET) synergizes with cisplatin to induce tumor cell apoptosis, Oncogene source
    • cites [19] Fransson, 2016, Strong synergy with APR-246 and DNA-damaging drugs in primary cancer cells from patients with TP53 mutant high-grade serous ovarian cancer, J Ovarian Res source
    • cites [20] Perdrix, 2017, PRIMA-1 and PRIMA-1(Met) (APR-246): from mutant/wild type p53 reactivation to unexpected mechanisms underlying their potent anti-tumor effect in combinatorial therapies, Cancers source
    • cites [21] Ceder, 2021, A thiol-bound drug reservoir enhances APR-246-induced mutant p53 tumor cell death, EMBO Mol Med source
    • cites [22] Cluzeau, 2021, Eprenetapopt plus azacitidine in TP53-mutated myelodysplastic syndromes and acute myeloid leukemia: a phase ii study by the groupe francophone des myelodysplasies (GFM), J Clin Oncol source
  • It may state two separate claims as one.

    Interpretationcitation

    APR-246 kills CIP2A-deficient ovarian cancer cells mainly through ROS induction, probably independently of TP53.

    “Our data on the ROS-dependent, but most likely TP53-independent mechanism of OvCa cell killing by APR-246 is directly supported by recently published work (21,25).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim2 of 2 sources checked
    • cites [21] Ceder, 2021, A thiol-bound drug reservoir enhances APR-246-induced mutant p53 tumor cell death, EMBO Mol Med source

      The Introduction says APR-246 has pro-oxidant effects and that its redox effects are important for antitumor activity; the results also report growth suppression in ovarian cancer cell lines. But the paper does not study CIP2A-deficient cells or establish that ROS is the main cause of their death. The Discussion says separating redox effects from mutant-p53 effects is difficult, and the results report reduced APR-246 growth suppression after mutant-p53 knockdown, so it does not directly establish TP53 independence. (LLM, conf=0.85)

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
    • cites [25] Yoshikawa, 2016, PRIMA-1MET induces apoptosis through accumulation of intracellular reactive oxygen species irrespective of p53 status and chemo-sensitivity in epithelial ovarian cancer cells, Oncol Rep source
  • It may state two separate claims as one.

    Premisecitation

    Patients whose tumors lack CIP2A, about 17-32% of ovarian cancer cases, show significantly longer cancer-specific survival overall and after platinum-based chemotherapy.

    “The remaining 17-32% of OvCa patients with CIP2A-deficient tumors have significantly longer overall cancer-specific survival both in an unselected patient population, as well as among patients treated with standard platinum-based chemotherapy (8).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [8] Bockelman, 2011, Prognostic role of CIP2A expression in serous ovarian cancer, Br J Cancer source

      The Results (Immunohistochemistry and Survival analyses; page numbers not supplied) report that 17.2% of serous ovarian cancer specimens were cytoplasmic CIP2A-negative and that these patients had significantly better cancer-specific survival, including in platinum-treated subgroups. The paper does not establish a 17–32% range or extend that prevalence and survival finding to all ovarian cancer types. (LLM, conf=0.88)

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

    Premisecitation

    CIP2A is linked to stemness traits in patient-derived high-grade serous cancer cells.

    “CIP2A was recently also shown in cell culture to protect OvCa cells from Cisplatin-induced apoptosis (10), and to associate with stemness features in patient-derived high grade serous cancer (HGSC) cells (11).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim1 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [11] Kaipio, 2020, ALDH1A1-related stemness in high-grade serous ovarian cancer is a negative prognostic indicator but potentially targetable by EGFR/mTOR-PI3K/aurora kinase inhibitors, J Pathol source
  • It may state two separate claims as one.

    Premisecitation

    In high-grade serous ovarian cancer, high CIP2A expression is linked to greater proliferation, aneuploidy, higher tumor grade, TP53 mutation, and EGFR expression.

    “High CIP2A expression has been observed in 68-83% of high-grade serous OvCa tumors, and this associates with high proliferation index, aneuploidy, advanced tumor grade, TP53 mutation, and EGFR expression (8,9).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim1 of 2 sources checked
    • cites [8] Bockelman, 2011, Prognostic role of CIP2A expression in serous ovarian cancer, Br J Cancer source

      The Results (Association to clinicopathological variables and biomarkers; page unavailable) link cytoplasmic CIP2A positivity with high grade, high proliferation index, aneuploidy, aberrant p53 immunoreactivity, and EGFR overexpression. They do not establish an association with TP53 mutation: the measured marker was p53 immunoreactivity. The reported associations and the approximately 83% overall positivity rate concern serous ovarian cancer specimens, not specifically the high-grade subgroup. (LLM, conf=0.88)

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
    • cites [9] Fang, 2012, CIP2A is overexpressed in human ovarian cancer and regulates cell proliferation and apoptosis, Tumor Biology source
  • Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.

