MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3095632384 · doi:10.3390/jcm9113571

Potential Second-Hits in Hereditary Hemorrhagic Telangiectasia

2020· review· en· W3095632384 on OpenAlexaff
Carmelo Bernabéu, Pınar Bayrak‐Toydemir, Jamie McDonald, Michelle Letarte

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Medicine · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicVascular Anomalies and Treatments
Canadian institutionsSickKids FoundationHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of Toronto
FundersInstituto de Salud Carlos IIIConsejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas
KeywordsTelangiectasesMedicineACVRL1EndoglinTelangiectasiaLoss of heterozygosityPathologyGermline mutationGene mutationMutationGeneAlleleGeneticsBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Hereditary hemorrhagic telangiectasia (HHT) is an autosomal dominant genetic disorder that presents with telangiectases in skin and mucosae, and arteriovenous malformations (AVMs) in internal organs such as lungs, liver, and brain. Mutations in ENG (endoglin), ACVRL1 (ALK1), and MADH4 (Smad4) genes account for over 95% of HHT. Localized telangiectases and AVMs are present in different organs, with frequencies which differ among affected individuals. By itself, HHT gene heterozygosity does not account for the focal nature and varying presentation of the vascular lesions leading to the hypothesis of a “second-hit” that triggers the lesions. Accumulating research has identified a variety of triggers that may synergize with HHT gene heterozygosity to generate the vascular lesions. Among the postulated second-hits are: mechanical trauma, light, inflammation, vascular injury, angiogenic stimuli, shear stress, modifier genes, and somatic mutations in the wildtype HHT gene allele. The aim of this review is to summarize these triggers, as well as the functional mechanisms involved.

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)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.942
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0070.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.099
GPT teacher head0.455
Teacher spread0.356 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations75
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical MedicineSame topicVascular Anomalies and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207