MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2060443143 · doi:10.1182/blood-2009-07-233965

Persons with Quebec platelet disorder have a tandem duplication of PLAU, the urokinase plasminogen activator gene

2009· article· en· W2060443143 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Andrew D. Paterson, Johanna M. Rommens, Bhupinder Bharaj, Jessica Blavignac, Isidro Wong, Maria Diamandis, John S. Waye, Georges E. Rivard, Catherine P.M. Hayward

Bibliographic record

VenueBlood · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicProtease and Inhibitor Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsCentre Hospitalier Universitaire Sainte-JustineHospital for Sick ChildrenMcMaster UniversityUniversity of Toronto
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsGene duplicationTandem exon duplicationPlateletActivator (genetics)GeneGeneticsMedicineUrokinaseBiologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Quebec platelet disorder (QPD) is an autosomal dominant bleeding disorder linked to a region on chromosome 10 that includes PLAU, the urokinase plasminogen activator gene. QPD increases urokinase plasminogen activator mRNA levels, particularly during megakaryocyte differentiation, without altering expression of flanking genes. Because PLAU sequence changes were excluded as the cause of this bleeding disorder, we investigated whether the QPD mutation involved PLAU copy number variation. All 38 subjects with QPD had a direct tandem duplication of a 78-kb genomic segment that includes PLAU. This mutation was specific to QPD as it was not present in any unaffected family members (n = 114), unrelated French Canadians (n = 221), or other persons tested (n = 90). This new information on the genetic mutation will facilitate diagnostic testing for QPD and studies of its pathogenesis and prevalence. QPD is the first bleeding disorder to be associated with a gene duplication event and a PLAU mutation.

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 categoriesnone
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.325

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.206
Teacher spread0.200 · 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 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

Citations106
Published2009
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBloodSame topicProtease and Inhibitor MechanismsFrench-language works237,207