MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2760998161 · doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehx504.3946

3946Comparison of genetic signature of isolated left ventricular non-compaction cardiomyopathy and familial dilated cardiomyopathy as assessed by whole exome sequencing

2017· article· en· W2760998161 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Miloš Kubánek, Alice Krebsová, Lenka Piherová, Viktor Stránecký, Milan Maçek, Radka Kočková, Tomáš Paleček, Filip Málek, Vojtěch Melenovský, Stanislav Kmoch, Josef Kautzner

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Heart Journal · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiomyopathy and Myosin Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersHealth CanadaSyddansk UniversitetOdense UniversitetshospitalHjerteforeningen
KeywordsMedicineExome sequencingDilated cardiomyopathyCardiomyopathyLeft ventricular noncompactionCardiologyInternal medicineSignature (topology)GeneticsMutationHeart failureGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Isolated left ventricular non-compaction cardiomyopathy (LVNC) is an unclassified form of cardiomyopathy which may overlap with genetic forms of dilated cardiomyopathy. We aimed to compare genetic architecture of LVNC and familial DCM (DCM) to elucidate whether LVNC represents a distinct disease entity. Methods: A representative cohort of 39 patients (pts) with LVNC and 83 probands with familial DCM [mean age 49±14 years; 85 males (70%), 37 females (30%)] from three tertiary care hospitals was assessed by whole exome sequencing (WES; SeqCap EZ MedExome, Roche, USA; Illumina, USA). Detected variants were confirmed by Sanger DNA sequencing and their segregation was assessed in available families. Diagnosis of LVNC was made by two specialists, based on echocardiographic criteria and/or cardiac magnetic resonance imaging. Familial DCM was defined as confirmed diagnosis of DCM in ≥2 closely related family members. Results: Three probands (8%) with LVNC had familial disease with either LVNC (2 cases) or hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (1 case) in a first degree relative. In LVNC patients, WES revealed one pathogenic mutation in 26 pts (67%), ≥2 pathogenic mutations in 4 pts (10%) and an inconclusive result in 9 pts (23%). The corresponding results of WES in familial DCM were as follows: one pathogenic mutation in 50 pts (60%), ≥2 pathogenic mutations in 11 pts (13%) and an inconclusive result in 22 pts (27%). Table illustrates differences between both diagnoses. Mutations affecting sarcomeric genes (MYH7, MYH6, ACTC1, TNNT2, TPM1) and group of other genes (PRDM16, RBM20, LAMP2, RAF1, TMEM43, TNNI3K, TBX20) were more common in LVNC than in familial DCM. On the other hand, truncating mutations of titin were the most common etiology of familial DCM followed by mutations of sarcomeric (MYH7, MYBPC3, TNNT2, TNNI3, MYOC1) and desmosomal (DSP, PKP2) genes.

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)0.001
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.264 · 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

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Heart Journal→Same topicCardiomyopathy and Myosin Studies→French-language works237,207→