Talk:2012 Group 5 Project

From CellBiology

--Mark Hill 11:46, 4 April 2012 (EST) As of Wed 4th April (week 5) other than the requested individual assessment references there is nothing on your project page (except the template sub-headings) or discussion page (other than allocation of work) that indicates that you are carrying out the research work on your project . I remind you of the assessment criteria and my expectation of ongoing demonstrable contributions.

  • The key points relating to the topic that your group was allocated are clearly described.
  • The choice of content, headings and sub-headings, diagrams, tables, graphs show a good understanding of the topic area.
  • Content is correctly cited and referenced.
  • The wiki has an element of teaching at a peer level using the student’s own innovative diagrams, tables or figures and/or using interesting examples or explanations.
  • Evidence of significant research relating to basic and applied sciences that goes beyond the formal teaching activities.
  • Relates the topics and content of the Wiki entry to learning aims of cell biology.
  • Clearly reflects on editing/feedback from group peers and articulates how the Wiki could be improved (or not) based on peer comments/feedback. Demonstrates an ability to review own work when criticised in an open edited wiki format. Reflects on what was learned from the process of editing a peer’s wiki.
  • Evaluates own performance and that of group peers to give a rounded summary of this wiki process in terms of group effort and achievement.
  • The content of the wiki should demonstrate to the reader that your group has researched adequately on this topic and covered the key areas necessary to inform your peers in their learning.
  • Develops and edits the wiki entries in accordance with this sites wiki guidelines.

Peer Review


  • A great introduction to the topic, it incorporates the information that would be discussed


  • I thought it was really good as it is well referenced with links to abbreviations

Mechanisms of action

  • Even though it was in point form, it was clear in explaining what it does and how. I thought it was refreshing as it is a bit different from others, and doesn't seem like information overload. Relevant image with description, easy to understand.


  • Good use of table and images to present the different type of disease. Good amount of information on each disease, brief but informative

Key players

  • again, table gives a nice layout, and information given shows extensive research done

Overall, i quite like the layout and the amount of effort put into this page, as it shows enough information but not too much, and glossary links and the list of terminology provide an easy read. Well referenced.

I love how this page had its unique headings.

  • History: love the amount of information but there is no recognition of who conducted it
  • Mechanism of action: it shows the understanding of the writer and it is well detailed and organized. And I love the hand drawn diagram!
  • Diseases associated with Wnt/β-catenin signalling: love the table and the structure but perhaps put treatment option with the table?
  • Key players in Wnt/β-catenin Signalling: Fabulous work. very detailed and easy to understand
  • Embryonic development: nice addition of information may be out more of this information in the introduction page.
  • Future directions: may be make it more formal and detail about things that should be researched on

--Z3291200 16:01, 17 May 2012 (EST)

  • The Introduction is very interesting. The introduction also makes good reference to the more elaborate topics that are going to be discussed in the report. The image used at the top creates a good sense of appeal.
  • The History section is quite elaborate, and very detailed. Despite this, it remains very easy to follow. Citations have been used correctly. On the downside, I haven’t found the image used any relevant to the history, hence this could be rather incorporated to the introduction
  • Under the section Mechanism of action, the author has made a clever distinction between the signalling pathway in the presence and absence of Wnt, which allows for a more logical understanding. I usually find the use of bullets as a great way of organising information, however in this instance, the use of too many bullets has caused confusion to the reader. Hence it would be easier to provide a paragraph of information, and then follow it with some bullets. Furthermore, the sketch provided is also very useful and relevant to the topic.
  • The section for associated diseases has been done magnificently, and there is little criticism to follow. The range of associated diseases have been organised into a table, and are very easy to follow. Furthermore the author has made a great attempt at providing the treatment options for specific mutations, and this leads as an example for other groups to follow. This section has been referenced correctly, and the images used have greatly enhanced the appeal of the page
  • The section for embryonic development is a great addition to the project
  • The section for Future directions contains an long list of future research for Wnt, however no specific research has been elaborated upon.
  • The Glossary is well organised. The division between the abbreviations and other terms makes it easy to follow
  • A good list of external links have been provided
  • References have been done correctly, and the list is also quite elaborate.


  • Good length, long enough to provide enough info but short enough to be interesting.
  • Good relevant image.


  • Image is in the wrong section, I feel.
  • Definitely could use a table.
  • Well referenced.


  • Maybe some sections could be paragraphs while others stay bullet points? Just for ease of readability.
  • Good , hand-drawn image.


  • Good little section, has both normal and abnormal function.
  • nice use of tables and images.

Key players

  • Table could use some light borders between cells to separate everything.


  • Needs to be referenced a little more.

Great glossary, external links and referencing!

  • History – it might look nicer if you put this into a table and under one certain year, write everything that happened in dot point instead of writing the same year several times.
  • Mechanism of action: great stuff, but simply writing it in dot form made me a little confused. Maybe write a little paragraph explaining the basic idea of whats happening and then have the dot points after it.
  • Overall: great project. Just a few touch ups with adding a little more info here and there but overall it was a clear and easy project to follow through. Loved the table with the pictures making everything easier to follow and understand. Great work.

