An Overlapping Case of Alport Syndrome and Thin Basement Membrane Disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We report a case of a 48-year-old male who presented with hematuria of at least 10 years, and has a daughter with hematuria as well. The patient has a history of degenerative hearing loss, decreased vision and cataract formation, but no diabetes, hypertension or proteinuria. A full serology and urology workup was negative for any abnormality. A kidney biopsy for the patient revealed a diagnosis of Alport syndrome but was unable to rule out thin basement membrane disease. The biopsy was inconclusive in making the diagnosis but the patient's clinical presentation led to the diagnosis of Alport syndrome. The patient's 10-year-old daughter also has hematuria with no clear etiology but now can subsequently be anticipatorily managed for Alport syndrome progression. Due to the rarity of the disease, diagnosis is often missed or delayed by primary care providers especially when no associated proteinuria has yet developed. This can lead to confusion and misdiagnosis with thin basement membrane disease, a generally benign hematuria without kidney failure progression. Additionally, biopsy can be inconclusive in these patients, relying on the physician's history and physical examination findings to diagnose. It is important to appropriately diagnose Alport syndrome not only to manage the patient's rate of kidney failure progression but also allow for a higher degree of suspicion, screening and intervention in the patient's family members. Both the inconclusive nature of kidney biopsies and the usefulness of diagnosis for family member screening are often overlooked in medical literature but are explored in this case.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".