MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2149077277 · doi:10.3109/10428194.2014.947607

<i>DNMT3A</i>mutations and prognostic significance in childhood acute lymphoblastic leukemia

2014· article· en· W2149077277 on OpenAlexaff
Weijing Li, Chao Gao, Lei Cui, Shuguang Liu, Xiaoxi Zhao, Ruidong Zhang, Min‐Yuan Wu, Huyong Zheng, Guoren Deng, Zhigang Li, Quangeng Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueLeukemia & lymphoma/Leukemia and lymphoma · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAcute Lymphoblastic Leukemia research
Canadian institutionsMinistry of Education and Child Care
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExonMutationMinimal residual diseaseIntronCoding regionMedicineLymphoblastic LeukemiaBiologyCancer researchGeneticsInternal medicineLeukemiaMolecular biologyOncologyGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Little is known about DNMT3A mutations in childhood acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL). We screened for DNMT3A mutations in exon 23 and its adjacent intron regions in diagnostic samples of 201 children with ALL. The cDNA samples from 82 patients were also sequenced to identify other mutations in the entire coding region. DNMT3A mutations were detected in exon 23 and its adjacent intron regions only in five patients (2.5%). There was only one mutation in exon 23 in two patients, respectively. In the other three patients, five intronic mutations were found. None of the mutations was found in the five corresponding complete remission samples. DNMT3A mutations were correlated with higher minimal residual disease at the end of remission induction (p = 0.078). Treatment outcome was obviously worse in patients with DNMT3A mutations than in other patients (p < 0.05). Thus, DNMT3A mutations can be found in a few children with ALL, and may have an adverse impact on prognosis.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.234 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations13
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLeukemia & lymphoma/Leukemia and lymphomaSame topicAcute Lymphoblastic Leukemia researchFrench-language works237,207