<i><scp>OPA</scp>1</i> analysis in an international series of probands with bilateral optic atrophy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To determine the molecular genetic cause in previously unreported probands with optic atrophy from the United Kingdom, Czech Republic and Canada. METHODS: OPA1 coding regions and flanking intronic sequences were screened by direct sequencing in 82 probands referred with a diagnosis of bilateral optic atrophy. Detected rare variants were assessed for pathogenicity by in silico analysis. Segregation of the identified variants was performed in available first degree relatives. RESULTS: A total of 29 heterozygous mutations evaluated as pathogenic were identified in 42 probands, of these seven were novel. In two probands, only variants of unknown significance were found. 76% of pathogenic mutations observed in 30 (71%) of 42 probands were evaluated to lead to unstable transcripts resulting in haploinsufficiency. Three probands with the following disease-causing mutations c.1230+1G>A, c.1367G>A and c.2965dup were documented to suffer from hearing loss and/or neurological impairment. CONCLUSIONS: OPA1 gene screening in patients with bilateral optic atrophy is an important part of clinical evaluation as it may establish correct clinical diagnosis. Our study expands the spectrum of OPA1 mutations causing dominant optic atrophy and supports the fact that haploinsufficiency is the most common disease mechanism.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".