Elevated Cerebral Blood Flow and Volume in Systemic Lupus Measured by Dynamic Susceptibility Contrast Magnetic Resonance Imaging
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Studies that have examined abnormalities in cerebral blood flow (CBF) in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) reported CBF relative to a region assumed to be normal in the brain. We examined the absolute differences in both regional CBF and cerebral blood volume (CBV) between patients with SLE and healthy controls. METHODS: CBF and CBV were measured with dynamic susceptibility contrast (DSC) magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), a technique that provides an alternative to radionuclide perfusion studies and permits quantitative anatomic, CBF, and CBV imaging in a single scanning session. CBF and CBV were measured in lesions and in normal-appearing tissue in the major cerebral and subcortical brain regions. Unlike most perfusion studies in SLE, CBF and CBV values were not normalized to a region of the brain assumed to be healthy. RESULTS: CBF and CBV within MRI-visible lesions were markedly reduced relative to surrounding normal-appearing white matter. CBF and CBV in normal-appearing tissue were both higher in SLE patient groups, with or without lesions, relative to the control group. CONCLUSION: DSC MRI, without normalization to a region presumed to be healthy, revealed that CBF and CBV in normal-appearing tissue in patients with SLE was higher than CBF and CBV in controls. Since this finding was made in subgroups of patients with and without lesions, the higher CBF and CBV appear to precede lesion pathology.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".