Prevalence of inherited neurotransmitter disorders in patients with movement disorders and epilepsy: a retrospective cohort study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Inherited neurotransmitter disorders are primary defects of neurotransmitter metabolism. The main purpose of this retrospective cohort study was to identify prevalence of inherited neurotransmitter disorders. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study does not have inclusion criteria; rather included all patients who underwent cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) homovanillic and 5-hydroxyindol acetic acid measurements. Patients with CSF neurotransmitter investigations suggestive of an inherited neurotransmitter disorder and patients with normal or non-diagnostic CSF neurotransmitter investigations underwent direct sequencing of single gene disorders. RESULTS: There were 154 patients between October 2004 and July 2013. Four patients were excluded due to their diagnosis prior to this study dates. Two major clinical feature categories of patients who underwent lumbar puncture were movement disorders or epilepsy in our institution. Twenty out of the 150 patients (13.3%) were diagnosed with a genetic disorder including inherited neurotransmitter disorders (6 patients) (dihydropteridine reductase, 6-pyruvoyl-tetrahydropterin synthase, guanosine triphosphate cyclohydrolase I, tyrosine hydroxylase, pyridoxine dependent epilepsy due to mutations in the ALDH7A1 gene and pyridoxamine-5-phosphate oxidase deficiencies) and non-neurotransmitter disorders (14 patients). CONCLUSION: Prevalence of inherited neurotransmitter disorders was 4% in our retrospective cohort study. Eight out of the 150 patients (5.3%) had one of the treatable inherited metabolic disorders with favorable short-term neurodevelopmental outcomes, highlighting the importance of an early and specific diagnosis. Whole exome or genome sequencing might shed light to unravel underlying genetic defects of new inherited neurotransmitter disorders in near future.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".