MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W6884300798 · doi:10.1002/gec.20526

Analysis of the DNDI gene in men with sporadic and familial testicular germ cell tumors

2008· article· en· W6884300798 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueUniversity of Groningen research database (University of Groningen / Centre for Information Technology) · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTesticular diseases and treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeneTesticular Germ Cell TumorGerm cellMutationGermlineLIM domainGerm cell tumors

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A base substitution in the mouse DndI gene resulting in a truncated Dnd protein has been shown to be responsible for germ cell loss and the development of testicular germ cell tumors (TGCT) in the 129 strain of mice. We investigated the human orthologue of this gene in 263 patients (165 with a family history of TGCT and 98 without) and found a rare heterozygous variant, p. Glu86Ala, in a single case. This variant was not present in control chromosomes (0/4,132). Analysis of the variant in an additional 842 index TGCT cases (269 with a family history of TGCT and 573 without) did not reveal any additional instances. The variant, p. Glu86Ala, is within a known functional domain of DNDI and is highly conserved through evolution. Although the variant may be a rare polymorphism, a change at such a highly conserved residue is characteristic of a disease-causing variant. Whether it is disease-causing or not, mutations in DNDI make, at most, a very small contribution to TGCT susceptibility in adults and adolescents. (c) 2007 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.208 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUniversity of Groningen research database (University of Groningen / Centre for Information Technology)→Same topicTesticular diseases and treatments→French-language works237,207→