Predictive, pre‐natal and diagnostic genetic testing for Huntington's disease: the experience in Canada from 1987 to 2000
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Predictive and pre-natal testing for Huntington's Disease (HD) has been available since 1987. Initially this was offered by linkage analysis, which was surpassed by the advent of the direct mutation test for HD in 1993. Direct mutation analysis provided an accurate test that not only enhanced predictive and pre-natal testing, but also permitted the diagnostic testing of symptomatic individuals. The objective of this study was to investigate the uptake, utilization, and outcome of predictive, pre-natal and diagnostic testing in Canada from 1987 to April 1, 2000. A retrospective design was used; all Canadian medical genetics centres and their affiliated laboratories offering genetic testing for HD were invited to participate. A total of 15 of 22 centres (68.2%), currently offering or ever having offered genetic testing for HD, responded, providing data on test results, demographics, and clinical history. A total of 1061 predictive tests, 15 pre-natal tests, and 626 diagnostic tests were performed. The uptake for predictive testing was approximately 18% of the estimated at-risk Canadian population, ranging from 12.5% in the Maritimes to 20.7% in British Columbia. There appears to have been a decline in the rate of testing in recent years. Of the predictive tests, 45.0% of individuals were found to have an increased risk, and a preponderance of females (60.2%) sought testing. A greater proportion of those at < or = 25% risk sought predictive testing once direct CAG mutation analysis had become available (10.9% after mutation analysis vs 4.7% before mutation analysis, p = 0.0077). Very few pre-natal tests were requested. Of the 15 pre-natal tests, 12 had an increased risk, resulting in termination of pregnancy in all but one. Diagnostic testing identified 68.5% of individuals to be positive by mutation analysis, while 31.5% of those with HD-like symptoms were not found to have the HD mutation. The positive diagnostic tests included 24.5% of individuals with no known prior family history of HD.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".