MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3132683067 · doi:10.1542/peds.2020-011601

Congenital Chylothorax and Hydrops Fetalis: A Novel Neonatal Presentation of <i>RASA1</i> Mutation

2021· article· en· W3132683067 on OpenAlexaff
Alessia Gallipoli, Gillian MacLean, Jagdeep S. Walia, Anupam Sehgal

Bibliographic record

VenuePEDIATRICS · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLymphatic Disorders and Treatments
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHydrops fetalisMedicineChylothoraxMutationPresentation (obstetrics)PediatricsDifferential diagnosisObstetricsFetusGeneticsSurgeryPregnancyPathologyGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mutations in the RASA1 gene are known to cause arteriovenous malformations (AVMs), with evidence of associated lymphatic malformations. We report for the first time, to the best of our knowledge, an infant with RASA1 mutation presenting with hydrops fetalis and chylothorax, but without an associated AVM. Previously, researchers studying rodents have found chylothorax associated with RASA1 mutations, and, in previous case reports, researchers have reported on infants with RASA1 mutations born with hydrops fetalis and AVMs. In this report, we describe the case of a “late preterm” female infant born with nonimmune hydrops fetalis and congenital chylothorax who was detected to have a RASA1 deletion on genetic workup. Although classically described phenotypes of RASA1 mutations present with venous malformations, no such malformations were found in this infant on extensive imaging. This combination is a novel and nonclassic presentation of RASA1 mutation. In cases of congenital chylothorax, especially with nonimmune hydrops fetalis, RASA1 mutations should be considered as part of the differential diagnosis and genetic testing should be included as part of a complete workup to allow for screening for associated vascular anomalies.

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)0.003
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.253 · 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

Citations16
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePEDIATRICSSame topicLymphatic Disorders and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207