Full sequencing and haplotype analysis of <i>MAPT</i> in Parkinson's disease and rapid eye movement sleep behavior disorder
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: MAPT haplotypes are associated with PD, but their association with rapid eye movement sleep behavior disorder is unclear. OBJECTIVE: To study the role of MAPT variants in rapid eye movement sleep behavior disorder. METHODS: Two cohorts were included: (A) PD (n = 600), rapid eye movement sleep behavior disorder (n = 613) patients, and controls (n = 981); (B) dementia with Lewy bodies patients with rapid eye movement sleep behavior disorder (n = 271) and controls (n = 950). MAPT-associated variants and the entire coding sequence of MAPT were analyzed. Age-, sex-, and ethnicity-adjusted analyses were performed to examine the association between MAPT, PD, and rapid eye movement sleep behavior disorder. RESULTS: MAPT-H2 variants were associated with PD (odds ratios: 0.62-0.65; P = 0.010-0.019), but not with rapid eye movement sleep behavior disorder. In PD, the H1 haplotype odds ratio was 1.60 (95% confidence interval: 1.12-2.28; P = 0.009), and the H2 odds ratio was 0.68 (95% confidence interval: 0.48-0.96; P = 0.03). The H2/H1 haplotypes were not associated with rapid eye movement sleep behavior disorder. CONCLUSIONS: Our results confirm the protective effect of the MAPT-H2 haplotype in PD, and define its components. Furthermore, our results suggest that MAPT does not play a major role in rapid eye movement sleep behavior disorder, emphasizing different genetic background than in PD in this locus. © 2018 International Parkinson and Movement Disorder Society.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".