Exploring the “two‐hit hypothesis” in NF2: Tests of two‐hit and three‐hit models of vestibular schwannoma development
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Neurofibromatosis 2 (NF2) is a genetic disease that occurs in approximately 1 in 40,000 live births. Almost all affected individuals develop bilateral tumors of Schwann cells that surround the vestibular nerves; these tumors are known as vestibular schwannomas (VS). Evidence from molecular genetic studies suggests that at least two mutations are involved in formation of VS in patients with NF2. Several authors proposed probabilistic models for this process in other tumors, and showed that such models are consistent with incidence data. We evaluated two different probabilistic models for a "2-hit" hypothesis for VS development in NF2 patients, and we present results from fitting these models to incidence data. Molecular evidence does not exclude the possibility that additional hits are necessary for the development of VS, and we also assessed a "3-hit" model for tumor formation. The "3-hit" model fits the data marginally better than one of the "2-hit" models and much better than the other "2-hit" model. Our findings suggest that more than two mutations may be necessary for VS development in NF2 patients.
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 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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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 it