MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2187658776 · doi:10.1016/j.neuro.2015.10.011

GDNF-induced cerebellar toxicity: A brief review

2015· review· en· W2187658776 on OpenAlexaff
Matthias Luz, Erich Mohr, H.C. Fibiger

Bibliographic record

VenueNeuroToxicology · 2015
Typereview
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNerve injury and regeneration
Canadian institutionsMedGenesis Therapeutix (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGlial cell line-derived neurotrophic factorNeurotrophic factorsPutamenNeuroprotectionMedicineToxicityNeuroscienceParkinson's diseaseCerebellumInternal medicinePharmacologyPsychologyDiseaseReceptor

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recombinant-methionyl human glial cell line-derived neurotrophic factor (GDNF) is known for its neurorestorative and neuroprotective effects in rodent and primate models of Parkinson's disease (PD). When administered locally into the putamen of Parkinsonian subjects, early clinical studies showed its potential promise as a disease-modifying agent. However, the development of GDNF for the treatment of PD has been significantly clouded by findings of cerebellar toxicity after continuous intraputamenal high-dose administration in a 6-month treatment/3-month recovery toxicology study in rhesus monkeys. Specifically, multifocal cerebellar Purkinje cell loss affecting 1-21% of the cerebellar cortex was observed in 4 of 15 (26.7%; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 10.5-52.4%) animals treated at the highest dose level tested (3000μg/month). No cerebellar toxicity was observed at lower doses (450 and 900μg/month) in the same study, or at similar or higher doses (up to 10,000μg/month) in subchronic or chronic toxicology studies testing intermittent intracerebroventricular administration. While seemingly associated with the use of GDNF, the pathogenesis of the cerebellar lesions has not been fully understood to date. This review integrates available information to evaluate potential pathogenic mechanisms and provide a consolidated assessment of the findings. While other explanations are considered, the existing evidence is most consistent with the hypothesis that leakage of GDNF into cerebrospinal fluid during chronic infusions into the putamen down-regulates GDNF receptors on Purkinje cells, and that subsequent acute withdrawal of GDNF generates the observed lesions. The implications of these findings for clinical studies with GDNF are discussed.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.227
GPT teacher head0.416
Teacher spread0.189 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations38
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeuroToxicologySame topicNerve injury and regenerationFrench-language works237,207