MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2126068237 · doi:10.1007/s10545-007-0700-1

Unsuccessful treatment attempt: Cord blood stem cell transplantation in a patient with Niemann–Pick disease type A

2007· article· en· W2126068237 on OpenAlexaff
Chantal F. Morel, Adam Gassas, John Doyle, Joe T.R. Clarke

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Inherited Metabolic Disease · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLysosomal Storage Disorders Research
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick Children
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHepatosplenomegalyFailure to thriveHypotoniaNiemann–Pick diseaseMedicineNiemann–Pick disease, type CTransplantationCord bloodAcid sphingomyelinaseDiseasePediatricsSurgeryInternal medicineSphingomyelinGastroenterologyPathologyCholesterol

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Niemann-Pick disease type A (NP-A; OMIM 257200) is an autosomal recessive lysosomal storage disorder caused by deficiency of acid sphingomyelinase and resulting in accumulation of sphingomyelin, unesterified cholesterol, and other complex lipids in many tissues. It is characterized by failure to thrive, hepatosplenomegaly, and a rapidly progressive neurodegenerative course culminating in death by 3 years of age. There is no known effective treatment. We report the case of a prenatally diagnosed girl who underwent cord blood stem cell transplantation (CBSCT) at 3 months of age. She was neurologically intact at the time of CBSCT. Hepatosplenomegaly, was detected at 6 weeks of age; the splenomegaly resolved following CBSCT. Recovery was complicated by graft-versus-host disease. She subsequently developed and continues to show marked global developmental delay, generalized hypotonia, and signs of neurological regression, despite continued engraftment. Bilateral cherry red spots were detected at 10 months of age, 7 months post-CBSCT. Although she is doing better than her affected brother, she shows little overall benefit from CBSCT.

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 score0.271
Threshold uncertainty score0.827

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.268 · 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

Citations12
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Inherited Metabolic DiseaseSame topicLysosomal Storage Disorders ResearchFrench-language works237,207