MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2123580994 · doi:10.1093/europace/eum271

The occurrence of Brugada syndrome and isolated cardiac conductive disease in the same family could be due to a single SCN5A mutation or to the accidental association of both diseases

2007· article· en· W2123580994 on OpenAlexaff
Isabelle Six, J.-S. Hermida, Hai Huang, Laëtitia Gouas, Véronique Fressart, N. Benammar, Bernard Hainque, I. Denjoy, Mohamed Chahine, Pascale Guicheney

Bibliographic record

VenueEP Europace · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac electrophysiology and arrhythmias
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
FundersGIS-Institut des Maladies Rares
KeywordsBrugada syndromeProbandMedicineMutationFamily historyGeneticsPhenotypeGene mutationGeneInternal medicineBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AIMS: The distinct cardiac arrhythmia diseases, Brugada syndrome (BS) and isolated cardiac conduction disease (ICCD) are caused by heterozygous mutations in the SCN5A gene. Previous studies have demonstrated an intriguing association between ICCD and BS with the same mutation in the SCN5A gene. METHODS AND RESULTS: The proband of a multigenerational family presented BS and a familial history of sudden death. We performed clinical evaluations in family members including drug testing and screening for SCN5A mutations. Based on electrocardiogram features, we identified four individuals with BS, two with ICCD and one compatible with both. For five individuals, one with BS and ICCD, three with BS and one with ICCD, we characterized a heterozygous C- to T- mutation at position 4313 (P1438L) in the SCN5A gene. Expression studies of the P1438L mutation showed non-functional channels. The proband's father with the BS phenotype was not a carrier of the new SCN5A mutation. CONCLUSION: We report the case of a family with BS and/or ICCD and describe a novel mutation, the P1438L SCN5A mutation. In this family, the occurrence of BS and ICCD could be due to this single mutation but also to the accidental association of both diseases.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.579
Threshold uncertainty score0.229

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.264 · 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

Citations15
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEP EuropaceSame topicCardiac electrophysiology and arrhythmiasFrench-language works237,207