MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2096855204 · doi:10.1212/wnl.0b013e3181f96175

Clinical features of facioscapulohumeral muscular dystrophy 2

2010· article· en· W2096855204 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Jessica C. de Greef, Richard J.L.F. Lemmers, Pilar Camaño, John Day, Sabrina Sacconi, M. Dunand, Baziel G.M. van Engelen, Sari Kiuru‐Enari, G.W. Padberg, Alberto L. Rosa, Claude Desnuelle, Simone Spuler, Mark A. Tarnopolsky, Shannon L. Venance, Rune R. Frants, Silvère M. van der Maarel, Rabi Tawil

Bibliographic record

VenueNeurology · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMuscle Physiology and Disorders
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institute of Neurological Disorders and StrokeCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchNational Institutes of HealthGilead SciencesHersenstichtingNederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk OnderzoekJain FoundationDeutsche ForschungsgemeinschaftNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversiteit LeidenLeids Universitair Medisch CentrumEuropean CommissionNational Center for Research ResourcesMuscular Dystrophy AssociationFSH SocietyNational Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin DiseasesCalifornia HIV/AIDS Research Program
KeywordsFacioscapulohumeral muscular dystrophyMedicineDNA methylationInternal medicineDiseaseGenotypeMuscular dystrophyBioinformaticsOncologyGeneticsBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: In some 5% of patients with facioscapulohumeral muscular dystrophy (FSHD), no D4Z4 repeat contraction on chromosome 4q35 is observed. Such patients, termed patients with FSHD2, show loss of DNA methylation and heterochromatin markers at the D4Z4 repeat that are similar to patients with D4Z4 contractions (FSHD1). This commonality suggests that a change in D4Z4 chromatin structure unifies FSHD1 and FSHD2. The aim of our study was to critically evaluate the clinical features in patients with FSHD2 in order to establish whether these patients are phenotypically identical to FSHD1 and to establish the effects of the (epi-) genotype on the phenotype. METHODS: This cross-sectional study studied 33 patients with FSHD2 from 27 families, the largest cohort described to date. All patients were clinically assessed using a standardized clinical evaluation form. Genotype analysis was performed by pulsed field gel electrophoresis and PCR; D4Z4 methylation was studied by methylation-sensitive Southern blot analysis. RESULTS: FSHD2 is identical to FSHD1 in its clinical presentation. Notable differences include a higher incidence (67%) of sporadic cases and the absence of gender differences in disease severity in FSHD2. Overall, average disease severity in FSHD2 was similar to that reported in FSHD1 and was not influenced by D4Z4 repeat size. In FSHD2, a small effect of the degree of hypomethylation on disease severity was observed. CONCLUSIONS: Clinically, patients with FSHD2 are indistinguishable from patients with FSHD1. The present data suggest that FSHD1 and FSHD2 are the result of the same pathophysiologic process.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.923
Threshold uncertainty score0.396

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.267 · 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

Citations180
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeurologySame topicMuscle Physiology and DisordersFrench-language works237,207