The Neuropathies of Waldenström's Macroglobulinemia (WM) and IgM-MGUS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Neuropathy is common in Waldenström's macroglobulinemia (WM, an IgM-associated lymphoplasmacytic lymphoma) and in IgM-monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance (IgM-MGUS). Paraneoplastic or paraimmune mechanisms are thought to be involved in the pathogenesis of these neuropathies. Attempts at distinguishing WM and IgM-MGUS neuropathies are lacking especially among bone marrow (BM) confirmed patients. METHODS: Retrospective analyses were performed on BM confirmed WM (N=30) and IgM-MGUS (N=73) neuropathy patients with neurologic assessments and hematologic features. RESULTS: The presence of anemia and quantity of IgM monoclonal protein were significantly greater in WM. Based on multiple neurologic assessments differences were not found for: 1) length of time from neurologic symptom onset to evaluation; 2) chief complaint of painless loss of feeling in the feet, Romberg's sign and tremor; and 3) clinical motor, sensory and reflex abnormalities. Autonomic testing was normal in both diseases. Using nerve conduction (NCS) criteria for demyelination, 62% of IgM-MGUS and 27% of WM met this criteria (p=0.013). IgM MGUS patients had greater terminal conduction slowing by ulnar residual latency calculation (<0.01). The degree of axonal loss as measured by summated compound muscle action potentials and available nerve biopsy was not significantly different between diseases. CONCLUSION: Although WM and IgM-MGUS must be distinguished for hematologic prognosis and treatment, clinical neuropathy presentations of WM and IgM-MGUS are similar and likely related to comparable axonal loss in both conditions. Despite these similarities, evidence of demyelination was found by electrophysiologic studies much more commonly in IgM-MGUS. This difference may reflect varied immune mechanism(s) in the two disorders.
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) | 0.002 | 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".