    Premisecitation

    APR-246 needs high micromolar concentrations to kill ovarian cancer cells, matching prior reports and reflecting its conversion to methylene quinuclidinone.

    “Of a note, the high micromolar concentrations of APR-246 required for OvCa cell killing is consistent with published studies (21,25), and due to intracellular metabolism of the drug to the active product methylene quinuclidinone (MQ)(21).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim2 of 2 sources checked
    • cites [21] Ceder, 2021, A thiol-bound drug reservoir enhances APR-246-induced mutant p53 tumor cell death, EMBO Mol Med source

      The Introduction says APR-246 is converted to active methylene quinuclidinone (MQ), and the MRP1-inhibition results report APR-246 growth-suppression experiments in ovarian cancer cell lines. The IC50 analysis describes testing at micromolar concentrations, but the paper does not establish that conversion to MQ is why high concentrations are required for cell killing. Page numbers were not available in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.84)

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
    • cites [25] Yoshikawa, 2016, PRIMA-1MET induces apoptosis through accumulation of intracellular reactive oxygen species irrespective of p53 status and chemo-sensitivity in epithelial ovarian cancer cells, Oncol Rep source

      The Results report that PRIMA-1MET reduced ovarian cancer cell viability at IC50 values of 2.6–20.1 µM, so the paper supports micromolar activity but not a general requirement for high micromolar concentrations. The Discussion says PRIMA-1MET is converted to methylene quinuclidinone (MQ), but does not say that conversion explains the concentrations needed for cell killing. Page numbers are unavailable in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.86)

      Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • It may state two separate claims as one.

    Findingown data

    APR-246 induces ROS production in HEY cells, and this is quenched by NAC pre-treatment.

    “In a similar vein, we observed APR-246-elicited induction of ROS production in HEY cells, and this was completely quenched by pre-treatment of cells with antioxidant N-acetyl cysteine (NAC) (Supplementary Fig. S2A).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • It may state two separate claims as one.

    Findingown data

    Overexpressing MEKK3 strongly activates NF-kB promoter activity in HEY control cells, but this activation is reduced in HEY-CIP2AshRNA cells.

    “MEKK3 overexpression strongly induced NF-kB promoter activity in HEY-CTLshRNA cells, but this was blunted in HEY-CIP2AshRNA cells (Fig. 4E; lane 3 vs. 4).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • It may state two separate claims as one.

    Findingown data

    CIP2A shRNA does not impact HEY xenograft tumor growth; if anything, CIP2A-silenced cells grew slightly larger.

    “The tumor growth of HEY cells was not impacted by CIP2A shRNA, or if anything, the HEY-CIP2AshRNA grew slightly larger during the follow-up period (Fig. 2A,B).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • It may state two separate claims as one.

    Findingown data

    APR-246 was the only drug in a caspase3/7 apoptosis assay that did not induce apoptosis in HEY control cells but induced a higher apoptotic response in HEY-CIP2A-silenced cells.

    “Notably, APR-246 was the only drug that did not induce apoptosis in HEY-CTLshRNA cells but showed clearly higher apoptotic response in HEY-CIP2AshRNA cells (Fig. 1B).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • It may state two separate claims as one. The quote only partly states this claim.

    Findingown data

    APR-246 treatment significantly reduced growth of HEY-CIP2AshRNA xenograft tumors, while control xenografts were unaffected.

    “Instead, APR-246 therapy significantly decreased tumor growth of HEY-CIP2AshRNA cells (Fig. 2B).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • The quote only partly states this claim.

    Findingown data

    In high-grade ovarian cancer tumors at diagnosis, about 22% express CIP2A at low or negative levels.

    “We report that 22 % of the high grade OvCa tumors at diagnosis express CIP2A oncoprotein at low levels.”
    • Also stated in: § Screening for therapeutics that preferentially kill CIP2A-deficient OvCa cells · plain
      “Among this group, 21.4% of tumors had negative CIP2A protein expression (Supplementary Table S1).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • It may state two separate claims as one.

    Findingown data

    NAC pre-treatment prevents APR-246-elicited killing of CIP2A-silenced cells, supporting ROS induction as a causative mechanism.

    “Strongly supporting ROS induction as a causative mechanism for APR-246-elicited killing of CIP2A-silenced cells, NAC pre-treatment prevented the effects of APR-246 in cell viability (Fig. 1E).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • It may state two separate claims as one.

    Findingown data

    Nearly all MISIIR-TAg X CIP2AHOZ tumors were hypersensitive to APR-246, unlike tumors from MISIIR-TAg X CIP2AWT mice.

    “After quantification, all but one MISIIR-TAg X CIP2AHOZ tumor showed hypersensitivity to APR-246 therapy, as compared to tumors from MISIIR-TAg X CIP2AWT mice (Fig. 2J).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

    Interpretationown data

    CIP2A-deficient cells may be hypersensitive to ROS-inducing drugs beyond APR-246.