--Z3290558 01:06, 17 May 2012 (EST)

•Introduction: Introduction of this page is good. It gives just a touch of information about Wnt-Beta catenin making you want to read more about it.

•History: This section shows detailed research the group has done. It gives an intensive timeline that is well referenced.

•Mechanism of Action: This section is good, however, the flow of idea is quite hard to follow. I think it will be easier to understand if it was in paragraph form rather than in bullet point format. It's nice that a group has already posted a student drawn image.

•Disease section: This section is well referenced and the the group talked how the signaling pathway results to abnormal function. Also, the layout makes it easy for the readers to understand this section.

•Key players in Wnt/b-catenin signaling: This subheading shows intensive and well constructed research about the topic. It was well referenced and the images make this section engaging.

•Embryonic Development: This section is informative yet I think this section can be placed under Mechanism of Action.

•Future directions: There were several bullet points under this section that were not referenced. Maybe, adding articles that shows experiments being conducted in search for the answers would be good.

The placement of the image in the beginning brightens up the page. The use of dot point through out the page as well not having the project heavily text based makes the content easy to understand so well done! The distinction between abbreviations and terminology in the glossary page is quite impressive. The group has done an excellent job in satisfying all of the assessment criteria (including a student drawn image and use of one wiki image). However, there are several components that may need improvement. These include; use of table for the history section and the key players in wnt/B-catenin signalling as it’s too large and chunky and you can reduce the size of the thumb images to avoid this problem.

-Introduction: I thought that the introduction was well written. It really set the standard that something good is coming.

-History: I thought the history was good. It was well researched and easy to follow.

-Function: I thought that this section was short and simple to read. The pictures were good and made things easy to follow. The video really is a good idea and gave me something to think about for my project.

-Abnormal function: I thought that the table really demonstrated the research they had done. It was easy to understand, brief and simple (not referenced).

-Others: The other tables were a good idea and supplied us with extra information, proving that their research was sufficient.

-Further research: I didn’t think that it was simple to follow. I wasn’t sure how or where they were going with it.

- I thought that overall the project was well written and displayed the key concepts extremely well. It also demonstrated extra research. It did however lack some references.


Wnt/B-catenin signalling pathway subheading is there before the introduction without any further information to explain the process. The introduction is done good easy to understand but lack of referencing, there is only one reference which shows lack of research by the group. The picture used is not proper with no referencing, the picture is not proper because it does not explain anything related to the topic.


Extensive research is done, good referencing.

Mechanism of action

This section starts with dot points from the beginning; the group should include a good explanation of the paragraphs.

Diseases associated with Wnt/β-catenin signalling

Good use of table, well referenced.

Treatment options

Well organised but the pictures used in the table are not referenced.

Embryonic development

Well explained, easy to understand

Future direction

Needs editing, if change from dot point to easy paragraph to explain the future studies, will be easier for the reader to understand.

  • Introduction: I would explain what a Wnt/β Signalling pathway first, then go on about the 30th anniversary. Only one reference is used here.
  • History: Although, preferably have it in a table, it seems to be neat and easy to read! Great use of resources, and it is evident that a lot of research has been put into this section. The Image could be slightly larger to be easily read.
  • Mechanism of Action: Maybe a short summary or paragraph about the MoA instead of dot points? The hand drawn image is very well done. Its a great summary of the pathway as opposed to a wall of text.
  • Diseases Associated with Wnt/β-catenin signalling: Excellent work! Short, concise, great images, great formatting.
  • Key Players in Wnt/β-catenin Signalling: Table looks really well set out. I’m not 100% sure about the copyright for the images. Technically this website is available to the world wide web – not just university students etc.
  • Embryonic Development: Short, but informative. Possible to explain a bit more?
  • Future directions: This section is difficult to understand. Instead of just a list of possible directions, maybe you can elaborate on the points and provide some sources/articles/research.
  • Glossary: Looks good, some formatting to clean it up is all that’s really needed.
  • References: Excellent referencing, though 64 needs to be fixed. And also you have many instances where references appear twice. Such as 74&73 and 77&79 and 105&106.

‘’’Introduction’’’ – witty intro

‘’’History’’’ – really good picture, well-researched extensive information

‘’’Mechanism of Action’’’ – liked use of sub-headings and figure, broke everything down and very simple to follow

‘’’Diseases associated with WNt-beta-catenin signaling’’’ – figures were good and table was excellent really good way to follow information, only thing is maybe consider putting in more visuals in another column next to mutations

‘’’Key players’’’ – really good section, well referenced, pictures look great and very easy to follow; there are some unfilled sections though; is that intentional?

‘’’Embryonic development’’’ – great photo, concise text

‘’’Future directions’’’ – needs more information, maybe talk about recent research articles you’ve come across and summarise them or put more in-text refernces into the other bullet points

‘’’Reference list’’’ – very extensive list

‘’’Overall’’’ – very well researched, looks really good guys

what was done Well:

  • Although I didn't get the Joke of the image just before the intro, it was guite creative and catchy. Gives this page that X factor.
  • Mechanism of action diagram clarified everything in the text and it was highly relevant. It was a student drawn image which is a rare sight on other pages.
  • The movie in Mechanism of Action was educational. I understood the text a lot better after viewing
  • The disease section gave a lot of detail but it clearly linked the mutations of Wnt with the pathogenesis of the diseases.

