MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4243344667 · doi:10.1182/blood.v110.11.709.709

Novel VWF Sequence Variations Identified in Normal Controls and Index Cases Enrolled in the TS Zimmerman Program for the Molecular and Clinical Biology of VWD (ZPMCB-VWD).

2007· article· en· W4243344667 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Daniel B. Bellissimo, P.A. Christopherson, S.L. Haberichter, V.H. Flood, J.C. Gill, K.D. Friedman, Thomas C. Abshire, J.A. DiPaola, W. Keith Hoots, Cindy Leissinger, J.M. Lusher, Margaret V. Ragni, A.D. Shapiro, R.R. Montgomery

Bibliographic record

VenueBlood · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPlatelet Disorders and Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVon Willebrand diseaseMissense mutationGeneticsNonsense mutationMutationVon Willebrand factorBiologyPoint mutationExonPenetranceGeneMedicinePhenotypeImmunology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Von Willebrand disease (VWD) is caused by quantitative (types 1 and 3) and qualitative (type 2) defects in von Willebrand factor (VWF). The TS Zimmerman Program for the Molecular and Clinical Biology of VWD is a multinational Program Project established to further the study of VWD in the United States and to contrast these studies with the studies initiated previously in the EU and Canada. As one of the components of this study we sought further insight into the clinical expression and penetrance of established types of VWD by performing full gene DNA sequence analysis in VWD patients and normal controls. This report is an interim report of the first 50 index cases and 113 normal individuals recruited into this study. Twenty four of these index cases were found to have known mutations, four of which had a second new mutation, and 11 cases had 1 or 2 new mutations. In cases where mutations were identified, 46% of the identified mutations were new mutations that have not been reported in the Sheffield VWF Mutation Database. In 15 patients, no mutations were identified in the coding region, although analysis of the non-coding regions is still in progress. Five of the mutations were deletions, insertions, or nonsense mutations that have clear functional consequences. The other 12 mutations were missense mutations. Since VWF polymorphisms are not well characterized in all exons, we have also completed studies of the first 113 normal control individuals in our study. These are individuals without a bleeding history and in whom full VWF laboratory testing and VWF sequencing was also undertaken. Since some estimates in the EU and Canadian studies have determined the prevalence of VWF mutations varies by the severity of type 1 VWD patients, we wanted to determine the frequency of VWF variation in a normal population and determine if sequence variations correlate with VWF levels. There were three linked common polymorphims identified in normal African Americans that are discussed elsewhere and are not included in this present analysis. We found 19 new sequence variations in the normal control group of which three (2900G>A, 6554G>A, 7997C>T) were found individually in 4–6% of the normal control samples. In addition, in 12 normal control samples we identified 6 sequence variations that were previously reported as VWF mutations. Four were reported as type 1 mutations (2220 G>A, 3686T>G, 3692A>C, 6859C>T) and two as type 2N mutations (2451T>A, 2771G>A). The 2220G>A and 2451T>A mutations were seen in 6 normal controls (5%) and 5 of these 6 normal controls had both mutations. In another normal control, both 3686T>G and 3692A>C were identified. Although the reported prevalence of VWD is 1% or greater, the frequency of these mutations in our normal controls is higher than expected (as high as 5%). In our normal control group, the mean VWF:Ag concentration in the patients with polymorphisms/mutations did not differ from the normal control group as a whole and did not cluster on the lower end of the normal range. Thus, the data on our normal individuals suggest that VWF gene variation is considerable and that many mutations and polymorphisms remain to be identified. Differentiation of those that affect the diagnosis of VWD and/or hemorrhagic risk continues to be difficult.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.375
Teacher spread0.337 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations1
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBlood→Same topicPlatelet Disorders and Treatments→French-language works237,207→