Genotype–Phenotype Correlation in Neurofibromatosis Type 1: Evidence for a Mild Phenotype Associated with Splicing Variants Leading to In-Frame Skipping of NF1 Exon 24 [19a]
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Neurofibromatosis type 1 (NF1) is an autosomal dominant neurocutaneous disorder caused by loss-of-function variants in the NF1 gene. As of 20 November 2023, over 5000 distinct pathogenic or likely pathogenic variants have been reported in public databases. However, only a few NF1 genotype–phenotype correlations have been established so far. In this study, we present findings on 40 individuals with NF1, comprising 26 unrelated probands and 14 affected relatives, who carry one of nine NF1 heterozygous pathogenic splicing variants, all of which result in the in-frame skipping of exon 24 [19a] (NM_000267.3:r.3114_3197del, p.Asn1039_Arg1066del). These variants include c.3114-2A>G, c.3114-1G>A, c.3196A>G, c.3197G>A, c.3197G>T, c.3197+1G>A, c.3197+1G>T, c.3197+2T>C, and c.3197+3A>T. Among individuals with these variants, none exhibit externally visible plexiform neurofibromas, histopathologically confirmed cutaneous or subcutaneous neurofibromas, symptomatic spinal neurofibromas, or symptomatic optic pathway gliomas. The most prevalent, and sometimes sole, clinical feature observed in this cohort is multiple café-au-lait macules, with or without skinfold freckles: 85% and 60.5% of the individuals display six or more café-au-lait macules and freckles, respectively. In comparison to established NF1 genotype–phenotype correlations, these patients demonstrate highly similar clinical presentations to those associated with the NF1 pathogenic variant c.2970_2972del (p.Met992del), known for resulting in the mildest clinical features. Despite the generally mild phenotype, cognitive impairment, developmental delay, and/or learning difficulties are still observed in 33.3% of these patients, suggesting that learning challenges remain a prominent aspect of the phenotypic presentation in these individuals and necessitate specialized care. This newly established genotype–phenotype correlation will assist clinicians in improving the management of patients harboring NF1 exon 24 [19a] skipping variants and provide a new therapeutic target for NF1 treatment.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
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".