Improvements needed:

  • Disease section - can you give some background information for each disease - such as epidiomology and symptoms? what happened to the references?
  • 'Key players table' doesn't seem complete - what happened to the structures of Dsh, axin and Gsk-3B?

  • Clever, creative intro.
  • History- great, nice detail, looks like someone put a lot of effort into it.
  • Mechanism of action, is another great section. info is in short and simple sentence layout (following Marks lecture material) i think its smart and clever thinking- you don't want to further elaborate i think the about of info is enough. nice picture, wish it could have more colour to it though- make it more appealing. MOVIE is a great idea- but very detailed like you warned
  • Disease table is also good, i like how you have little bit of information under each column makes it easy to read and understand. Dont know what has happened with ur references in this section.
  • This table under Key players in Wnt/β-catenin Signalling is nice work, will be good source of info when complete
  • Embryonic dev. is another clever interesting section you have added, i was interested in reading it.


  • great extensive history section
  • good layout that was very easy to read
  • most sections very well cited/referenced
  • great overall,polished project with interesting info


  • diseases associated section not cited properly

Possible improvements

  • basic info about b-catenin i.e. structure. The picture is great at showing the structure but having this info reiterated in writing would make it clearer.
  • embryonic development headings seems a little out of place. Should it be under a current research section? With other current research taking place/recent findings (not a big deal)

The introduction is clear and well-written. It gives a good overview of what will be discussed in further details throughout your project.

The history has an incredible amount of information. Credit on those who researched it all! When it comes to the picture displayed in the history section, please provide information whether or not you are classified as being an 'authorised user', as the copyright statements mentions 'Authorized users of Genes & Development may view, reproduce, or store copies of articles for the purposes of scholarly, research, educational, and individual use only'.

The mechanism of action is easy to understand and has a good amount of detail to it. The student picture in particular gives me as a reader a clear comprehension of what happens during the 'on' and 'off' state. This complements the text well. Please do note that you got inspiration for this picture from another source, hence the copyright statement will need to be provided. Your subheading on tumour cells might seem more logical in the abnormal function section, as I expect to read only the normal function in the mechanism of action.

The section on diseases looks very attractive with the table and 2 pictures. You might want to expand upon the treatment subheading - only to a minor extend though. Maybe give us some more information (if available) on what step of the abnormal signalling it affects in order to help relieve or cure the disease.

Great idea to provide the readers with the key players in the signalling pathway! However, to me it would make more sense if you were to put this section behind your history and in front of your mechanism of action. Just so that we get a general overview of what is involved before we read how they are involved. Also, some parts of the table were not visible, eg. structure of Dsh, Axin, GSK3beta, diversin. If information is unavailable then please mention this. Pictures in the table were very helpful.

Embryonic development is very important when it comes to the functioning of the WNT/beta-catenin pathway. Again, it might be good to rearrange your format - most ogical to me would be reading this section after reading about the mechanism of action and before the diseases section.

Your section on future directions seemed a bit rushed. There is no paragraph format, only dotpoints. If you are planning on listing them, then at least provide a brief statement saying what it is exactly that you are listing, eg. current research being undertaken, future research and hypotheses yet to be attempted, etc.

Your glossary seems good, although you could always expand upon that. With regards to the references I can see that a lot of research has been done. Please be aware of cite errors (eg. #63) and references which have been listed twice (eg. #74 and #75).

Overall, well done.

A very well written introduction, in addition to the image at top makes the reader wanting to read more, so well done. The History is extensive, and organised which is great. However, what is "Figure 2 doing next to the history.

Overall structure of the β-catenin/XAxin-CBD complex" doing next to the history?? The referencing for the history is great though.

The mechanism of action is extensive, and the detailed referencing makes the section look complete. I am glad to see that you have included a hand drawn image next to mechanism of action, and it easy to understand which is great. The external link which leads to the movie is a great idea, adding another movie for the history or a different section would also be beneficial.

However, the subheading tumor cells does not belong under the mechanism of action heading. It is good to see that you have included both the on and off state, and have explained the difference pathways

The use of tables and images to explain Diseases associated with Wnt/β-catenin signalling is a great idea. The images found here all have correct references and the right copyright information which is great to see. The Glossary makes everything clear, and it seems to be a great idea to include the abbreviation.

However, what you might consider is adding the meaning of the abbreviation within brackets after the word within the text. At least that way readers wont have to continually scroll up and down.

The external links are great sources. They had some information which I believe you could benefit from. One thing I failed to find is current and future reasearch. Please include that section, as the rest seems very good.

And the reference list is extensive. Good luck with the rest of the assignment.

Overall, an extremely well researched project. Interesting use of the EMBO Conference to make the topic relevant to the audience. The history is comprehensive and the image in the mechanism section supports the text. Clever naming of ‘Diseases’ section rather than abnormal function like most other groups. Only faults I noticed were an incomplete ‘key players’ table and one or two of the references doubled up in the list – the instructions on how to change it so a reference only appears once are on the ‘Project Referencing’ page. Also, if time permits, maybe some of the abbreviations could be explained like the glossary to enhance the readers understanding.

