<i>CRB1</i>Heterozygotes with Regional Retinal Dysfunction: Implications for Genetic Testing of Leber Congenital Amaurosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To test human CRB1 heterozygotes for possible clinical or functional retinal changes and to evaluate whether a patient with Leber congenital amaurosis (LCA) with CRB1 mutations not consistent with previously described CRB1 phenotypes carried a modifier allele in another LCA gene. METHODS: Seven unrelated heterozygous carriers of CRB1 mutations underwent phenotyping by full eye examinations (indirect ophthalmoscopy and slit lamp biomicroscopy) and functional testing (standard full-field electroretinography [ERG] and multifocal ERG). For genotyping of the LCA patients and their parents, denaturing high-performance liquid chromatography (dHPLC) analyses were performed, followed by sequence analysis of CRB1, followed by sequence analysis of the AIPL1 and CRX genes to identify a putative modifier effect in a patient with an atypical CRB1 phenotype. RESULTS: Reduced full-field ERG b-wave amplitudes were observed with scotopic -2 dB flash (140 microV; P < 0.05), normal full-field cone ERGs, and significant regional retinal dysfunction on mfERG in five of seven carriers of CRB1 mutations. A known AIPL1 mutation (p. R302L) was identified as a potential modifier allele in a patient with LCA carrying two CRB1 mutations and with a prominent maculopathy. CONCLUSIONS: In human heterozygotes of CRB1 mutations (parents of offspring with LCA), distinctive regional retinal dysfunctions were found by multifocal ERG measurements that were consistent with the focal histologic abnormalities reported for the two CRB1 knockout mice models. This phenotypic finding may identify CRB1 carriers and point to the causal gene defect in affected LCA offspring, significantly facilitating the molecular diagnostic process. Evidence suggests a modifier allele in AIPL1 in a patient with LCA with prominent atrophic macular lesions and homozygous defects in CRB1.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".