MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401371472 · doi:10.1002/ccr3.9265

Whole‐exome sequencing and copy number alterations analysis in a case of expansive florid cemento‐osseous dysplasia

2024· article· en· W4401371472 on OpenAlexaff
Carolina Cavaliéri Gomes, Victor Coutinho Bastos, Ahmed El Mouatani, Filipe Fideles Duarte‐Andrade, Nada Jabado, Wagner Henriques Castro, Ricardo Santiago Gomez

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Case Reports · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBone Tumor Diagnosis and Treatments
Canadian institutionsMcGill University Health CentreMcGill University
FundersFundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de Minas GeraisUniversidade Federal de Minas GeraisConselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e TecnológicoCoordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior
KeywordsExpansiveExome sequencingDysplasiaMissense mutationMedicineGenePhenotypePathologyGeneticsBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Whole-exome sequencing (WES) analysis of an expansive case florid cemento-osseus dysplasia were reported for the first time. Also, the new potential candidate genes were reported to expand our knowledge about their molecular pathogenesis. Abstract: We report a case of expansive florid cemento-osseus dysplasia in a 32-year-old female patient who presented an expansive tumoral lesion in the anterior mandible. As florid cemento-osseus dysplasia have only been molecularly investigated using targeted-sequencing, fragments of the lesion were collected and subjected to molecular investigation using WES to assess somatic mutations as well as copy number alterations. No gains and losses of chromosomal arms or segments longer than 1 Mb were detected. Our findings revealed a pathogenic stopgain variant at the KIF5C gene, a stoploss variant at MAPK10, and missense SNV at COL6A2 at DCDC1, suggesting potential candidate genes associated with florid cemento-osseus dysplasia.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.277
Threshold uncertainty score0.571

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.407
Teacher spread0.354 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designCase report
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

Citations4
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical Case ReportsSame topicBone Tumor Diagnosis and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207