The mutational spectrum of type 1 von Willebrand disease: results from a Canadian cohort study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In order to evaluate the changes within the VWF gene that might contribute to the pathogenesis of type 1 von Willebrand disease (VWD), a large multicenter Canadian study was undertaken. We present data from the sequence analysis of the VWF gene in 123 type 1 VWD index cases and their families. We have identified putative mutations within the VWF gene in 63% (n = 78) of index cases, leaving 37% (n = 45) with no identified changes. These changes comprise 50 different putative mutations: 31 (62%) missense mutations, 8 (16%) changes involving the VWF transcriptional regulatory region, 5 (10%) small deletions/insertions, 5 (10%) splicing consensus sequence mutations, and 1 nonsense mutation. Twenty-one of the index cases had more than one putative VWF mutation identified. We were somewhat more likely to identify putative mutations in cases with lower VWF levels, and the contribution of other factors, such as ABO blood group, seems more important in milder cases. Taken as a whole, our data support a complex spectrum of molecular pathology resulting in type 1 VWD. In more severe cases, genetic changes are common within the VWF gene and are highly penetrant. In milder cases, the genetic determinants are more complex and involve factors outside of the VWF gene.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".