LMNA mutation position predicts organ system involvement in laminopathies
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The underlying disease mechanisms likely include mutation effects on the nuclear envelope and on interactions between lamins and transcription factors. At the same time, can a simple genomic attribute -- for instance, mutation position within the LMNA sequence -- predict the complex phenotypic effects? In order to assess this, hierarchical cluster analysis (HCA) was used for assembling 16 laminopathies into two classes based on organ system involvement. Ninety-one reported causative LMNA mutations in these laminopathies were then classified according to their position upstream or downstream of the nuclear localization signal sequence (NLS). Contingency analysis was used in order to assess a non-random relationship between HCA laminopathy class and LMNA mutation position relative to the NLS. HCA laminopathy class and LMNA mutation position were strongly associated (p < 0.0001). The odds ratio for general association between an HCA class 1 laminopathy and a mutation upstream of the NLS sequence was 8.4 (95% confidence interval = 2.9 - 24.7, p < 0.0001). Although the underlying molecular biology is complex, the findings support the hypothesis that laminopathy phenotype and LMNA genotype are non-randomly associated. Furthermore, HCA may be a tool to help with the study of phenotype - genotype associations, or 'phenomics'.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it