<scp> <i>GCH1</i> </scp> mutations in hereditary spastic paraplegia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
)-deficient hyperphenylalaninemia B. Recently, GCH1 mutations have been reported in five patients with hereditary spastic paraplegia (HSP). Here, we analyzed a total of 400 HSP patients (291 families) from different centers across Canada by whole exome sequencing (WES). Three patients with heterozygous GCH1 variants were identified: monozygotic twins with a p.(Ser77_Leu82del) variant, and a patient with a p.(Val205Glu) variant. The former variant is predicted to be likely pathogenic and the latter is pathogenic. The three patients presented with childhood-onset lower limb spasticity, hyperreflexia and abnormal plantar responses. One of the patients had diurnal fluctuations, and none had parkinsonism or dystonia. Phenotypic differences between the monozygotic twins were observed, who responded well to levodopa treatment. Pathway enrichment analysis suggested that GCH1 shares processes and pathways with other HSP-associated genes, and structural analysis of the variants indicated a disruptive effect. In conclusion, GCH1 mutations may cause HSP; therefore, we suggest a levodopa trial in HSP patients and including GCH1 in the screening panels of HSP genes. Clinical differences between monozygotic twins suggest that environmental factors, epigenetics, and stochasticity could play a role in the clinical presentation.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".