Developing a disease-specific annotation protocol for <i>VHL</i> gene curation using Hypothes.is
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Von Hippel-Lindau (VHL) disease is a rare, autosomal dominant disorder that predisposes individuals to developing tumors in many organs. There is significant phenotypic variability and genetic variants encountered within this syndrome, posing a considerable challenge to patient care. The lack of VHL variant data sharing paired with the absence of aggregated genotype-phenotype information results in an arduous process, when characterizing genetic variants and predicting patient prognosis. To address these gaps in knowledge, the Clinical Genome Resource (ClinGen) VHL Variant Curation Expert Panel (VCEP) has been resolving a list of variants of uncertain significance within the VHL gene. Through community curation, we crowdsourced the laborious task of variant annotation by modifying the ClinGen Community Curation (C3)-developed Baseline Annotation protocol and annotating all published VHL cases with the reported genotype-phenotype information in Hypothes.is, an open-access web annotation tool. This process, incorporated into the ClinGen VCEP's workflow, will aid in their curation efforts. To facilitate the curation at all levels of genetics expertise, our team developed a 4-day biocuration training protocol and resource guide. To date, 91.3% of annotations have been completed by undergraduate and high-school students without formal academic genetics specialization. Here, we present our VHL-specific annotation protocol utilizing Hypothes.is, which offers a standardized method to present case-resolution data, and our biocuration training protocol, which can be adapted for other rare disease platforms. By facilitating training for community curation of VHL disease, we increased student engagement with clinical genetics while enhancing knowledge translation in the field of hereditary cancer. Database URL: https://hypothes.is/groups/dKymJJpZ/vhl-hypothesis-annotation.
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 | 0.023 | 0.047 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.009 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.010 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.041 | 0.036 |
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".