MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410419638 · doi:10.1093/brain/awaf183

<i>FGF14</i> repeat length and mosaic interruptions: modifiers of spinocerebellar ataxia 27B?

2025· article· en· W4410419638 on OpenAlexafffund
Joshua Laß, Mirja Thomsen, Max Borsche, Theresa Lüth, Julia C. Prietzsche, Susen Schaake, Andona Milovanović, Hannah Macpherson, Emil K. Gustavsson, Paula Saffie Awad, Nataša Dragaševic‐Mišković, Björn‐Hergen Laabs, Inke R. König, Ana Westenberger, Christopher E. Pearson, Norbert Brüggemann, Christine Klein, Joanne Trinh

Bibliographic record

VenueBrain · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicGenetic Neurodegenerative Diseases
Canadian institutionsSickKids FoundationHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of Toronto
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchElse Kröner-Fresenius-StiftungDeutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
KeywordsSpinocerebellar ataxiaAtaxiaMosaicPhysical medicine and rehabilitationPsychologyMedicineNeuroscienceHistory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Deep intronic FGF14 repeat expansions have been identified as a frequent genetic cause of late-onset cerebellar ataxias, explaining ≤30% of patients. Interruptions between repeats have previously been identified to impact the penetrance in other repeat expansion disorders. Repeat interruptions within FGF14 have yet to be characterized in detail. We used long-range PCR, Sanger sequencing, repeat-primed PCR, Nanopore and PacBio sequencing to distinguish the repeat motifs, mosaicism and number of repeat interruptions present in FGF14-related ataxia patients and unaffected individuals. A total of 304 patients with late-onset ataxia and 190 unaffected individuals were previously screened for repeat expansions in FGF14 by long-range PCR, identifying 37 individuals with expanded repeat lengths (≥250 repeats). These, along with three newly identified expansion carriers were included in the present study, and advanced genetic methods were applied to investigate the repeat composition in 27 patients and 13 unaffected individuals. The expansions, based on Nanopore data, ranged from 236 to 486 repeats (standard deviation = 60), with 20 individuals showing repeat interruptions, including complex motifs such as GAG, GAAGGA, GAAGAAAGAA, GAAAAGAAGAAGGAAGAAGGAA, GAAAAGAAGAAGGAA and GCAGAAGAAGAAGAA. We calculated the longest pure GAA length from the long-read data for all 40 individuals. When comparing the pure GAA tract between patients and unaffected individuals, clusters were apparent based on >200 or <200 repeats. Five ataxia patients with interruptions still had a remaining pure GAA expansion <200. We observed an association of the pure GAA length with age at onset (P = 0.016, R2 = 0.256). Somatically incurred mosaic divergent repeat interruptions were discovered that affect motif length and sequence (mDRILS), which varied in number and mosaicism (frequency: 0.37-0.93). The mDRILS were correlated with pure GAA length (P = 0.022, R2 = 0.334), with a higher mosaic frequency of interruptions in unaffected individuals compared with patients (unaffected: 0.90; patients: 0.67; P = 0.009). We demonstrate that: (i) long-read sequencing is required to detect complex repeat interruptions accurately; (ii) repeat interruptions in FGF14 are mosaic, have various lengths and start positions in the repeat tract, and can thereby be annotated as mDRILS; which (iii) enabled us to establish a categorization based on remaining pure GAA repeats quantifying the impact of mDRILS on pathogenicity or age at onset, dependent on the interruption length and position, with high accuracy; and (iv) we provide evidence that mosaicism stabilizes pure GAA repeats in interrupted FGF14 repeat expansions.

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)0.001
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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.540

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.262 · 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

Citations3
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBrainSame topicGenetic Neurodegenerative DiseasesFrench-language works237,207