MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2073788769 · doi:10.1002/humu.1124

Thirty-three novel COL1A1 and COL1A2 mutations in patients with osteogenesis imperfecta types I-IV

2001· article· en· W2073788769 on OpenAlexaff
Leanne M. Ward, Liljana Lalic, Peter J. Roughley, Francis H. Glorieux

Bibliographic record

VenueHuman Mutation · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicConnective tissue disorders research
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityShriners Hospitals for Children - Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOsteogenesis imperfectaMissense mutationGeneticsBiologyTransversionHumMutationDentinogenesis imperfectaPhenotypeGeneType I collagenEndocrinologyAnatomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Osteogenesis imperfecta (OI) is a heritable disease of bone characterized by low bone mass and bone fragility. Six different types of OI have been described to date, based on clinical phenotype and histological findings. The genetic defect in many patients with OI types I-IV is due to mutations in the genes encoding type I collagen, while patients with OI types V and VI show no evidence of mutations in the COL1A1/COL1A2 genes. Here we report thirty-three novel mutations in patients with types I-IV OI. Sixteen mutations were in COL1A1 and seventeen were in COL1A2. Most mutations resulted in substitutions for glycine: one of these, a doublet GG>CC transversion, created a unique Gly-->Pro missense mutation in the triple helical domain of COL1A2. Two rare triple helical Gly-->Glu substitutions in COL1A2 are also described. In addition, there were six single-base deletion mutations resulting in frameshifts, seven splice junction mutations, and a 9-bp triple helix insertion associated with a severe (OI II) phenotype. The variety of mutations described in the COL1A1/COL1A2 genes giving rise to an OI phenotype is in accordance with the clinical heterogeneity of the disease. Hum Mutat 17:434, 2001.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.086
Threshold uncertainty score0.378

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.259 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations48
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHuman MutationSame topicConnective tissue disorders researchFrench-language works237,207