Correlation between phenotype and genotype in a large unselected cohort of children with severe hemophilia A
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Phenotypic variability is well recognized in severe hemophilia A. A few studies, mainly in adults treated lifelong on demand, suggest that bleeding phenotype correlates with factor VIII gene (F8) mutation type. Because treatment regimens influence outcomes to a large extent, examining bleeding phenotype during the first years of life may be the most suitable way to define this variability. We set out to analyze the very early phenotypic expression of severe hemophilia A in 621 consecutively enrolled, well-characterized previously untreated patients and to correlate this with patients' F8 mutation. Detailed information was collected on bleeds and treatment of the first 75 exposure days or until inhibitor development. F8 mutation type was known for 531 patients; 402 had null mutations and 129 had non-null mutations. Considering only patients who had not started prophylaxis or developed an inhibitor before select bleeding events, we found that patients with null mutations experienced their first bleed and first joint bleed at younger median ages than patients with non-null mutations (9.7 vs 10.9 months and 13.8 vs 16.1 months, respectively). We conclude that F8 mutation type accounts for only a small component of the significant phenotypic variability found among patients with severe hemophilia A.
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 | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".