MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2070595851 · doi:10.1089/gte.2006.10.229

Strategy for Comprehensive Molecular Testing for Duchenne and Becker Muscular Dystrophies

2006· article· en· W2070595851 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueGenetic Testing · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMuscle Physiology and Disorders
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGene duplicationExonGeneticsDuchenne muscular dystrophyGeneMultiplex ligation-dependent probe amplificationGenetic testingBiologyMultiplex polymerase chain reactionMuscular dystrophyCoding regionIntronCopy-number variationgenomic DNAPolymerase chain reactionGenome

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Comprehensive molecular testing for mutations in the DMD gene causing Duchenne and Becker muscular dystrophy (DMD/BMD) is challenging because of the large size of the gene and the variety of mutation types. There is an increasing demand for comprehensive DMD gene molecular testing, including deletion/duplication testing of 79 exons and direct sequencing of the 14-kb coding region from genomic DNA, to provide confirmation of clinical diagnoses in affected patients and to determine carrier risk for family members. To determine an efficient strategy to prioritize patients for comprehensive molecular testing of the DMD gene, we tested a consecutive cohort of 165 males referred over a 4-year period because of a suspicion of DMD or BMD using: (1) a new quantitative multiplex polymerase chain reaction (PCR) assay designed to detect deletions or duplications in all exons of the gene and the brain promoter and (2) direct sequencing of the coding region and intron/exon boundaries. For the patients being tested because of a suspicion of DMD, deletion/duplication testing followed by direct sequencing detected pathogenic mutations in 98% (106/108 total patients). However, of the patients tested because of a suspicion of BMD, only 60% (34/57 total patients) had causative mutations identified, all of which were deletions or duplications. Our results suggest that direct genomic sequence analysis of the DMD gene is a useful addition to deletion/duplication testing for diagnosis of DMD, but does not provide an improved sensitivity compared to deletion/duplication analysis alone for the diagnosis of BMD. In addition, due to the relatively common finding of single exon deletions and duplications (22%, 27 of 125 total patients with deletions/duplications), methods to examine all exons of the gene for deletions/duplications should be used as the initial molecular quantitative test for DMD and BMD.

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 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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.555
Threshold uncertainty score0.836

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.233 · 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