MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408927697 · doi:10.1002/jha2.70026

Leaky Artemis Deficiency and EBV‐Related Lymphoproliferative Disease: A Novel Case and Review of the Literature

2025· article· en· W4408927697 on OpenAlexaff
Lucie Roussel, Stephane Bernier, Gertruda Evaristo, Anna Pérez, Sanabelle Zaabat, Romina Pace, Yizhe Sun, Isabelle Angers, John M. Storring, Donald C. Vinh

Bibliographic record

VenueeJHaem · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicImmunodeficiency and Autoimmune Disorders
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityMcGill University Health Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLymphoproliferative diseaseLymphoproliferative disordersMedicineDiseaseImmunologyPathologyLymphoma

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: ) deficiency causes radiosensitive severe combined immunodeficiency (SCID), although hypomorphic cases can manifest later-onset immunodeficiency, autoimmunity, or lymphoproliferation. We report a 45-year-old man with humoral immunodeficiency, opportunistic infections, and recurrent EBV-positive diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL). Methods: gene. Functional studies, including γH2AX assays to assess DNA damage repair and measurement of Type I interferon responses, were conducted to evaluate the impact of the variant. A literature review was performed to contextualize the findings. Results: was identified, leading to significantly decreased mutant protein expression. Functional testing confirmed impaired DNA damage repair, via γH2AX measurement, and elevated Type I interferon responses, indicating cytosolic DNA damage accumulation. A literature review highlighted EBV-positive lymphomas in leaky Artemis deficiency with high mortality rate. Conclusion: deficiency as an inborn error of immunity that predisposes to EBV-associated lymphoproliferative disease. Trial Registration: The authors have confirmed clinical trial registration is not needed for this submission.

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)0.000
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.661
Threshold uncertainty score0.416

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.220 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueeJHaemSame topicImmunodeficiency and Autoimmune DisordersFrench-language works237,207