UNEXPECTED BENEFIT OF PROPOFOL IN STIFF-PERSON SYNDROME
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Stiff person syndrome (SPS) is a rare autoimmune disorder characterized by severely increased axial muscular tone with superimposed “progressive fluctuating muscular rigidity and spasms,” despite an otherwise normal neurologic examination.1 An association with autoimmune disease was noted early on, and in 1988 high titers of autoantibodies directed against glutamic acid decarboxylase (GAD) were found in patients with SPS.2 GAD catalyzes the rate-limiting step in the synthesis of gamma-aminobutyric acid (GABA), the principal inhibitory neurotransmitter of the CNS. These observations, along with the known beneficial effects of drugs that enhance GABAergic neurotransmission, underlie the current concept of SPS as an immune-mediated pathologic impairment of central inhibition. This concept is supported by various electrophysiologic studies.3 SPS has also been described as a paraneoplastic syndrome in association with several types of tumors, including breast and small cell lung cancer. Paraneoplastic SPS may be associated with anti-GAD antibodies, as well as amphiphysin 1, gephyrin, or Ri antibodies.4 Although the pathophysiology of non-paraneoplastic SPS is incompletely understood, effective treatments include immunomodulating therapies and drugs that enhance GABAergic neurotransmission. Unfortunately, these treatments may lose …
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".