  • The introduction is short and concise with the expected generalized basic info needed, although perhaps citations for the end of the 2nd paragraph are needed
  • The history section is well detailed with a fair bit of history and citation for each point. However I am unsure about the need for the figure that is included in the history section – perhaps it would be better placed elsewhere
  • The mechanism of action appears to have a lot of information and be well cited, however I do not believe the dot point format is appropriate for a wiki page – you do not normally see an entire section on a wiki page in dot point format. You could perhaps have an introductory paragraph that leads into further dotpoints, but as of now it seems as if you merely have the outline of the format done
  • The table in the disease section provides nice summarized information, however perhaps more detail as to the mutation would be helpful. Perhaps integrating the treatment options into the table would also be useful, or perhaps make it more clear that the 4 treatment options you have shown are linked to the disease you have shown, as the table is not numbered while your treatment options are.
  • The Key players section is well cited for the most part, and the table format is quite useful for conveying such a large amount of information. Structure is missing for a few of the proteins, making it seem a bit odd. You have also neglected the citation for the structure of the APC protein.
  • Embryonic development section is a nice touch and well cited.
  • Future directions seems to be lacking in citation, and again is in full dot point format, which is probably not the best idea for a wiki page.
  • You have a format error for ref 64

  • I really like the picture at the top of the project, makes me interested in the topic.
  • Intro was good as there was a good selection of relevant background information only. I also liked the justifications for what was going to be discussed in the project.
  • History was detailed and drew information from a wide variety of sources. And the picture made the section interesting.
  • There was extremely thorough work in the mechanism of action section which is evident in the referencing of this section as they cover a wide range of sources. Your understanding of the topic in this section is excellent and the inclusion of the external link to the movie was nice.
  • Disease section was also well written. The information was summarised nicely and the two pictures complement the information presented.
  • The embryonic development section was very interesting and overall you covered a wide variety of subtopics which was nice.
  • I appreciated that the project had a style that was consistent throughout even though it was edited by different people. Only improvements I could suggest are including a student drawn image and providing internal links in the text to the terms listed in the glossary. Also you may want to check you are formatting your references correctly so they don’t double up. References 73 and 74 are the same.

Overall, very good project.

Introducing your theme with a picture is a good idea! It creates curiosity for the reader and makes him reading more. I do not understand why you have a picture of the overall structure in your history part. Nevertheless, the History part is very nice. You just mention the most important events and do not overload the reader with too much. It is easy to follow- good! I also like the self made picture a lot! What I do not really understand are the bullet points below the picture. Maybe you should either bring them in context or make them into a text format. The table about the key players in signaling is a nice idea. I do think that you should try something new, because due to the big pictures, the last column is very tiny and it is annoying to read only one or two words in one line. Some of your references repeat- you should bring that to perfection. But all in all, I really like your page- I think it is the best so far.

The introduction is a nice overview of the project, but the writing style is a little bit choppy. I recommend looking this over to make it more cohesive. The history is very detailed and seems to be well-researched. Although the image is nice and is correctly referenced and includes the copyright information, I'm not to sure that it is relevant to the section on history. I like the subheadings for the mechanism of action, but this section is a little bit difficult to read. The image helps, and is a good student drawing, however, this section should be simplified and made easier to understand. The disease section is great, and visually pleasing, but the images need copyright information. The table involving the key proteins is very detailed, well-researched, and visually pleasing. All the images are correctly referenced and include the copyright information - well done! My only comment is that this section should be placed before diseases, just so that the flow is a little bit better. The addition of the embryonic development section is good, but you may want to change the title to be a little more descriptive (ex: The role embryonic development). For the section on future directions, it would be best to summarize the future directions, and perhaps include examples of research that is currently underway, or even recent findings involving this signaling pathway. The glossary is well-done and the list of external links is a nice addition.

Group 5 • This project has adhered closely to the marking criteria and learning aims of cell biology

• For FAP in abnormal fucntion you have mentioned that one mutated allele is inherited at birth. It would be a good idea to mention that this is therefore heterozygous at this genetic locus, and therefore there one inherited bad copy, and one inherited good copy. For the disease process to start, the individual undergoes “loss of heterozygosity” which means the good copy of the allele is sporadically mutated (caused by radiation etc) and therefore two mutated copies are present and polyps grow out of control. But I am being nit-picky.

• All key points relating to the topic are present

• The choice of content, headings and sub-headings, diagrams, tables, graphs show a good understanding of the topic area

• The project is full of proof that the topic has been researched to a suitable depth

• Contains and element of teaching and does this through dot points, text, diagrams, images and videos

• Correct and citation and referencing

A very good effort and interesting read. Minor things that could do with some adjustments include:

  1. Introduction is very intriguing and definitely engages readers but could do with a bit more of a clear definition as to what the Wnt signaling pathway is.
  2. Although effective, the description of the mechanism of the pathway in bullet point style can be confusing to follow at times. In order to keep things short and sweat, the bullet points are great but can lead to miscellaneous information that looks like it doesn’t belong. In the Tumor Cell section, continuous use of the sub bullet point can throw off readers.
  3. Protein table used in Key Players… segment looks like it doesn’t fit. I think there are too many columns. Possibly integrating the inhibitors column with the function column as the inhibitors themselves, play a role in the pathway.

