MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406018006 · doi:10.1136/jmg-2024-110219

Sexual dimorphism in <i>SMAD3</i> pathogenic variant-harbouring individuals

2025· article· en· W4406018006 on OpenAlexaff
Julie Richer, Joe Davis Velchev, Sharan Goobie, Christie Boswell-Patterson, Ingrid M.B.H. van de Laar, Judith M.A. Verhagen, Marja W. Wessels, Jolien W. Roos‐Hesselink, Ilse Luyckx, Hussein Al-Amodi, Michael Chu, Anne‐Marie Laberge, Bekim Sadiković, Tuğçe B. Balcı, Aline Verstraeten, Bart Loeys

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Medical Genetics · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenomics and Rare Diseases
Canadian institutionsLondon Health Sciences CentreWestern UniversityIzaak Walton Killam Health CentreChildren's Hospital of Eastern Ontario
FundersH2020 European Research CouncilThird Health ProgrammeEuropean CommissionVlaamse regeringUniversiteit AntwerpenFonds Wetenschappelijk OnderzoekHartstichting
KeywordsSexual dimorphismPedigree chartAortic dissectionAscending aortaPenetranceAortaMedicineAortic aneurysmInternal medicineCohortMissense mutationAneurysmBiologySurgeryGeneticsPhenotypeGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background Individuals harbouring SMAD3 pathogenic variants are at risk for aneurysms/dissections throughout the arterial tree. Based on prior reports of sex differences in thoracic aortic aneurysm/dissection, we investigated the sexual dimorphism for vascular events in SMAD3- variant-harbouring patients. Methods We analysed two large pedigrees comprising 84 individuals segregating pathogenic missense variants affecting the same p.Arg287 residue in SMAD3 . We excluded individuals&lt;40 years without vascular involvement, as they were too young to be classified. Individuals were subcategorised according to sex, the presence or absence and localisation (aneurysm/dissection with or without involvement of the aortic root/ascending aorta) of vascular lesions. We complemented our familial patient cohort with 178 SMAD3 patients reported in the literature between 2011 and 2023. Results In our two pedigrees, 11/30 (37%) variant-harbouring females had no vascular involvement, whereas none of the variant-harboring males (n=23) had no vascular involvement (p=0.001). While the two groups did not differ by age, males were at higher risk of vascular complications (p=0.037), there was no age difference between sexes. Of the 19 females with vascular involvement, six (32%) had vascular involvment sparing the aortic root/ascending aorta, whereas of the 23 males with vascular invovlement, only one (4%) had vascular involvement sparing the aortic root/ascending aorta (p=0.034). In the literature, we identified 116 male and 62 female additional patients. In the combined cohort of 220 patients, we demonstrated an over-representation of males (p&lt;0.001) and non-penetrance in females for vascular pathology involving the aortic root/ascending aorta (p=0.028). Conclusions Non-penetrance is more common in women, and normal echocardiography in at-risk females is not as reassuring for risk of vasculopathy in other locations. The higher non-penetrance in women creates an ascertainment bias and results in an over-representation of male patients in the literature.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.535
Threshold uncertainty score0.447

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.257 · 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 designBench or experimental
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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Medical GeneticsSame topicGenomics and Rare DiseasesFrench-language works237,207