MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1999436010 · doi:10.1182/blood-2007-05-091561

A high-density SNP genome-wide linkage search of 206 families identifies susceptibility loci for chronic lymphocytic leukemia

2007· article· en· W1999436010 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueBlood · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChronic Lymphocytic Leukemia Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Cancer InstituteNational Institutes of HealthCancer Research UKMcMaster University
KeywordsGeneticsSingle-nucleotide polymorphismChronic lymphocytic leukemiaGenetic linkageBiologyLinkage disequilibriumLocus (genetics)SNP arrayTag SNPSNPGeneLeukemiaGenotype

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) and other B-cell lymphoproliferative disorders display familial aggregation. To identify a susceptibility gene for CLL, we assembled families from the major European (ICLLC) and American (GEC) consortia to conduct a genome-wide linkage analysis of 101 new CLL pedigrees using a high-density single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) array and combined the results with data from our previously reported analysis of 105 families. Here, we report on the combined analysis of the 206 families. Multipoint linkage analyses were undertaken using both nonparametric (model-free) and parametric (model-based) methods. After the removal of high linkage disequilibrium SNPs, we obtained a maximum nonparametric linkage (NPL) score of 3.02 (P = .001) on chromosome 2q21.2. The same genomic position also yielded the highest multipoint heterogeneity LOD (HLOD) score under a common recessive model of disease susceptibility (HLOD = 3.11; P = 7.7 x 10(-5)), which was significant at the genome-wide level. In addition, 2 other chromosomal positions, 6p22.1 (corresponding to the major histocompatibility locus) and 18q21.1, displayed HLOD scores higher than 2.1 (P < .002). None of the regions coincided with areas of common chromosomal abnormalities frequently observed in CLL. These findings provide direct evidence for Mendelian predisposition to CLL and evidence for the location of disease loci.

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.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.073
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.276 · 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