High frequency of intermediate alleles on huntington disease‐associated haplotypes in British Columbia's general population
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Intermediate alleles (27-35 CAG, IAs) for Huntington disease (HD) usually do not confer the disease phenotype but are prone to CAG repeat instability. Consequently, offspring are at-risk of inheriting an expanded allele in the HD range (≥36 CAG). IAs that expand into a new mutation have been hypothesized to be more susceptible to instability compared to IAs identified on the non-HD side of a family from the general population. Frequency estimates for IAs are limited and have largely been determined using clinical samples of HD or related disorders, which may result in an ascertainment bias. This study aimed to establish the frequency of IAs in a sample of a British Columbia's (B.C.) general population with no known association to HD and examine the haplotype of new mutation and general population IAs. CAG sizing was performed on 1,600 DNA samples from B.C.'s general population. Haplotypes were determined using 22 tagging SNPs across the HTT gene. 5.8% of individuals were found to have an IA, of which 60% were on HD-associated haplotypes. There was no difference in the haplotype distribution of new mutation and general population IAs. These findings suggest that IAs are relatively frequent in the general population and are often found on haplotypes associated with expanded CAG lengths. There is likely no difference in the propensity of new mutation and general population IAs to expand into the disease range given that they are both found on disease-associated haplotypes. These findings have important implications for clinical practice.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".