Fatigue in Multiple Sclerosis: Assessing Pontine Involvement Using Proton MR Spectroscopic Imaging
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE: The underlying mechanism of fatigue in multiple sclerosis (MS) remains poorly understood. Our study investigates the involvement of the ascending reticular activating system (ARAS), originating in the pontine brainstem, in MS patients with symptoms of fatigue. METHODS: Female relapsing-remitting MS patients (n = 17) and controls (n = 15) underwent a magnetic resonance spectroscopic imaging protocol at 1.5T. Fatigue was assessed in every subject using the Fatigue Severity Scale (FSS). Using an FSS cut-off of 36, patients were categorized into a low (n = 9, 22 ± 10) or high (n = 10, 52 ± 6) fatigue group. The brain metabolites N-acetylaspartate (NAA) and total creatine (tCr) were measured from sixteen 5x5x10 mm3 spectroscopic imaging voxels in the rostral pons. RESULTS: MS patients with high fatigue had lower NAA/tCr concentration in the tegmental pons compared to control subjects. By using NAA and Cr values in the cerebellum for comparison, these NAA/tCr changes in the pons were driven by higher tCr concentration, and that these changes were focused in the WM regions. DISCUSSION/CONCLUSION: Since there were no changes in NAA concentration, the increase in tCr may be suggestive of gliosis, or an imbalanced equilibrium of the creatine and phosphocreatine ratio in the pons of relapsing-remitting MS patients with fatigue.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".