The KOUNCIL Consortium: From Genetic Defects to Therapeutic Development for Nephronophthisis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Nephronophthisis (NPH) is the most common monogenic cause of renal failure in children. Treatment options are limited to dialysis and transplantation. Therapeutics to significantly delay or prevent end-stage renal disease (ESRD) in children are currently not available. In the Dutch-Anglo KOUNCIL (Kidney-Oriented UNderstanding of correcting CILiopathies) consortium, several groups and specialties united to perform scientific groundwork with the aim to develop genetic and therapeutic personalized care for NPH patients. At the start of this consortium, a genetic diagnosis for NPH was available for only 30-40% of patients, which improved to 50-60% during the course of the 4-year KOUNCIL project. Other major accomplishments of the consortium were (1) the establishment of a Dutch renal ciliopathy patient database with genotype and phenotype data; (2) composition of a proteomics-based integrated network of protein modules disrupted in NPH; (3) the development of non-invasive, urine-based assays that allow functional assessment of genomic variants in NPH and of therapeutic efficiency of drugs; and (4) chemical screening towards the identification of compounds that delay or prevent disease progression in NPH, which resulted in four potential medical interventions for NPH. In conclusion, the KOUNCIL consortium effectively channeled complementary approaches to broaden our understanding of NPH pathogenesis, resulted in 54 publications, improvement of genome diagnostics for NPH patients, awareness in the nephrology and clinical genetics communities for NPH, and new avenues for patient management.
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 | 0.028 | 0.028 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.011 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.026 | 0.009 |
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".