The curious case of phenocopies in families with genetic Parkinson's disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Monogenic forms of Parkinson's disease account for ∼3% of all "idiopathic" Parkinson's disease. With reduced penetrance in dominant forms and manifesting heterozygotes in recessive forms of Parkinson's disease, it has been well recognized that inheritance patterns do not always follow classic Mendelian genetics. A novel twist to the puzzle is the presence of phenocopies (i.e., family members with the same clinical syndrome as the mutation carriers, but lacking the familial mutation). We reviewed all pedigrees published between 1997 and 2009 with α-synuclein, leucine-rich repeat kinase 2, Parkin, or PTEN-induced kinase 1 mutations with at least 2 affected individuals and known genetic status for the possible presence of phenocopies. Of 537 patients with clinical Parkinson's disease in 160 families meeting our inclusion criteria, 27 patients (5.0%) from 23 families (14.4%) were phenocopies. Phenocopies represented 3.8% of all blood relatives reported in the pedigrees containing phenocopies and an estimated 1.3% of all blood relatives in all pedigrees included. Both of these rates exceeded age-specific prevalences of Parkinson's disease. In 4 families, the phenocopy was explained by another known mutation: In 2 pedigrees, a monogenic cause was likely; in another 2, secondary parkinsonism was suspected; and in the remaining 15 families, "sporadic Parkinson's disease" was suggested as the cause of disease in the phenocopy. The unexpectedly high number of phenocopies of mostly unknown origin within families with a seemingly known etiology of Parkinson's disease adds another level of complexity to genetic research of Parkinson's disease, as well as to the interpretation of genetic testing results in the clinical diagnostic setting.
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 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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".