    “Further, based on the initial screening results (Fig. 1A), hypersensitivity of CIP2A-deficient cells to ROS inducing drugs might not be unique to APR-246.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • It may state two separate claims as one.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Tumors lacking CIP2A, found in roughly one-fifth of ovarian cancer patients, may define a less aggressive and more treatment-sensitive subtype.

    “Together, these results indicate that CIP2A-deficient OvCa tumors, constituting approximately 1/5 of all OvCa patients, may represent a less aggressive, and more therapy sensitive OvCa subtype.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one. The quote only partly states this claim.

    Study design and conductown data

    All cell lines used were authenticated by STR profiling and tested negative for mycoplasma.

    “All cell lines were authenticated by STR profiling by their respective commercial source or cell line bank.”
    • Also stated in: § Cell culture · plain
      “The cells were routinely tested for negative mycoplasma contamination according to manufacturer’s protocol (The MycoAlert™ Mycoplasma Detection kit, Lonza).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.

    Study design and conductown data

    The human study received ethics committee approval and followed the Declaration of Helsinki.

    “The study was approved by the Ethics Committee of the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology (no 040/95, no 56/13/03/03/2014 §100). The study was conducted according to the principles of Declaration of Helsinki.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

    Study design and conductown data

    Animal experiments received approval from the relevant Finnish regional authority.

    “All animal work protocols were approved by the Project Authorisation Board of the Regional State Administrative Agency for Southern Finland.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
21 of 21
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The retrospective patient cohort and immunohistochemical scoring accurately classify CIP2A tumor status.

    “The serous histology of all carcinomas had originally been determined and later verified by a gynecological pathologist.”
    “for which both the CIP2A status by immunohistochemistry (IHC), and relapse status was known”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The MISIIR-TAg mouse model recapitulates human ovarian cancer with respect to CIP2A dependence and APR-246 response.

    “TgMISIIR-TAg transgenic mice (14) were crossed with CIP2A genetrap mouse model (6).”
    “Consistent with human data that OvCa tumors may develop in a CIP2A-independent manner (Supplementary Table S1)”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Preclinical cell line and mouse findings predict clinical response to APR-246 in ovarian cancer patients.

    “Collectively, the results warrant consideration of clinical testing of APR-246 for CIP2A-deficient OvCa tumor subtype patients.”
    “By these means the presented results could support a better prediction of the potential responders in future ARP-246 clinical trials, and thus establish a future patient stratification strategy for the clinical use of APR-246.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The limited number of relapsed ascites samples (n=10) is representative of relapsed high-grade serous ovarian cancer.

    “we surveyed CIP2A protein expression from a limited number (n=10) of available samples from HGSC OvCa ascites at disease relapse.”
    “These results indicate that diagnostic identification of CIP2A status in recurrent OvCa tumors could have predictive potential for these patients regarding clinical responsiveness to APR-246 currently in clinical development (22,23).”
4 of 4

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Cvrljevic, A. N., Butt, U., Huhtinen, K., Grönroos, T. J., Böckelman, C., Lassus, H., Butzow, R., Haglund, C., Kaipio, K., Arsiola, T., Laajala, T. D., Connolly, D. C., Ristimäki, A., Carpen, O., Pouwels, J., & Westermarck, J.
Affiliations
  • Åbo Akademi University (FI)
  • University of Helsinki (FI)
  • University of Turku (FI)
  • 9Department of Pathology and Applied Tumor Genomics Research Program, Faculty of Medicine, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland.
  • Fox Chase Cancer Center (US)
  • 2Institute of Biomedicine, University of Turku, Turku, Finland.
Corresponding author
Westermarck, Jukka
Venue
Molecular Cancer Therapeutics
Published
2022-04-01
Volume
21
Issue
7
Pages
1236-1245
ISSN
  • 1535-7163 (ISSN-L)
  • 1538-8514
OpenAlex
W4225540723
Cited by
5
References
39
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 2
FWCI
0.84
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Molecular Cancer Therapeutics (publishedVersion)
  • bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) (acceptedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • Työväentutkimus Vuosikirja (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Funders
NCI (P30 CA006927)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Ovarian cancer diagnosis and treatment
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Cancer Research › Cancer Mechanisms and Therapy
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › PARP inhibition in cancer therapy
Keywords
ovarian cancer, CIP2A, APR-246, NF-κB inhibition, drug hypersensitivity, tumor subtypes, recurrent ovarian cancer, combination therapy, targeted therapy
MeSH terms
Carcinoma, Ovarian Epithelial, Animals, Autoantigens, Female, Humans, Ovarian Neoplasms, Quinuclidines, NF-kappa B, Cell Line, Tumor, Mice

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-09-28, under version 3 of the claim definition (prompt extract-v3).

A second model labelled each claim on 2026-09-28 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).

Cited sources are checked with a language model’s help (gpt-6-sol).

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review