MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1992543365 · doi:10.1002/ajmg.1587

Linkage study in families with posterior helical ear pits and Wiedemann-Beckwith Syndrome

2001· article· en· W1992543365 on OpenAlexaff
Cathy L. Barr, Lyle G. Best, Rosanna Weksberg

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Medical Genetics · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetic Syndromes and Imprinting
Canadian institutionsSickKids FoundationUniversity of TorontoToronto Western HospitalHospital for Sick Children
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPedigree chartGeneticsBeckwith–Wiedemann syndromeGenetic linkageBiologyPenetranceHaplotypePhenotypeLinkage (software)GeneAllele

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Wiedemann-Beckwith syndrome (WBS) is defined by a group of anomalies, including macrosomia, macroglossia, omphalocele, and ear creases. Several minor anomalies have also been reported in the syndrome, including posterior helical ear pits (PHEP). Two independent linkage studies of pedigrees with autosomal dominant inheritance have shown linkage of WBS to 11p15.5 markers. Further confirming the location of WBS to this location is the finding of 11p15.5 duplications and translocations, as well as uniparental disomy for a small area of 11p15.5. In this study, members of previously described families exhibiting autosomal dominant inheritance of the PHEP phenotype were genotyped for three markers in the 11p15.5 region. These three markers were in the insulin-like growth factor (IGF2), insulin (INS), and tyrosine hydroxylase (TH) region. The data were examined by linkage analysis using the same genetic model used previously to demonstrate linkage of WBS to markers on chromosome 11p15.5: an autosomal dominant model with a penetrance of 0.90 and a gene frequency of 0.001. In one large pedigree, linkage analysis of the 11p15.5 markers excluded the PHEP phenotype from the IGF2, INS, and TH region. In the four other pedigrees examined, the marker loci were not sufficiently informative or the pedigrees did not provide sufficient power to exclude linkage from this region. The strongest evidence against linkage of the PHEP phenotype to 11p15.5 was evident by inspection of the segregation of the haplotypes of the markers in the pedigrees. In two informative pedigrees, relatives with the PHEP phenotype did not share the same haplotype of markers identical by descent. Our results show that the PHEP phenotype is not linked to chromosome 11p15.5 in the informative families tested. In the families examined, there are not enough individuals with WBS to determine if WBS was linked to 11p15.5 in these families. Although locus heterogeneity has not been demonstrated in WBS, it is possible that a second WBS locus exists and that the PHEP phenotype in these families is linked to a second WBS locus. Alternatively, the PHEP phenotype may occur independently of WBS so that the association of WBS and PHEP in our pedigrees may, in fact, represent causal heterogeneity.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.136
Threshold uncertainty score0.581

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.253 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations11
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Medical GeneticsSame topicGenetic Syndromes and ImprintingFrench-language works237,207