MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2978543468 · doi:10.1111/ahg.12357

Xq26 duplications lead to undergrowth or overgrowth via competing pathways including GPC3/GPC4

2019· article· en· W2978543468 on OpenAlexafffund
Gaurav K. Karna, Kenneth A. Myers

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of Human Genetics · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGlycosylation and Glycoproteins Research
Canadian institutionsMcGill University Health CentreMontreal Children's HospitalMcGill University
FundersInstitut de recherche, Centre universitaire de santé McGill
KeywordsUndergrowthLead (geology)GeneticsBiologyEvolutionary biologyPaleontologyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Xq26 locus has importance in human growth with multiple genes and regions playing important roles, which potentially leads to macrosomia or microsomia if disrupted. One region of Xq26.2 comprises the genes GPC3 and GPC4; deletion or duplication of this region has been recently been shown to result in overgrowth, specifically Simpson-Golabi-Behmel syndrome. We describe a male patient with two maternally inherited Xq26 microduplications; the first was 0.8 Mb at Xq26.2 affecting only GPC3 and GPC4, and the second, a distal 0.6 Mb duplication at Xq26.3 affecting seven genes. Rather than having Simpson-Golabi-Behmel syndrome, our patient had microcephaly and undergrowth, with development that was within normal limits at 25 months of age. This finding suggests that the molecular pathway leading to overgrowth secondary to GPC3/GPC4 haploinsufficiency can be overpowered by a disruption to the distal Xq26.3 region. Of the genes in that region, we propose that SLC9A6 is the most likely to play an important role as mutations in this gene lead to Christianson syndrome, in which patients may have microcephaly and weight loss.

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)0.000
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.711

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.104
GPT teacher head0.373
Teacher spread0.269 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations3
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of Human GeneticsSame topicGlycosylation and Glycoproteins ResearchFrench-language works237,207