MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2142429430 · doi:10.1001/archneur.57.10.1454

Novel Presenilin 1 Mutations Associated With Early Onset of Dementia in a Family With Both Early-Onset and Late-Onset Alzheimer Disease

2000· article· en· W2142429430 on OpenAlexaff
Gayatria Devi, Alexandra Fotiou, Darlene Jyrinji, Benjamin Tycko, Steve DeArmand, Ekaterina Rogaeva, Helena Medieros, Yan Liang, Antonio Orlacchio, Jennifer Williamson, Peter St George‐Hyslop, Richard Mayeux

Bibliographic record

VenueArchives of Neurology · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAlzheimer's disease research and treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNational Institute on Aging
KeywordsPresenilinProbandDementiaAge of onsetMyoclonusFamily historyDiseaseEarly-onset Alzheimer's diseaseAlzheimer's diseaseMedicineMutationGeneticsPediatricsPsychiatryBiologyInternal medicineGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Two children of an adult with early-onset, autopsy-confirmed Alzheimer disease (AD) developed dementia in their late 20s and were subsequently found to have novel mutations in codon 434 of the presenilin 1 (PS1) gene on chromosome 14, a G-to-T substitution at nucleotide 1548 and a C-to-G substitution at nucleotide 1549. The younger of the 2 children had AD confirmed at postmortem examination. The disease course in these 3 individuals was characterized by cognitive and behavioral problems accompanied by myoclonus, seizures, and aphasia within 5 years after onset. Two grandparents had clinically diagnosed AD with stroke beginning at ages 78 and 66 years, but neither had a PS1 mutation. No other living family member was demented, nor did any other family member have the PS1 mutation. We conclude that the affected parent of the proband was a likely recent founder for these novel mutations in PS1. The family demonstrates the clinical and genetic heterogeneity of AD. Arch Neurol. 2000;57:1454-1457

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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.645

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.251 · 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

Citations43
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArchives of NeurologySame topicAlzheimer's disease research and treatmentsFrench-language works237,207