Oligoclonal bands and cerebrospinal fluid markers in multiple sclerosis: associations with disease course and progression
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The use of oligoclonal bands (OCBs) and cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) parameters are established in the diagnosis of MS, but poorly as markers of disease. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the role of OCBs in disease course and progression. METHODS: CSF data for 1120 patients with MS were analyzed for associations between OCBs and CSF parameters and clinical data (disease course [relapsing-onset MS (ROMS) vs primary-progressive MS (PPMS)]), disability progression (proportion reaching Expanded Disability Status Scale 6 within 10 years of onset and progression index) and ethnicity. RESULTS: Of patients with MS, 72.5% had detectable OCBs. For patients with detectable OCBs, 84.6% had ROMS and 15.4% PPMS versus 89.7% and 10.3%, respectively for those without detectable OCBs (p=0.04). Total CSF IgG and protein levels were higher in PPMS compared with ROMS (p<0.001). Disease progression appeared independent of OCB status. Patients with CSF (vs without) data were more likely to be male, older at onset, have PPMS and lack optic neuropathy at onset (p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: OCB positivity and elevated total CSF IgG and protein were moderately associated with a PPMS disease course, but not disease progression. Patients with atypical clinical presentations were more likely to have had CSF work-up, suggesting a testing bias.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".