MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2102262051 · doi:10.1093/brain/awl267

Progranulin gene mutations associated with frontotemporal dementia and progressive non-fluent aphasia

2006· article· en· W2102262051 on OpenAlexaff
Julie S. Snowden, Stuart Pickering‐Brown, Ian R. Mackenzie, Anna Richardson, Anoop Varma, David Neary, David M. A. Mann

Bibliographic record

VenueBrain · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAmyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis Research
Canadian institutionsVancouver General Hospital
FundersMedical Research CouncilMotor Neurone Disease Association
KeywordsFrontotemporal lobar degenerationSemantic dementiaFrontotemporal dementiaPathologyDementiaPathologicalAphasiaGene mutationPrimary progressive aphasiaTau proteinMutationPsychologyMedicineNeuroscienceGeneticsAlzheimer's diseaseBiologyGeneDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Frontotemporal lobar degeneration (FTLD) refers to a focal, non-Alzheimer form of cerebral degeneration that encompasses the distinct clinical syndromes of frontotemporal dementia (FTD), progressive non-fluent aphasia (PNFA) and semantic dementia. Some patients show tau-based pathological changes and in familial cases mutations have been identified in the microtubule-associated protein tau gene (MAPT) on chromosome 17q21. However, many cases are tau-negative, showing instead ubiquitin-immunoreactive (UBQ-ir) neuronal cytoplasmic inclusions and neurites, and in some familial cases UBQ-ir neuronal intranuclear inclusions of a lentiform appearance. Very recently, mutations have been identified in familial cases in the progranulin (PGRN) gene, also on chromosome 17q21. Clinical, pathological and molecular diversity within FTLD highlights the importance of careful examination of clinical-pathological-genetic relationships. This paper reports, for the first time, a clinico-pathological investigation of two FTLD families with PGRN mutations, and compares the clinical characteristics with those of patients studied in the department with MAPT mutations. The clinical profile associated with PGRN mutations constituted, in some patients, a prototypical picture of FTD and in others one of PNFA, both profiles occurring within the same family. Patients with PGRN mutations exhibited phonological deficits, whereas in patients with MAPT mutations language abnormalities, when present in addition to the prominent behavioural disorder, take the form of semantic disturbance. The findings provide compelling evidence for the link between FTD and PNFA, while raising the possibility of identifiable clinical differences between FTLD patients with MAPT and PGRN mutations.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.061
Threshold uncertainty score0.416

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.262 · 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 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

Citations201
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBrainSame topicAmyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis ResearchFrench-language works237,207