MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Quantitative measurement of FMRP in blood platelets as a new screening test for fragile X syndrome

2011· article· en· W2150200318 on OpenAlexaff
Maxime Lessard, A Chouiali, Régen Drouin, Guillaume Sébire, François Corbin

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Genetics · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetics and Neurodevelopmental Disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFragile X syndromeFMR1Wechsler Adult Intelligence ScaleIntelligence quotientPopulationFragile xPlateletAutismVineland Adaptive Behavior ScaleReceiver operating characteristicBiologyGeneticsCognitionPsychologyGeneMedicineInternal medicineDevelopmental psychologyNeuroscienceImmunology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The fragile X syndrome usually results from CGG repeats expansion and methylation of the FMR1 gene leading to the absence of expression of its encoded protein, fragile X mental retardation protein (FMRP). Therefore, its diagnosis is traditionally based on the detection of these molecular alterations. As an alternative, FMRP-based screening methods have been proposed over the years. Most of them are based on immunohistochemistry analyses applied to a restricted number of lymphocytes (100) or hair roots (10-20) with limited diagnosis potential. In this study, we describe a truly quantitative approach using a new model, the blood platelet, which can be recovered easily with very high purity (99.9%). FMRP levels in platelets were first measured in a control population (n = 124) and reference values were established. FMRP measurements were also performed in confirmed fragile X subjects. Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis has shown that our test can easily discriminate fragile X males and females from controls (area under curve, AUC = 0.948). Cognitive functions were also assessed in these individuals using age-specific Wechsler Intelligence Scales for Children and the Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scales. A proportional relationship between FMRP levels, intelligence quotient and adaptive behavior was observed among fragile X individuals, suggesting that our test would be able to detect fragile X cases and may predict cognitive functions.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.322
Threshold uncertainty score0.708

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.137
GPT teacher head0.343
Teacher spread0.206 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations39
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical GeneticsSame topicGenetics and Neurodevelopmental DisordersFrench-language works237,207