Brain-specific Proteins Decline in the Cerebrospinal Fluid of Humans with Huntington Disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We integrated five sets of proteomics data profiling the constituents of cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) derived from Huntington disease (HD)-affected and -unaffected individuals with genomics data profiling various human and mouse tissues, including the human HD brain. Based on an integrated analysis, we found that brain-specific proteins are 1.8 times more likely to be observed in CSF than in plasma, that brain-specific proteins tend to decrease in HD CSF compared with unaffected CSF, and that 81% of brain-specific proteins have quantitative changes concordant with transcriptional changes identified in different regions of HD brain. The proteins found to increase in HD CSF tend to be liver-associated. These protein changes are consistent with neurodegeneration, microgliosis, and astrocytosis known to occur in HD. We also discuss concordance between laboratories and find that ratios of individual proteins can vary greatly, but the overall trends with respect to brain or liver specificity were consistent. Concordance is highest between the two laboratories observing the largest numbers of proteins.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".