MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2768591526 · doi:10.1002/ajmg.a.38501

A heterozygous mutation in <i>RPGR</i> associated with X‐linked retinitis pigmentosa in a patient with Turner syndrome mosaicism (45,X/46,XX)

2017· article· en· W2768591526 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Qi Zhou, Fengxia Yao, Feng Wang, Hui Li, Rui Chen, Ruifang Sui

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Medical Genetics Part A · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicRetinal Development and Disorders
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersPeking Union Medical CollegeNatural Science Foundation of Beijing MunicipalityNational Natural Science Foundation of ChinaFoundation Fighting Blindness
KeywordsRetinitis pigmentosaFrameshift mutationSanger sequencingTurner syndromeGeneticsX chromosomeShort statureMutationGenetic testingBiologyMedicinePediatricsGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Turner syndrome with retinitis pigmentosa (RP) is rare, with only three cases reported based on clinical examination alone. We summarized the 4-year follow-up and molecular findings in a 28-year-old patient with Turner syndrome and the typical features of short stature and neck webbing, who also had X-linked RP. Her main complaints were night blindness and progressive loss of vision since the age of 9 years. Ophthalmologic examination, optical coherent tomographic imaging, and visual electrophysiology tests showed classic manifestations of RP. The karyotype of peripheral blood showed mosaicism (45,X [72%]/46,XX[28%]). A novel heterozygous frameshift mutation (c.2403_2406delAGAG, p.T801fsX812) in the RP GTPase regulator (RPGR) gene was detected using next generation sequencing and validated by Sanger sequencing. We believe that this is the first report of X-linked RP in a patient with Turner syndrome associated with mosaicism, and an RPGR heterozygous mutation. We hypothesize that X-linked RP in this woman is not related to Turner syndrome, but may be a manifestation of the lack of a normal paternal X chromosome with intact but mutated RPGR.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.109
Threshold uncertainty score0.614

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.239 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations9
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Medical Genetics Part ASame topicRetinal Development and DisordersFrench-language works237,207