MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Mosaicism in Tumor Suppressor Gene Syndromes: Prevalence, Diagnostic Strategies, and Transmission Risk

2022· review· en· W4294127795 on OpenAlexaff
Jillian L. Chen, David T. Miller, Laura S. Schmidt, David Malkin, Bruce R. Korf, Charis Eng, David J. Kwiatkowski, Krinio Giannikou

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnual Review of Genomics and Human Genetics · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeurofibromatosis and Schwannoma Cases
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of Toronto
FundersNational Cancer Institute
KeywordsBiologyGeneticsSuppressorPhenotypeAlleleGenePTENDiseaseGenotypeGenetic testingTumor suppressor geneMutationMedicineCarcinogenesisPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A mosaic state arises when pathogenic variants are acquired in certain cell lineages during postzygotic development, and mosaic individuals may present with a generalized or localized phenotype. Here, we review the current state of knowledge regarding mosaicism for eight common tumor suppressor genes— NF1, NF2, TSC1, TSC2, PTEN, VHL, RB1, and TP53—and their related genetic syndromes/entities. We compare and discuss approaches for comprehensive diagnostic genetic testing, the spectrum of variant allele frequency, and disease severity. We also review affected individuals who have no mutation identified after conventional genetic analysis, as well as genotype–phenotype correlations and transmission risk for each tumor suppressor gene in full heterozygous and mosaic patients. This review provides new insight into similarities as well as marked differences regarding the appreciation of mosaicism in these tumor suppressor syndromes.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.284 · 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 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

Citations23
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnual Review of Genomics and Human GeneticsSame topicNeurofibromatosis and Schwannoma CasesFrench-language works237,207