My comments may seem petty at times but I think it was a very well done piece and that forces minor criticisms to be made. Hopefully they help. Otherwise a very well researched, very well written wiki. It is well aimed at peers in that field of research and will serve as a strong basis for further research.

Group 5 Feedback:

-Introduction: I thought that the introduction was well written. It was put thoroughly and insightfully

-History: I thought the history was good. It was well researched and easy to follow.

-Function: I thought that this section was short and simple to read. The pictures were good and made things easy to follow. The video really is a good idea and gave me something to think about for my project. However it does seem slightly messy, so a slight organisation of the content would make it easy to follow. Overall content was good.

-Abnormal function: I thought that the table really demonstrated the research they had done. However, greater referencing of this section is needed.

-Further research: I didn’t think that it was simple to follow. It needs to be concise and follow a certain progression. Slightly all over the place and hence some focus is needed on organising the content in a logical manner

Overall I thought the assessment was insightful, and showed a great deal of success in its contents and the way the assessment was presented with images, videos and tables allowing for interactivity. There needs to be more referencing is some sections as well as organisational work of the content to make it easy to follow.


- history section is comprehensive and well-researched

- mechanism of action section is well written and concise but perhaps a summarising introductory paragraph may be useful

- good work on the student drawn diagram, detailed but precise

-treatment section could be organised into headings and expanded on a bit more

- the key players section should perhaps be placed about diseases for better flow

-good use of images, especially in the key players section

-future direction still needs work but ideas are good so far

- perhaps embryonic development should a part of the function section

Group 5's Discussion Board

Ive figured out what references have been listed a few times; 14+50, 22+99, 29+77+111, 32+45, 35+48, 37+51, 40+44+65+86+89+98, 47+49, 52+58+66+104, 61+62, 56+93, 63+113, 70+75+78, 72+85, 64+73+74, 80+112, 84+107, 91+96, 101+103, 102+105+106

It might take me a while to reformat them all, but ill get it done as soon as i can

--Z3332227 20:49, 17 May 2012 (EST)

Hey I just tried adding links to all the words in the glossary that appear in the body of the wiki. For some reason, the text won't bold...

I have to go home now so I'll leave it here. I'll try figuring it out another time.

--Z3336051 17:28, 17 May 2012 (EST)

Tasks to be completed before next lab (wiki page due by NEXT LAB):

  • Sara - complete glossary definitions; expanding history; normal function; student drawn image
  • Lee - linking glossary; complete proteins table; future directions
  • Sam - coding references; current research;
  • Nat (just keep working on what you've been doing, good work so far)

Hey guys, Unfortunately I won't be able to make the lab this Thursday. I just wanted to update you on what I've done with my section. Basically I've re-done my table so that I can include more information; this table includes all previous information but it allowed me to draw connections between the cancers and the pathway more clearly. I also figured out how to control the width of the columns and add colour to the table :) Have a look and see what you think!

From looking at our project page I found the one thing we seriously need to fix up is our references as we have the same ones listed multiple times at the end. I am happy to fix this up after our lab this week.

I've pasted my changes below and will copy it over to the main page once the peer reviews are done. --Z3289738 20:24, 15 May 2012 (EST)

As described above, the Wnt/β-catenin signalling pathway plays a critical role in development, stem cell regulation and cellular processes such as proliferation and migration. Thus mutations in components of this pathway have been associated with cancers, hereditary disorders, developmental defects and other diseases.

Wnt/B-Catenin Pathway and the Onset of Cancer

The high number of repressor genes involved in the Wnt/β-catenin pathway indicates that it is imperative for this pathway to be tightly regulated. [1] These repressor genes include APC, Axin 1 and Axin 2. Given the pathways involvements in the regulation of stem cell choice to proliferate or self renew, there is a strong correlation between mutations in these genes and the onset of cancer. The table below describes in further detail some mutations of the Wnt signalling pathway and associated cancers.

Mutations of the Wnt signalling pathway and associated cancers

Gene Normal function Effects of mutation Associated cancers [2]
β-catenin Primary Wnt effector. Acts as an oncogene. In the nucleus, β-catenin functions as a cofactor for TCF transcription factors which specify a subset of genes responsible for determining cell fate and regulation of proliferation. [2] Any mutations that inhibit its destruction motif (the amino terminal phosphorylation site)[3] would cause constitutively active β-catenin signalling, leading to excessive stem cell renewal and proliferation, predisposing the cells to the formation of tumours. [4]
  • Colorectal cancer
  • Prostate cancer
  • Uterine endometrial cancer
  • Melanoma
  • Hepatoblastoma (liver cancer)
  • Medulloblastoma (brain cancer)
  • Pancreatoblastoma (pancreatic cancer)
  • Ovarian carcinoma
  • Thyroid carcinoma
  • Pancreatic carcinoma
  • Hepatocellular carcinoma
  • Lung adenocarcinomas
  • Esophageal adenocarcinomas
  • Synovial sarcoma
APC Facilitates β-catenin degradation; acts as a tumour suppressor Mutational inactivation of APC inhibits degradation of β-catenin, leading to the over-stabilisation and accumulation of β-catenin in the nucleus of the cell. This leads to an increased activation of target genes such as the oncogenes cyclin D1 and c-MYC. [3]

Colorectal Cancer (CRC)

  • Activating mutations in the canonical Wnt pathway is responsible for approximately 90% of all colorectal cancer cases. [5] Of these, 85% are caused by loss of function mutations in APC. [2]
  • Colorectal cancer is the fourth most commonly diagnosed cancer in the world.
  • APC mutations in intestinal epithelial cells lead constitutive β-catenin/Tcf4 complex activation, causing unrestrained production of crypt stem cells, resulting in cancer. [6]
  • Once the cancer has spread widely through the body, it is often incurable and management focuses on chemotherapy and improving quality of life.

