The G20210A Prothrombin Polymorphism Is not Associated with Increased Thromboembolic Risk in a Large Protein C Deficient Kindred
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Likelihood analysis was used to test the effect of the G20210A prothrombin mutation and the His107Pro protein C mutation (resulting from a C insertion) on thrombosis status and prothrombin level in a large kindred of French Canadian descent with type I protein C deficiency. Genotypes were available on 279 pedigree members or their spouses. Of this total, 36 pedigree members were heterozygous for the G20210A variant and one pedigree member was homozygous for G20210A, while 64 were heterozygous for the His107Pro protein C mutation. The factor V Leiden mutation (Arg506Gln) was observed in only one of 181 tested family members. Objectively verified thrombosis was present in 26 of the 279 pedigree members. Thrombosis was suspected in an additional 19 pedigree members. The transmission disequilibrium test of Spielman, 1996, as extended to pedigrees, was used to test for excess transmission of G20210A or His107Pro to thrombosis cases, with transmission of 0.5 specifying no effect. Although the His107Pro mutation was over transmitted (0.837 +/- 0.075 p <0.001) to thrombosis cases in this pedigree, the G20210A variant was not (0.491 +/- 0.130 NS). Measured genotype analysis was used to examine a total of 184 individuals for the relationship between prothrombin level and both the G20210A variant and thrombosis. The G20210A variant increased prothrombin level from 97 +/- 2% to 124 +/- 4% (p <0.0001), but thrombosis status was not associated with any additional increase in prothrombin level. Thus, in a large thrombophilic, protein C deficient kindred, with the G20210A variant present in a proportion (13%) far higher than the general Caucasian population (approximately 2%), neither the presence of the variant nor the plasma concentration of prothrombin were associated with increased risk for thrombosis. These findings contrast with those of others who have established the G20210A variant as a thrombophilic risk factor; and emphasize the complex nature of the multigenic pathogenesis of thrombophilia.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".