MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2095208613 · doi:10.1089/hum.2008.162

Efficient and Fast Functional Screening of Microdystrophin Constructs <i>In Vivo</i> and <i>In Vitro</i> for Therapy of Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy

2009· article· en· W2095208613 on OpenAlexaff
Louise Helskov Jørgensen, Nancy Larochelle, Kristian Orlopp, Patrick Dunant, Roy Dudley, Rolf Stucka, Christian Thirion, Maggie C. Walter, Steven H. Laval, Hanns Lochmüller

Bibliographic record

VenueHuman Gene Therapy · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMuscle Physiology and Disorders
Canadian institutionsMontreal Neurological Institute and HospitalMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDuchenne muscular dystrophyDystrophinExon skippingMuscular dystrophyGenetic enhancementIn silicoTransgeneBiologyComputational biologyExonIn vivoGeneIn vitroBioinformaticsGeneticsAlternative splicing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD) is an X-linked, lethal genetic disorder affecting the skeletal muscle compartment, and is caused by mutation(s) in the dystrophin gene. Gene delivery of microdystrophin constructs using adeno-associated virus (AAV) and antisense-mediated exon skipping restoring the genetic reading frame are two of the most promising therapeutic strategies for DMD. Both approaches use microdystrophin proteins either directly as a desired construct for gene delivery, using the capacity-limited AAV vectors, or as the therapeutic outcome of gene splicing. Although functionality of the resulting artificial dystrophin proteins can be predicted in silico, experimental evidence usually obtained in transgenic mice is required before human trials. However, the enormous number of potential constructs makes screening assays for dystrophin protein function in vitro and in vivo highly desirable. Here we present data showing that functionality of microdystrophins can be assessed using relatively simple and fast techniques.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.040
Threshold uncertainty score0.551

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.221 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations16
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHuman Gene TherapySame topicMuscle Physiology and DisordersFrench-language works237,207