Familial Adenomatous Polyposis (FAP)

  • Hereditary cancer syndrome caused by a germline APC mutation whereby one defective allele is inherited. [7][8]
  • Effect: large numbers of adenomas or polyps (benign out growths) are developed in the colorectum. [2] Inevitably, some of these polyps progress into cancers (CRC).
  • Colorectal cancer
  • Prostate cancer
  • Melanoma
  • Hepatoblastoma
  • Medulloblastoma
  • Ovarian carcinoma
  • Pancreatic non-ductal acinar cell carcinomas
  • Synovial carcinoma
  • Desmoid tumor
  • Gastric adenoma
  • Breast fibromatoses
Axin 1 & Axin 2 Serve as scaffolding components for the β-catenin degradation complex. Acts as a tumour suppressor. Mutational inactivation of Axin 1 or Axin 2 inhibits degradation of β-catenin, leading to the over-stabilisation and accumulation of β-catenin in the nucleus of the cell.
  • Ovarian carcinoma
  • Hepatocellular carcinoma
  • Medulloblastoma
  • Predisposition to colon cancer [9]

For a comprehensive list of human diseases associated with mutations of the Wnt signalling components, please refer to Table 1 in the following article: Wnt/β-catenin signaling: components, mechanisms, and diseases[5]


There is a large focus on finding more effective means of treating and preventing cancer. Current researchers are looking at inhibiting various components of the Wnt/β-catenin pathway to prevent the proliferation of cancer. Such treatments include:

  1. Small molecule inhibitors can be used to block the interaction between β-catenin and TCF, thus preventing constitutive transcriptional activities that lead to the proliferation of cancer. [10]
  2. Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) function by interfering with β-catenin/TFC-dependent transcription, and have proven promising for the prevention of colorectal cancers. [11] Examples include exisulind, sulindac and aspirin.[12]
  3. Frizzled-related proteins can be used as natural antagonists to manage the Wnt pathway.
  4. A “recombinant adenovirus (Ad-CBR) that constitutively expresses the β-catenin binding domain of APC” [13] was developed, enabling APC to maintain its function of β-catenin degradation.
  5. Monoclonal antibodies are being used against Wnt proteins by inducing apoptosis in cancer cells [14].

Sorry, I realized that I copied the wrong table into the wiki page (I made one copy with the correct referencing format and one which I could use on Microsoft word).

I'm trying to find photo's of each disease and more information on treatment options. Does anyone know of a website that allows you to search for images in journal articles?

--Z3289738 11:43, 14 May 2012 (EST)

Umm Nat we're not supposed to be working on the wiki page this week. Otherwise the comments from peer review would not be consistent, if the first reviewer saw a different product to the last one.

You can save your progress offline, and transfer it after our next lab.

--Z3336051 19:40, 13 May 2012 (EST)

Hey, I found a list of areas for future research in my article so I copied it over to that section.

Its looking good guys :)

--Z3289738 15:37, 10 May 2012 (EST)

Hey guys, I was also having issues uploading things onto the wiki, everytime I edited something it would save and then disappear - very frustrating! Everythings up now so hopefully it will stay there.

As for everything below I just needed to paste it somewhere while I edit it further


Wnt/β-Catenin Signaling: Components, Mechanisms, and Diseases [5]

  • Signaling by the Wnt family of secreted glycolipoproteins is one of the fundamental mechanisms that direct cell proliferation, cell polarity, and cell fate determination during embryonic development and tissue homeostasis (Logan and Nusse, 2004). As a result, mutations in the Wnt pathway are often linked to human birth defects, cancer, and other diseases (Clevers, 2006). A critical and heavily studied Wnt pathway is the canonical Wnt pathway, which functions by regulating the amount of the transcriptional coactivator β-catenin, which controls key developmental gene expression programs.
  • Given the critical roles of Wnt/b-catenin signaling in development and homeostasis, it is no surprise that mutations of the Wnt pathway components are associated with many hereditary disorders, cancer, and other diseases (Table 1).
  • Association of deregulated Wnt/β-catenin signaling with cancer has been well documented, particularly with colorectal cancer (Polakis, 2007) (Table 1). Constitutively activated β-catenin signaling, due to APC deficiency or β-catenin mutations that prevent its degradation, leads to excessive stem cell renewal/proliferation that predisposes cells to tumorigenesis.
  • Mutations of β-catenin at and surrounding these serine and threonine residues are frequently found in cancers, generating mutant β-catenin that escapes phosphorylation and degradation (Table 1).

