Autoantibodies in Childhood Post-Varicella Acute Cerebellar Ataxia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Anti-Purkinje cell antibodies have been reported in cerebellar ataxia following Epstein-Barr virus (EBV) infection. We investigated autoantibody responses, including anti-Purkinje cell antibodies, and the clinical course in eight children who developed post-varicella ataxia, five of their siblings with uncomplicated varicella, one child with post-EBV ataxia, two children with acute disseminated encephalomyelitis (ADEM) and one with neuroblastoma associated ataxia, and in age and gender matched controls. METHODS: Autoantibodies were tested by indirect immunofluorescence (IIF) on cryopreserved cerebrum and cerebellum sections. Other autoantibodies were measured by conventional IIF protocols using HEp-2 cells as a substrate. Antibodies to myelin associated glycoprotein (MAG), asialo-GM1, beta2 glycoprotein 1, cardiolipin and myelin basic protein (MBP) were measured by ELISA. RESULTS: Three of eight children with acute post-varicella ataxia, one child with post-EBV ataxia, one child with ADEM and one child with uncomplicated varicella, had high titer autoantibodies (>1/160) that reacted with cerebrum and cerebellar tissue. This reactivity was not seen in one child with ADEM, in one with neuroblastoma and ataxia, in the remainder of the children with uncomplicated varicella or age and gender matched controls. Autoantibodies were not seen in CSF from two children with post-varicella ataxia. The punctate staining seen on cerebrum and cerebellum sections co-localized with rabbit antibodies to the centrosome protein pericentrin. All patients with strong reactivity with cerebrum and cerebellar tissue by IIF had elevated levels of anti-MAG that was not confirmed by absorption assay. No reactivity was seen with asialo-GM1, MBP, beta2 glycoprotein 1 or cardiolipin. None of the sera had autoantibodies directed against endosomes, the Golgi complex, or the paraneoplastic autoantigens Hu and Yo. CONCLUSION: Some children with post-viral ataxia develop antibodies that have strong reactivity with cerebral and cerebellar tissue. Some of the antigenic reactivity co-localized with the centrosome protein pericentrin.
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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".