MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2090144201 · doi:10.1002/humu.9498

Women heterozygous forNALP7/NLRP7 mutations are at risk for reproductive wastage: report of two novel mutations

2007· article· en· W2090144201 on OpenAlexaff
Jinhua Qian, Catherine Deveault, Rashmi Bagga, Xing Xie, Rima Slim

Bibliographic record

VenueHuman Mutation · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicChild and Adolescent Health
Canadian institutionsMontreal General HospitalMcGill University Health Centre
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsBiologyGeneticsMutationHeterozygote advantageCompound heterozygosityGeneGenotype

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Familial recurrent hydatidiform moles are a rare recessive condition in which molar tissues have biparental contribution to their genome. One maternal locus responsible for this condition has been mapped to 19q13.4 and the causative gene, NALP7, identified (HUGO-approved nomenclature is now NLRP7). Here we report a first stop codon, c.295G>T (p.Glu99X) and a missense mutation, c.1970A>T (p.Asp657Val) in NLRP7 in two sisters with RHMs. We found these two mutations and a previously reported one, c.2078G>C (p.Arg693Pro) in a homozygous state, in males with normal reproductive outcomes. This suggests that NLRP7 is not required for normal spermatogenesis. The mother of the patients is heterozygous for Glu99X and had one stillbirth and three normal pregnancies. Our data on this new family and on heterozygous women from previously reported families indicate that women heterozygous for NLRP7 mutations are at risk for reproductive wastage without the manifestation of molar phenotype.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.080
GPT teacher head0.435
Teacher spread0.355 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations85
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHuman MutationSame topicChild and Adolescent HealthFrench-language works237,207