MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2483116350 · doi:10.1136/jclinpath-2016-203940

Novel germline mutations in the calreticulin gene: implications for the diagnosis of myeloproliferative neoplasms

2016· article· en· W2483116350 on OpenAlexaff
Natasha Szuber, Bruno Lamontagne, Lambert Busque

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Pathology · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMyeloproliferative Neoplasms: Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalHôpital Maisonneuve-Rosemont
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGermlineCalreticulinGermline mutationGeneticsBiologyMutationAlleleExonFrameshift mutationJanus kinase 2Essential thrombocythemiaSomatic cellGeneCancer researchPolycythemia veraImmunology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mutations in the calreticulin (CALR) gene are found in the majority of Janus kinase 2-negative myeloproliferative neoplasms MPN and, thus far, have exclusively been reported as acquired, somatic mutations. We assessed the mutational status of exon 9 of the CALR gene in 2000 blood samples submitted to our centre and identified 12 subjects (0.6%) harbouring distinctive CALR mutations, all with an allelic frequency of 50% and all involving indels occurring as multiples of 3 bp. Buccal cell samples obtained from these patients confirmed the germline nature of the mutations. Importantly, these germline mutations were not diagnostic of MPN. We thus report for the first time the identification and confirmation of germline mutations in CALR distinct from those somatic mutations that define classical MPN. The finding of a non-standard CALR mutation with an allelic frequency of 50% should raise suspicion of the possibility of a germline CALR mutation and these cases investigated further.

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 score0.001
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
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.119
GPT teacher head0.433
Teacher spread0.313 · 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

Citations12
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical PathologySame topicMyeloproliferative Neoplasms: Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207