Reassessment of the Proteus syndrome literature: Application of diagnostic criteria to published cases
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
The medical care of patients affected by rare disorders depends heavily on experiences garnered from prior cases, including those patients evaluated by the treating physician and those published in the medical literature. The utility of published cases is wholly dependent upon accurate diagnosis of those patients. In our experience, the rate of misdiagnosis in Proteus syndrome (PS) is high. Diagnostic criteria have been published, but these criteria have not been applied consistently and were published after many case reports appeared in the literature. We reviewed 205 cases of individuals reported to have PS in the literature and three of us independently applied the diagnostic criteria to these case reports. Our initial diagnostic congruence was 97.1% (199/205); the discrepancies in six cases were easily resolved. Only 97 (47.3%) of reported cases met the diagnostic criteria for PS; 80 cases (39%) clearly did not meet the criteria; and although 28 cases (13.7%) had features suggestive of PS, there were insufficient clinical data to make a diagnosis. Reported cases that met the PS criteria had a higher incidence of premature death, and other complications (scoliosis, megaspondyly, central nervous system abnormalities, tumors, otolaryngologic complications, pulmonary cystic malformations, dental and ophthalmogic complications) compared to those in the non-Proteus group. The cases that met the criteria were more often male, which has implications for hypotheses regarding the etiology and pathophysiology of PS. We also studied the attributes that led authors to conclude the reported patients had PS when we concluded they did not. We found that two of the diagnostic criteria (disproportionate overgrowth and connective tissue nevi) were often misinterpreted. In PS, the abnormal growth is asymmetric, distorting, relentless, and occurred at a faster rate compared to the rest of the body. Furthermore, PS was associated with irregular and disorganized bone, including hyperostoses, hyperproliferation of osteoid with variable calcification, calcified connective tissue, and elongation of long bones with abnormal thinning. In contrast, non-Proteus cases displayed overgrowth that was asymmetric but grew at a rate similar to the growth found in unaffected areas of the body. Also, the overgrowth in non-Proteus cases was associated with normal or enlarged bones together with ballooning of the overlying soft tissues. Taken together, these data show that (1) PS diagnostic criteria sort individuals with asymmetric overgrowth into distinct groups; (2) individuals with PS were more likely to have serious complications; (3) PS affects more males than females; and 4) the published diagnostic criteria are useful for clinical care and research. This article contains supplementary material, which may be viewed at the American Journal of Medical Genetics website at http://www.interscience.wiley.com/jpages/0148-7299/suppmat/index.html.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,036 | 0,228 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,039 | 0,012 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,002 | 0,004 |
| Communication savante | 0,005 | 0,005 |
| Science ouverte | 0,005 | 0,003 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».