Interaction of normal and expanded CAG repeat sizes influences age at onset of Huntington disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Huntington disease (HD) is a neurodegenerative disorder caused by the abnormal expansion of CAG repeats in the HD gene on chromosome 4p16.3. Past studies have shown that the size of expanded CAG repeat is inversely associated with age at onset (AO) of HD. It is not known whether the normal Huntington allele size influences the relation between the expanded repeat and AO of HD. Data collected from two independent cohorts were used to test the hypothesis that the unexpanded CAG repeat interacts with the expanded CAG repeat to influence AO of HD. In the New England Huntington Disease Center Without Walls (NEHD) cohort of 221 HD affected persons and in the HD-MAPS cohort of 533 HD affected persons, we found evidence supporting an interaction between the expanded and unexpanded CAG repeat sizes which influences AO of HD (P = 0.08 and 0.07, respectively). The association was statistically significant when both cohorts were combined (P = 0.012). The estimated heritability of the AO residual was 0.56 after adjustment for normal and expanded repeats and their interaction. An analysis of tertiles of repeats sizes revealed that the effect of the normal allele is seen among persons with large HD repeat sizes (47-83). These findings suggest that an increase in the size of the normal repeat may mitigate the expression of the disease among HD affected persons with large expanded CAG repeats.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".