Clinical and Molecular Genetics of Leber's Congenital Amaurosis: A Multicenter Study of Italian Patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To identify the molecular basis of Leber's congenital amaurosis (LCA) in a cohort of Italian patients and to perform genotype-phenotype analysis. METHODS: DNA samples from 95 patients with LCA were analyzed by using a microarray chip containing disease-associated sequence variants in eight LCA genes. In addition, all patients in whom no mutations were identified by microarray were subjected to sequence analysis of the CEP290 gene. Patients with mutations identified underwent a detailed ophthalmic evaluation. RESULTS: Disease-causing mutations were identified in 28% of patients, and twelve novel variants were identified. Mutations occurred more frequently in the RPE65 (8.4%), CRB1 (7.4%), and GUCY2D (5.2%) genes. Mutations in CEP290 were found in only 4.2% of the patients analyzed. Clinical assessment of patients carrying RPE65 or CRB1 mutations revealed the presence of retained visual capabilities in the first decade of life. RPE65 mutations were almost always associated with normal macular thickness, as assessed by optical coherence tomography (OCT), whereas CRB1 mutations were associated with reduced retinal thickness and a coarsely laminated retina. Fundus autofluorescence was mostly observed in patients with RPE65 and GUCY2D mutations and was not elicitable in patients carrying CRB1. CONCLUSIONS: RPE65 gene mutations represented a significant cause of LCA in the Italian population, whereas GUCY2D and CEP290 mutations had a lower frequency than that found in other reports. This finding suggests that the genetic epidemiology of LCA in Italy is different from that reported in the United States and in northern European countries. Autofluorescence in patients with RPE65 mutations was more frequently associated with preserved retinal thickness, which suggests that these mutations are not associated with progression of retinal degeneration. Therefore, normal retinal thickness (identified with OCT) and fundus autofluorescence may be the means with which to identify patients with LCA who carry RPE65 mutations, which are expected to be a potential gene therapy target in the near future.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".