Simultaneous <i>MFN2</i> and <i>GDAP1</i> mutations cause major mitochondrial defects in a patient with CMT
Bibliographic record
Abstract
WITH CMTMutations in the MFN2 gene are associated with Charcot-Marie-Tooth disease type 2A (CMT2A), a dominant axonal CMT, whereas mutations in GDAP1 are associated with recessive demyelinating CMT (CMT4A), recessive axonal CMT (AR-CMT2), and dominant axonal CMT (CMT2K).Both proteins are involved in energy metabolism and dynamics of the mitochondrial network.[1][2][3] We have previously reported that, in fibroblasts from patients with CMT, MFN2 mutations resulted in a mitochondrial energy coupling defect, 4,5 whereas dominant mutation in GDAP1 resulted in defective complex I activity.6 In this study, we investigated mitochondrial bioenergetics from a severely affected patient with CMT harboring combined mutations in both GDAP1 and MFN2 genes. Methods.For details, see e-Methods on the Neurology ® Web site at www.neurology.org. Patients.Patient II-5 (figure 1A), a 71-year-old woman of Spanish origin, had severe distal muscle weakness from the age of 3, becoming wheelchairbound during her third decade.Clinical examination showed severe weakness of limbs with proximal and distal amyotrophy, tactile and nociceptive hypoesthesia with a gloves-and-socks distribution, and abolition of the limb reflexes.She had pes cavus and moderate vocal cord paresis.Electrophysiologic studies (table e-1) indicated a severe axonal neuropathy characterized by a major reduction of motor action potential in the left median nerve (0.1 mV) with a slightly reduced motor conduction velocity (43 m/s).Patient II-8, her 56-year-old brother, presented with a mild CMT2 clinical phenotype.Electrophysiologic examination showed a sensory axonal neuropathy (table e-1).His 2 daughters, aged 19 and 25 years, are currently asymptomatic.Patient II-2, who had a phenotype compatible with CMT, had died of respiratory failure. Results. Mutation analysis.Patient II-8 and his asymptomatic daughter (III-15) were found to be heterozygous for the pathogenic p.R468H mutation in MFN2, previously described.7 Individuals II-3, II-4, and II-7Genetic Diagnosis Center of Inherited Disease-IDIBELL (C.C., I.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".