MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2030456544 · doi:10.1182/blood-2013-07-517938

Leukocyte cell-derived chemotaxin 2 (LECT2)–associated amyloidosis is a frequent cause of hepatic amyloidosis in the United States

2014· article· en· W2030456544 on OpenAlexaff
Oana Madalina Mereuta, Jason D. Theis, Julie A. Vrana, Mark E. Law, Karen L. Grogg, Surendra Dasari, Vishal S. Chandan, Tsung‐Teh Wu, Víctor H. Jiménez‐Zepeda, Rafaël Fonseca, Angela Dispenzieri, Paul J. Kurtin, Ahmet Doǧan

Bibliographic record

VenueBlood · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicAmyloidosis: Diagnosis, Treatment, Outcomes
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAmyloidosisMedicinePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Using laser microdissection and mass spectrometry (MS)-based proteomics, we subtyped amyloid deposits from 130 cases of hepatic amyloidosis. Although we confirmed that immunoglobulin light chain amyloidosis was the most frequent cause of hepatic amyloidosis, leukocyte cell-derived chemotaxin 2 (LECT2) amyloidosis (ALect2) accounted for 25% of cases. This novel finding was associated with Hispanic ancestry, incidental discovery of amyloid in liver specimens sampled for other unrelated conditions, and a characteristic pattern of hepatic amyloid deposition. Although ALect2 patients had a common LECT2 polymorphism, pathogenic mutations were not discovered, suggesting that constitutive or compensatory LECT2 overexpression led to ALect2 deposition. These findings indicate that ALect2 is a common cause of hepatic amyloidosis in the population of the United States, and subtyping hepatic amyloid deposits by an accurate analytic method such as MS is required for optimal clinical management of hepatic amyloidosis patients and to avoid incorrect and unnecessarily toxic therapies.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.399
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.224 · 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.

Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations88
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBloodSame topicAmyloidosis: Diagnosis, Treatment, OutcomesFrench-language works237,207