MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4233537237 · doi:10.14740/jmc2444w

Proliferative Glomerulonephritis With Monoclonal IgG Deposits in a Young Patient: A Case Report

2016· article· en· W4233537237 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Lara El Khoury, Suzanne El Sayegh, Theodore Strange, Elie El Charabaty, Talal El Imad

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Medical Cases · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicAmyloidosis: Diagnosis, Treatment, Outcomes
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineProteinuriaGlomerulonephritisIsotypeMonoclonalMonoclonal antibodyRenal biopsyPathologyNephrotic syndromeMonoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significanceBiopsyImmunologyKidneyAntibodyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Proliferative glomerulonephritis with monoclonal IgG deposits (PGNMID) is a newly described entity that belongs to the class of disorders known as monoclonal gammopathy of renal significance (MGRS). The renal deposit in PGNMID is composed of monoclonal immunoglobulin (Ig). Microscopic findings typically show a non-fibrillar or non-microtubular pattern of Ig deposit without any organized structure. This entity affects adults and most patients present with nephrotic-range proteinuria and hematuria with or without renal failure. We report a unique case of PGNMID occurring in a young patient following a viral infection. The patient had significant proteinuria. There were no monoclonal proteins found in the serum. The renal biopsy was consistent with proliferative glomerulonephritis (GN) with monoclonal immune deposits. PGNMID is a novel form of GN that mimics immune-complex type GN on light and electron microscopy; thus, renal biopsy with careful attention to light-chain and IgG isotype staining is essential for diagnosis. J Med Cases. 2016;7(5):191-194 doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.14740/jmc2444w

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)0.002
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.266 · 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
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Medical CasesSame topicAmyloidosis: Diagnosis, Treatment, OutcomesFrench-language works237,207