MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2158613256 · doi:10.1681/asn.2009020162

Family History of Renal Disease Severity Predicts the Mutated Gene in ADPKD

2009· article· en· W2158613256 on OpenAlexafffund
Moumita Barua, Onur Çil, Andrew D. Paterson, Kairon Wang, Ning He, Elizabeth Dicks, Patrick S. Parfrey, York Pei

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the American Society of Nephrology · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetic and Kidney Cyst Diseases
Canadian institutionsUniversity Health NetworkMemorial University of NewfoundlandHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of Toronto
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchHealth CanadaCanada Research ChairsKidney Foundation of Canada
KeywordsPKD1Autosomal dominant polycystic kidney diseaseRenal functionMedicineInternal medicineDiseaseFamily historyPolycystic kidney diseaseKidney diseaseGenotypeBiologyGeneGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mutations of PKD1 and PKD2 account for 85 and 15% of cases of autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease (ADPKD), respectively. Clinically, PKD1 is more severe than PKD2, with a median age at ESRD of 53.4 versus 72.7 yr. In this study, we explored whether a family history of renal disease severity predicts the mutated gene in ADPKD. We examined the renal function (estimated GFR and age at ESRD) of 484 affected members from 90 families who had ADPKD and whose underlying genotype was known. We found that the presence of at least one affected family member who developed ESRD at age < or =55 was highly predictive of a PKD1 mutation (positive predictive value 100%; sensitivity 72%). In contrast, the presence of at least one affected family member who continued to have sufficient renal function or developed ESRD at age >70 was highly predictive of a PKD2 mutation (positive predictive value 100%; sensitivity 74%). These data suggest that close attention to the family history of renal disease severity in ADPKD may provide a simple means of predicting the mutated gene, which has prognostic implications.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.954
Threshold uncertainty score0.305

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.221 · 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

Citations131
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the American Society of NephrologySame topicGenetic and Kidney Cyst DiseasesFrench-language works237,207