Serum GH response to pharmacological stimuli and physical exercise in two siblings with two new inactivating mutations in the GH-releasing hormone receptor gene
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Inactivating mutations of the GH-releasing hormone receptor (GHRHR) gene (GHRHR) cause familial isolated GH deficiency (IGHD) type IB. The GH response to physical exercise (PE) in patients lacking GHRHR has never been studied. We hypothesized that subjects lacking functional GHRHR may be a model to study GH response to PE. DESIGN: We have analyzed peripheral genomic DNA of a family with two sibs affected by IGHD IB for mutations in the GHRHR, studied the patients' GH response to different GH secretagogues and to PE, and examined the morphology of their pituitary gland by magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). METHODS: The GHRHR was analyzed by direct sequencing of the 13 exons, intron-exon boundaries, and of the proximal 327 bp of the promoter region in the index case. The patients' GH response to GHRH and standardized PE was studied twice, using a GH ultrasensitive assay in the second round of testing. RESULTS: Both subjects were compound heterozygotes for two previously undescribed mutations in the GHRHR that are predicted to cause complete lack of functional GHRHR protein: a nonsense mutation in codon 43 (Q43X), and a splice mutation at the beginning of intron 3 (IVS3+1G-->A). MRI showed hypoplasia of their anterior pituitaries. Both subjects had a small but detectable increase in serum GH after maximal PE. CONCLUSIONS: GHRHR mutations need to be considered in IGHD IB patients even in the absence of parental consanguinity, and patients lacking GHRHR may provide a model to study the mechanism by which PE influences GH secretion.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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".