Pathophysiology of protein aggregation and extended phenotyping in filaminopathy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Mutations in FLNC cause two distinct types of myopathy. Disease associated with mutations in filamin C rod domain leading to expression of a toxic protein presents with progressive proximal muscle weakness and shows focal destructive lesions of polymorphous aggregates containing desmin, myotilin and other proteins in the affected myofibres; these features correspond to the profile of myofibrillar myopathy. The second variant associated with mutations in the actin-binding domain of filamin C is characterized by weakness of distal muscles and morphologically by non-specific myopathic features. A frameshift mutation in the filamin C rod domain causing haploinsufficiency was also found responsible for distal myopathy with some myofibrillar changes but no protein aggregation typical of myofibrillar myopathies. Controversial data accumulating in the literature require re-evaluation and comparative analysis of phenotypes associated with the position of the FLNC mutation and investigation of the underlying disease mechanisms. This is relevant and necessary for the refinement of diagnostic criteria and developing therapeutic approaches. We identified a p.W2710X mutation in families originating from ethnically diverse populations and re-evaluated a family with a p.V930_T933del mutation. Analysis of the expanded database allows us to refine clinical and myopathological characteristics of myofibrillar myopathy caused by mutations in the rod domain of filamin C. Biophysical and biochemical studies indicate that certain pathogenic mutations in FLNC cause protein misfolding, which triggers aggregation of the mutant filamin C protein and subsequently involves several other proteins. Immunofluorescence analyses using markers for the ubiquitin-proteasome system and autophagy reveal that the affected muscle fibres react to protein aggregate formation with a highly increased expression of chaperones and proteins involved in proteasomal protein degradation and autophagy. However, there is a noticeably diminished efficiency of both the ubiquitin-proteasome system and autophagy that impairs the muscle capacity to prevent the formation or mediate the degradation of aggregates. Transfection studies of cultured muscle cells imitate events observed in the patient's affected muscle and therefore provide a helpful model for testing future therapeutic strategies.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".