Excluding Digenic Inheritance of PGAP2 and PGAP3 Variants in Mabry Syndrome (OMIM 239300) Patient: Phenotypic Spectrum Associated with PGAP2 Gene Variants in Hyperphosphatasia with Mental Retardation Syndrome-3 (HPMRS3)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We present a case report of a child with features of hyperphosphatasia with neurologic deficit (HPMRS) or Mabry syndrome (MIM 239300) with variants of unknown significance in two post-GPI attachments to proteins genes, PGAP2 and PGAP3, that underlie HPMRS 3 and 4. Background: In addition to HPMRS 3 and 4, disruption of four phosphatidylinositol glycan (PIG) biosynthesis genes, PIGV, PIGO, PIGW and PIGY, result in HPMRS 1, 2, 5 and 6, respectively. Methods: Targeted exome panel sequencing identified homozygous variants of unknown significance (VUS) in PGAP2 c:284A>G and PGAP3 c:259G>A. To assay the pathogenicity of these variants, we conducted a rescue assay in PGAP2 and PGAP3 deficient CHO cell lines. Results: Using a strong (pME) promoter, the PGAP2 variant did not rescue activity in CHO cells and the protein was not detected. Flow cytometric analysis showed that CD59 and CD55 expression on the PGAP2 deficient cell line was not restored by variant PGAP2. By contrast, activity of the PGAP3 variant was similar to wild-type. Conclusions: For this patient with Mabry syndrome, the phenotype is likely to be predominantly HPMRS3: resulting from autosomal recessive inheritance of NM_001256240.2 PGAP2 c:284A>G, p.Tyr95Cys. We discuss strategies for establishing evidence for putative digenic inheritance in GPI deficiency disorders.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".