Caught up in a Wnt storm: Wnt signaling in cancer [2]

  • The Wnt signaling pathway, named for its most upstream ligands, the Wnts, is involved in various differentiation events during embryonic development and leads to tumor formation when aberrantly activated. Molecular studies have pinpointed activating mutations of the Wnt signaling pathway as the cause of approximately 90% of colorectal cancer (CRC), and somewhat less frequently in cancers at other sites, such as hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).
  • Greater than 90% of all CRCs will have an activating mutation of the canonical Wnt signaling pathway, ultimately leading to the stabilization and accumulation of β-catenin in the nucleus of a cell.
  • Fig. Schematic representation of a colon crypt and proposed model for polyp formation. At the bottom third of the crypt, the progenitor proliferating cells accumulate nuclear β-catenin. Consequently, they express β-catenin/TCF target genes. An uncharacterized source of WNT factors likely resides in the mesenchymal cells surrounding the bottom of the crypt, depicted in red. As the cells reach the mid-crypt region, β-catenin/TCF activity is downregulated and this results in cell cycle arrest and differentiation. Cells undergoing mutation in APC or β-catenin become independent of the physiological signals controlling β-catenin/TCF activity. As a consequence, they continue to behave as crypt progenitor cells in the surface epithelium giving rise to aberrant crypt foci.

--Z3289738 11:22, 10 May 2012 (EST)

Hey guys, really sorry but I don't know what happened to the last bit of our wiki page! >.< I was still adding to the glossary this morning, and I just went back to check out our page, and now it's missing!! I've tried undoing a few things but it hasn't come back...

I actually have to leave home for class now, and I won't be free right up until the lab begins (when the page will most likely be locked). I'm really sorry to ask the favour, but could someone please figure out how to bring back the lost data? I haven't kept an offline copy of the current/future research and glossary (and everything else beyond it)...

--Z3336051 21:51, 9 May 2012 (EST)

Hi Lee,

Actually I was doing the history :) -- Nat's taking care of the diseases associated with the signaling pathway. To be honest, the figure doesn't have too much to do with the history but it was the only relevant one I could find that could be posted on the website. I don't know if you noticed but all the references for the history come from big journals like Nature and Cell and so you have copyright issues.

I can try to relate the history to the figure or vice versa so things make more sense. Good job everyone!

Cheers, Sara --Z3333421 11:21, 7 May 2012 (EST)

Hi Nat (I think you're doing history now right?)

I noticed you posted up a figure of the β-catenin/XAxin-CBD complex. Since we're all madly posting content right now I understand why you haven't written up the explanation for the figure yet. I know no one else in our group has either (including me) but I ask about this one in particular because I'm a bit confused as to what it has to do with history.. I want to better understand what everyone else is doing, because it'll be more helpful than not for me to track what everyone else is doing, in putting together content for my section.

And to everyone else, especially Sara who has put in so much effort (and more than what she needed to!), sorry I haven't been contributing much so far. Been drowning in more work than I expected. This week however, cell bio will be my first priority subject in terms of workload. Partly because our page will be locked for peer evaluation by Thursday anyway.

Keep working hard everyone! Our page is slowly but surely taking form :) And please give me honest feedback as to anything you feel I should be doing but aren't doing currently. I would rather a group member point it out first so it can be fixed before someone else catches on during peer review assessment.

Cheers, Lee --Z3336051 21:19, 5 May 2012 (EST)

Thanks Sara for the table! It'll be a big help to decluttering my content.

--Z3336051 15:08, 4 May 2012 (EST)

Hey Sara, I can't work out how to create a table! If you have time, can you please one with these headings

- disease
- description
- causes
- symptoms
- treatment
- picture

Thanks :)

--Z3289738 15:26, 3 May 2012 (EST)

Hey guys, I've just edited some of the history, added a new pic (that wasn't copyrighted), updated the glossary and added content to embryonic development.

Lee, I also added a table that might be helpful in organising the content for the key players section.

--Z3333421 13:09, 3 May 2012 (EST)

Thanks Sara, I've started editing the disease section so all good now :)

I've just added/modified the subheadings for the page. Natalie, which section would you like to swap diseases with?

--Z3333421 21:35, 20 April 2012 (EST)

Hi guys, I've just uploaded the history which is not quite finished yet and I have to add in the references cheers.

--Z3333421 09:42, 19 April 2012 (EST)

Hey guys, Here's another simple diagram of the Wnt signaling cascade (on the right)

File:The Wnt Signaling cascade, simplified.png
Figure._Schematic_representation_of_a_colon_crypt_and_proposed_model_for_polyp_formation [2]

See you tomorrow

Just found a pretty good diagram showing the "on" and "off" states of the Wnt signalling pathway

Sam --Z3332227 17:21, 18 April 2012 (EST)

I've just written up a few notes on Wnt/Beta-catenin signalling. I haven't added the references in yet and i'm still looking for some good diagrams that explain it simply.

Sam --Z3332227 15:48, 10 April 2012 (EST)

Hey everyone, so to make it official, the task assigned to us for our project pages this week has officially been to upload one image each onto the wiki. I add one extra goal for our group to achieve by the end of this mid sem break; to begin writing relevant information under our assigned subheadings, and sourcing our information from four articles, by referencing it correctly.

