MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2161144285 · doi:10.1001/archneur.62.2.314

Two Novel CACNA1A Gene Mutations Associated With Episodic Ataxia Type 2 and Interictal Dystonia

2005· article· en· W2161144285 on OpenAlexaff
Sian Spacey, Luke A. Materek, Blajez I Szczygielski, Thomas D. Bird

Bibliographic record

VenueArchives of Neurology · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicGenetic Neurodegenerative Diseases
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDystoniaGeneticsMutationAtaxiaMedicineParoxysmal dyskinesiaGeneBiologyDiseaseDyskinesiaInternal medicineParkinson's diseasePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Episodic ataxia type 2 (EA2) is an autosomal dominant condition that results from mutations in the CACNA1A gene. It is characterized by episodes of ataxia and nystagmus that typically last hours. OBJECTIVE: To describe the clinical and genetic features of 2 unrelated patients who developed EA2 in childhood and late-onset dystonia. DESIGN: Pedigree study. SETTING: University academic teaching hospital. PATIENTS: Two unrelated patients with childhood-onset EA2 and adult-onset dystonia were identified through a neurogenetics clinic. The CACNA1A gene was screened by heteroduplex analysis and sequencing for mutations. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Mutations in the CACNA1A gene. RESULTS: Novel mutations in the pore-forming subunit of the P/Q-type calcium channels were found in both pedigrees. None of the family members carried an expansion of the CAG sequence that is found in the carboxy terminus of the CACNA1A gene. CONCLUSIONS: Truncating mutations are the most common mutations to cause EA2. We have identified 2 novel truncating mutations that are associated with interictal dystonia. The dystonia is a late feature in this disease and may be a manifestation of a degenerative cerebellar process.

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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.305
Threshold uncertainty score0.563

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 studies0.0000.001
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.240 · 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

Citations91
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArchives of NeurologySame topicGenetic Neurodegenerative DiseasesFrench-language works237,207