MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Gaucher disease: Variability in phenotype among siblings

2004· article· en· W2025810134 on OpenAlexaffabout
Dante Amato, T. Stachiw, Joe T.R. Clarke, Georges‐Étienne Rivard

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Inherited Metabolic Disease · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLysosomal Storage Disorders Research
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalUniversity of TorontoCentre Hospitalier Universitaire Sainte-JustineMount Sinai Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConcordanceSiblingEnzyme replacement therapyDiseaseGenotypeGeneticsGlucocerebrosidaseGenotype-phenotype distinctionPhenotypeClinical phenotypeBiologyMedicineGenePathologyPsychologyDevelopmental psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Although many mutations of the GBA gene have been described as causing Gaucher disease, there is generally poor correlation between genotype and phenotype, with a few exceptions. However, most previous reports of genotype-phenotype correlation have involved unrelated individuals, who, even if they share the same mutations, are not as genetically close as siblings. We have studied 24 groups (mostly pairs) of Canadian siblings with type I (non-neuronopathic) Gaucher disease. Since most Canadian provinces have adopted similar criteria for instituting enzyme replacement therapy (ERT), the age at which ERT is begun can serve as a rough surrogate for disease severity, and concordance (or lack of concordance) can be examined between siblings. In 14 of the 24 sibling families, there was sibling concordance: either both siblings were not on ERT, or both were on ERT and had begun at roughly the same age. In these families, there was also much similarity in the clinical features of the disease between siblings. In the other 10 families there was lack of sibling concordance, with only one sibling receiving ERT (or, in one family with three affected siblings, two of three on ERT). In these families, there was also much discrepancy between siblings in the clinical features (as might be expected in a setting where the guidelines for starting ERT are relatively uniform). Possible reasons for the discordances between siblings include macro-environmental and microenvironmental differences. The latter may include micro-environments at the level of the cell (e.g. lysosomal pH, alternative substrates) or at the level of the chromosome (contiguous genes, modifier genes, neutral polymorphisms in GBA).

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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 score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score0.816

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.281 · 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

Citations43
Published2004
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Inherited Metabolic DiseaseSame topicLysosomal Storage Disorders ResearchFrench-language works237,207