Keep posting here, to keep each other updated on each of our progresses, and to keep the thoughts flowing.

Enjoy your breaks!

Lee --Z3336051 21:22, 6 April 2012 (EST)

Hey guys, I found four articles relating to abnormal function of the pathway:

Paper 1

Taketo, M Mark. "Shutting down Wnt signal-activated cancer." Nature Genetics 36. (2004): 320-22. DOI: 10.1038/ng0404-320 <pubmed>15054482</pubmed>

In this article, New evidence suggests that Wnt signaling can be suppressed or further activated by upstream signals, even though the pathway seems to be constitutively activated by downstream mutations in cancer cells.

Paper 2


This article highlights some key aspects of Wnt/β-catenin signaling in human diseases including congenital malformations, cancer, and osteoporosis, and discuss potential therapeutic implications

Paper 3


This review discusses some of the strategies that are being used or can be explored to target key components of the Wnt/β-catenin signaling pathway in rational cancer drug discover.

Paper 4


This review considers the spectra of tumors arising from active Wnt signaling and attempts to place perspective on recent data that begin to elucidate the mechanisms prompting uncontrolled cell growth following induction of Wnt signaling.

--Z3289738 10:48, 29 March 2012 (EST)

Check this out. It's a website all about the Wnt pathway. It has a list of virtually all review articles on the pathway.

<pubmed>9529612</pubmed> A review of the Wnt/beta-catenin pathway and the protein and receptor interactions involved.

<pubmed>9407023</pubmed> Outlines the evidence for the interaction of the Frizzled receptor with the Wnt protein.

<pubmed>15001769</pubmed> Explores the interrelationship between the Wnt, beta-catenin and cadherin pathways by examining the role of receptor activation and repression to control gene expression.

<pubmed>15652476</pubmed> Newer research made possible by advancements in imaging technology have better elucidated the finer interactions in the Wnt/beta-catenin pathway.

--Z3336051 23:36, 25 March 2012 (EST)

<pubmed>19619488</pubmed> Overview of the Wnt signaling pathway; ligands, agonists and antagonists and their interactions with Wnt receptors. Also mentions its implication in the development of human disease.

<pubmed>12775774</pubmed> Main extracellular antagonists of the Wnt signalling pathway - regulation of cell growth/differentiation.

<pubmed>19279722</pubmed> Involvement of Wnt signalling molecules in the control of embryonic development.

<pubmed>18392048</pubmed> Role of the Wnt pathway in proliferation, differentiation and apoptosis in adult tissues (and therefore oncogenesis).

--Z3332227 12:27, 25 March 2012 (EST)

Thank you so much Li! I'm happy with the are my references for this week's homework

<pubmed>16793760</pubmed> This review article provides a concise overview of the Wnt/Beta Catenin Signalling which can used in the introduction.

<pubmed>15372092</pubmed> There are a number of clearly labelled diagrams in this article that can be used as a starting point for the student drawn image.

<pubmed>18673238</pubmed> This article provides an historical overview of the key events that shaped our understanding of Wnt/Beta Catenin signalling and hence can greatly aid the history section.

<pubmed>17081971</pubmed> This review also contains many simplified diagrams that can be used to support the student drawn image.

--Z3333421 22:32, 22 March 2012 (EST)

Unfortunately we didn't get notch signalling, so we'll go with Wnt/beta-catenin signalling? To Natalie, the reason we didn't go with JAK/STAT was because of the apparent lack of research available on it. Wnt/beta-catenin seems better understood.

The following is a recommended assignment of sections, so we can get to our homework which is to each find four references for our respective assignment sections.

If you would like to swap, these roles are negotiable, but keep in mind that our homework is due next week.

  • Introduction + History + pathway images (at least one drawn) - Sara
  • Normal Function - Sam
  • Abnormal Function - Natalie
  • Receptors involved + (if applicable)Proteins involved - Li

To Sara, I wasn't quite sure how to divide up the subheadings based on the roles you wrote down, but you're free to reassign if you can elaborate for me. The above is my attempt at filling in the details.

Finally, I will look after maintenance of page formatting. Come to me if you have any questions.

--Z3336051 16:46, 22 March 2012 (EST)

Hey guys, If we decide to go with notch signaling here's a really great diagram & description:

--Z3289738 14:28, 22 March 2012 (EST)

  1. <pubmed>15054482</pubmed>
  2. 2.0 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 <pubmed>12781368</pubmed>
  3. 3.0 3.1 <pubmed>15372092</pubmed>
  4. <pubmed>15054482</pubmed>
  5. 5.0 5.1 5.2 <pubmed>19619488</pubmed>
  6. Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named PMID22234609
  7. <pubmed>1651562</pubmed>
  8. <pubmed>1651563</pubmed>
  9. <pubmed>15042511</pubmed>
  10. <pubmed>19619488</pubmed>
  11. <pubmed>19619488</pubmed>
  12. <pubmed>15372092</pubmed>
  13. <pubmed>15578921</pubmed>
  14. Cite error: Invalid <ref> tag; no text was provided for refs named PMID15578921