MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2125467859 · doi:10.1002/ajmg.1418

Defining the breakpoints of proximal chromosome 14q rearrangements in nine patients using flow-sorted chromosomes

2001· article· en· W2125467859 on OpenAlexaff
Deepak Kamnasaran, Patricia C. O’Brien, Simone Schuffenhauer, Oliver Quarrell, James R. Lupski, Paola Grammatico, Malcolm A. Ferguson-Smith, D.W. Cox

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Medical Genetics · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenomic variations and chromosomal abnormalities
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersMarch of Dimes Foundation
KeywordsChromosomal translocationGeneticsBiologyBreakpointChromosomeLocus (genetics)Chromosome 22Chromosome 21Candidate geneGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The breakpoints of deletions and translocations in the proximal chromosome 14q region were defined in nine patients, four of whom have not been reported previously. The aberrant chromosomes were isolated by flow cytometry and used to map the chromosome 14 deletion or translocation breakpoints. The parental origins of deletions were ascertained as paternal in five cases and maternal in one. With the draft genomic sequence for human chromosome 14 available, gene searches were performed on selected intervals of the 14q11.2-q21 region to identify candidate genes for the observed phenotype in some of those affected. Gain of function of the gene PAX9 on chromosome 14 is a possible candidate for a t(14;18) patient affected with mesomelic bone dysplasia. Furthermore, a compilation of other human chromosome 14q proximal deletion and translocation cases was obtained from a search on cytogenetic databases. These findings suggest a locus for myelofibrosis at chromosome 14q13. This study contributes to useful information for identifying disease genes in this region.

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)0.000
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 score0.092
Threshold uncertainty score0.452

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.244 · 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

Citations39
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Medical GeneticsSame topicGenomic variations and chromosomal abnormalitiesFrench-language works237,207