Predictors of visual acuity and genotype-phenotype correlates in a cohort of patients with Stargardt disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To assess the genotypic diversity in patients with Stargardt disease and to characterise epidemiological and genotypic predictors of phenotype. METHODS: Retrospective, cross-sectional study of 112 patients with Stargardt disease. We evaluated the correlation between age at presentation, best-corrected visual acuity (BCVA), and ABCA4 genotypes. RESULTS: Mean age at presentation was 30 ± 16 years (range 6-78 years) for the 112 patients of 104 families. 98 of 90 families had a probable molecular diagnosis. We found that BCVA is not related to age of presentation in a linear or polynomial manner; that BCVA of patients presenting in the first decade was significantly worse than those presenting in later decades (p=0.04); that patients who harboured two or more mutations presented earlier and had worse BCVA than those with no or 1 mutation identified by any method of testing (n=112, p=3.29 × 10(-6)) or by full sequencing (n=32, p=0.02); that 16 patients with c.5882G>A allele demonstrated better BCVA than the remaining patients (p=0.01); and that 10 patients with the c.5461-10T>C mutation presented earlier (p=0.02 × 10(-5)) and had more severe disease. CONCLUSIONS: Epidemiological and genotypical findings portend visual prognosis in patients with Stargardt disease. Select sequence variations in ABCA4 may confer a specific phenotype. The present data will help in assessing patients for emerging therapies.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".