Evidence map›Paper›PMID 9228281›Full record

ReviewMolecular biology reports1997

Complex mechanisms for c-fos and c-jun degradation.

I Jariel-Encontre, C Salvat, A M Steff, M Pariat, C Acquaviva, O Furstoss, M Piechaczyk

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Molecular biology reports, 1997. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 22% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

17 citing papers in PubMed, 49 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Good COP1 or bad COP1? In vivo veritas.The Journal of clinical investigation · 2011
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Regulation of DeltaFosB stability by phosphorylation.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2006
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

I Jariel-EncontreInstitute of Molecular Genetics, UMR 5535, CNRS, Montpellier, France.
C Salvat
A M Steff
M Pariat
C Acquaviva
O Furstoss
M Piechaczyk
Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique · FRInstitut de Génétique Moléculaire de Montpellier · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

c-fos and c-jun proto-oncogenes have originally been found in mutated forms in murine and avian oncogenic retroviruses. They both define multigenic families of transcription factors. Both c-jun and c-fos proteins are metabolically unstable. In vivo and in vitro work by various groups suggests that multiple proteolytic machineries, including the lysosomes, the proteasome and the ubiquitous calpains, may participate in the destruction of c-fos and c-jun. The relative contribution of each pathway is far from being known and it cannot be excluded that it varies according to the cell context and/or the physiological conditions. It has been demonstrated that, in certain occurrences, the degradation of both c-fos and c-jun by the proteasome in vivo involves the ubiquitin pathway. However, the possibility that proteasomal degradation can also occur in a manner independent of the E1 enzyme of the ubiquitin cycle remains an open issue.

Indexed as

AnimalsCalpainCysteine EndopeptidasesMiceMultienzyme ComplexesProteasome Endopeptidase ComplexProto-Oncogene Proteins c-fosProto-Oncogene Proteins c-junCalpainCysteine EndopeptidasesMultienzyme ComplexesProteasome Endopeptidase ComplexProto-Oncogene Proteins c-fosProto-Oncogene Proteins c-jun

Identifiers

PMID9228281
OpenAlexW185143481

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.