MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Modifier genes in Mendelian disorders: the example of hemoglobin disorders

2010· review· en· W1595738627 on OpenAlexaff
Vijay G. Sankaran, Guillaume Lettre, Stuart H. Orkin, Joel N. Hirschhorn

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of the New York Academy of Sciences · 2010
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHemoglobinopathies and Related Disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalMontreal Heart InstituteUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMendelian inheritanceFetal hemoglobinThalassemiaDiseasePhenotypeMendelian randomizationBiologyGeneticsGenotypeBioinformaticsMedicineGeneGenetic variantsFetusInternal medicinePregnancy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The disorders of hemoglobin, including sickle cell disease (SCD) and β-thalassemia, are the most common "Mendelian" genetic diseases in the world. Numerous studies have demonstrated the complexity in making genotype-phenotype correlations in both SCD and β-thalassemia. Indeed, patients with exactly the same set of pathogenic globin mutations can have dramatically variable clinical courses. We discuss natural history studies that have attempted to delineate the factors responsible for the variability among the numerous clinical complications noted in these diseases. We then discuss, in depth, two well characterized ameliorating factors in the β-hemoglobin disorders, concomitant α-thalassemia, and elevated levels of fetal hemoglobin (HbF). We use the study of HbF regulation to illustrate how important insights into the genetic modifiers in Mendelian diseases can be achieved through the study of such factors. We finally go on to discuss future avenues of research that may allow us to gain further insight into the poorly understood clinical heterogeneity of this fascinating set of common genetic diseases.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.003

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.

Opus teacher head0.116
GPT teacher head0.369
Teacher spread0.252 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations36
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of the New York Academy of SciencesSame topicHemoglobinopathies and Related DisordersFrench-language works237,207