MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2289292318 · doi:10.1002/mgg3.208

Analysis of a large choroideremia dataset does not suggest a preference for inclusion of certain genotypes in future trials of gene therapy

2016· article· en· W2289292318 on OpenAlexafffund
Paul R. Freund, Yuri V. Sergeev, Ian M. MacDonald

Bibliographic record

VenueMolecular Genetics & Genomic Medicine · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicRetinal Development and Disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNational Eye InstituteCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchAlberta Innovates - Health SolutionsNational Institutes of HealthFoundation Fighting Blindness
KeywordsChoroideremiaMedicineGenetic enhancementInclusion (mineral)BioinformaticsPreferenceGenotypeClinical trialGeneticsComputational biologyGeneBiologyPsychologyMathematicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Choroideremia (CHM) is an X-linked degeneration of the retinal pigment epithelium, photoreceptors, and choroid, which causes nyctalopia and progressive constriction of visual fields leading to blindness. The CHM gene encodes Rab escort protein 1 (REP-1). In this work, we reviewed the phenotypes and genotypes of affected males with the purpose of understanding the functional effects of CHM mutations and their relationship with the phenotypes. METHODS: A retrospective review of 128 affected males was performed analyzing the onset of symptoms, visual acuity, and visual fields with respect to their mutations in the CHM gene. RESULTS: In rank order, reflecting data from this report, the most common mutations found in the CHM gene were nonsense mutations (41%), exon deletions (37%), and splice sites (14%) associated with a loss of functional protein. In the pool of 106 CHM mutations, we discovered four novel missense mutations (c.238C>T; p.L80F, c.819G>T; p.Q273H, c.1327A>G; p.M443V, and c.1370C>T; p.L457P) predicted to be severe changes affecting protein stability and folding with the effect similar to that of other types of mutations. No significant genotype-phenotype correlation was found with respect to the onset of nyctalopia, the onset of other visual symptoms, visual acuity, or width of visual fields. CONCLUSION: There is no evidence to support exclusion of CHM patients from clinical trials based on their genotypes or any potential genotype-phenotype correlations.

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)0.030
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.047
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 score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.161

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0300.047
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.003
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.024
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.285 · 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

Citations60
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMolecular Genetics & Genomic MedicineSame topicRetinal Development and DisordersFrench-language works237,207