MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1999087701 · doi:10.14740/wjnu198w

A Case of Anti-Glomerular Basement Membrane Antibody Disease in Siblings

2015· article· en· W1999087701 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Li Pen, Pierre-Marc Villeneuve

Bibliographic record

VenueWorld Journal of Nephrology and Urology · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicVasculitis and related conditions
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineGlomerular basement membraneGoodpasture syndromeAntibodyPathogenesisPulmonary hemorrhageRenal biopsyPathologyRapidly progressive glomerulonephritisGlomerulonephritisHuman leukocyte antigenImmunologyDiseaseSerologyBasement membraneBiopsyAntigenInternal medicineKidneyLungVasculitis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Anti-glomerular basement membrane (anti-GBM) antibody disease, also known as Goodpasture syndrome, is associated with the presence of antibodies against type 4 collagen. Increasing evidence supports the role of human leukocyte antigen (HLA) genes in the pathogenesis of this disease. A 48-year-old Caucasian male was admitted to the intensive care unit with diffuse alveolar hemorrhage and rapidly progressive glomerulonephritis. Serology demonstrated high anti-GBM antibodies (291.8 U/L). Renal biopsy showed crescentic glomerulonephritis involving 16 of 19 glomeruli with strong linear and diffuse IgG staining confirming the diagnosis of anti-GBM antibody disease. The patient’s sister presented with pulmonary-renal syndrome at age 29 due to the same illness. Subsequent HLA typing revealed that our patient was homozygous for DRB1*15:01, an allele strongly associated with anti-GBM antibody disease. To our knowledge, this is the first case report of anti-GBM antibody disease in a patient who is homozygous for DRB1*15:01 with a sibling who had the same diagnosis. Our case highlights the importance of HLA genes in the pathogenesis of this disease. World J Nephrol Urol. 2015;4(1):178-180 doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.14740/wjnu198w

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)0.000
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 score0.087
Threshold uncertainty score0.326

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.271 · 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

Citations3
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWorld Journal of Nephrology and UrologySame topicVasculitis and related conditionsFrench-language works237,207