Fulminant Central Plus Peripheral Nervous System Demyelination without Antibodies to Neurofascin
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Combined central and peripheral nervous system demyelination is a rare and poorly described phenomenon. Recently, anti-neurofascin antibodies were reported to be positive in 86% of these patients in a Japanese cohort. Yet, there seems to be a clinical, radiological, and serological heterogeneity among these patients. In this report, our aim is to describe characteristics of our patients with this entity and compare with others in the literature. METHODS: We report clinical, electrophysiological, radiological, and laboratory characteristics of five patients with both multiple sclerosis and chronic inflammatory demyelinating polyradiculoneuropathy from our institutional database containing 1890 MS patients. RESULTS: Three patients presented with extensive, active demyelination of both central nervous system and peripheral nervous system with hypertrophic peripheral nerves. Plexuses, trunks, division and cords were involved in the process. Oligoclonal band was negative. Conduction block was not detected. Corticosteroid treatment was not adequate. Others had a slowly progressive clinical course. Serum anti-neurofascin antibody was negative. Review of the literature revealed similar cases with active disease, early-onset hypertrophic peripheral nerves, and central demyelination, in addition to other cases with an insidious course. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with combined central and peripheral demyelination form a spectrum. Some patients may have an antibody-mediated syndrome with or without anti-neurofascin antibodies and others seem to represent a coincidence.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".