MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2811465672 · doi:10.1017/cjn.2018.176

P.074 Clinical features of a family with distal myopathy and rimmed vacuoles due to a digenic interaction

2018· article· en· W2811465672 on OpenAlexaffvenue
CS Pontifex, LE Hamilton, Kristina Martens, Gerald Pfeffer

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Neurological Sciences / Journal Canadien des Sciences Neurologiques · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMuscle Physiology and Disorders
Canadian institutionsCalgary Laboratory Services
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMyopathyMedicinePhenotypePathologyGeneticsBiologyGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: The interaction between mutations in two or more genes is increasingly recognised as an important contributor to the phenotypic variability in genetic disorders. Co-occurrence of variants in SQSTM1 and TIA1 is reported as a cause of myopathy in 3 prior cases, but limited clinical data were presented. We present detailed clinical features of a family with two siblings having a distal myopathy with rimmed vacuoles (DMRV), and genetic variants in SQSTM1 and TIA1. Methods: Clinicopathologic study of a family with DMRV to describe clinical features, laboratory and neurophysiology studies, neuroimaging, and genetic sequencing. Results: Two siblings with variants in SQSTM1 and TIA1 developed myopathy in their early 60’s, with early involvement of ankle dorsiflexors and finger extensors. A decade after onset, patients remain ambulatory and have not developed cardiac or respiratory complications. MRI of the legs showed selective involvement of adductor magnus, vastus lateralis, and in lower legs the anterior compartment and medial gastrocnemius. Muscle pathology demonstrated rimmed vacuoles, disrupted myofibrillar architecture, and mislocalised TDP43. Two unaffected family members had one genetic variant but not both. Conclusions: We describe a fourth family with co-occurrence of TIA1 and SQSTM1 genetic variants and describe their detailed phenotype. Future study should address the mechanism of the interaction between these two variants.

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: Case report · Consensus signal: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.031

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.274 · 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 designCase report
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
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Neurological Sciences / Journal Canadien des Sciences Neurologiques→Same topicMuscle Physiology and Disorders→French-language works237,207→