MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2074510121 · doi:10.1002/ajmg.a.33894

Identification of <i>SPRED1</i> deletions using RT‐PCR, multiplex ligation‐dependent probe amplification and quantitative PCR

2011· article· en· W2074510121 on OpenAlexaff
Emily Spencer, Julia Davis, Fady M. Mikhail, Chuanhua Fu, Raymon Vijzelaar, Elaine H. Zackai, Holly Feret, M. Stephen Meyn, Andrea Shugar, Gary A. Bellus, Kristina Kocsis, Sirpa Kivirikko, Minna Pöyhönen, Ludwine Messiaen

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Medical Genetics Part A · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicVascular Malformations and Hemangiomas
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick Children
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMultiplex ligation-dependent probe amplificationExonProbandGeneticsPoint mutationBiologyMolecular biologyMutationGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Legius syndrome, is a recently identified autosomal dominant disorder caused by loss of function mutations in the SPRED1 gene, with individuals mainly presenting with multiple café-au-lait macules (CALM), freckling and macrocephaly. So far, only SPRED1 point mutations have been identified as the cause of this syndrome. To determine if copy number changes (CNCs) are a cause of Legius syndrome, we have used a Multiplex Ligation-dependent Probe Amplification (MLPA) assay covering all SPRED1 exons in a cohort of 510 NF1-negative patients presenting with multiple CALMs with or without freckling, but no other NF1 diagnostic signs. Four different deletions were identified by MLPA and confirmed by quantitative PCR, reverse transcriptase PCR and/or array CGH: a deletion of exon 1 and the SPRED1 promoter region in a proband and two first-degree relatives; a deletion of the entire SPRED1 gene in a sporadic patient; a deletion of exon 2-6 in a proband and her father; and an ∼6.6 Mb deletion on chromosome 15 that spans SPRED1 in a sporadic patient. Deletions account for ∼10% of the 40 detected SPRED1 mutations in this cohort of 510 individuals. These results indicate the need for dosage analysis to complement sequencing-based SPRED1 mutation analyses.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.469
Threshold uncertainty score0.375

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.066
GPT teacher head0.327
Teacher spread0.261 · 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

Citations19
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Medical Genetics Part ASame topicVascular Malformations and HemangiomasFrench-language works237,207