MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2320778990 · doi:10.1136/jnnp-2014-309032.98

D06 Platelet Bdnf In Huntington's Disease: Evidence From A Preliminary Study

2014· article· en· W2320778990 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Sonia Mazzucchi, Elisa Unti, Lorenzo Kiferle, Lionella Palego, Gino Giannaccini, Antonio Lucacchini, Ubaldo Bonuccelli, Roberto Ceravolo

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neurology Neurosurgery & Psychiatry · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicGenetic Neurodegenerative Diseases
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBrain-derived neurotrophic factorInternal medicineHuntingtinPathogenesisPlateletMedicineNeurotrophic factorsEndocrinologyMontreal Cognitive AssessmentHuntington's diseasePsychologyDiseaseCognitive impairment

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background Brain Derived Neurotrophic Factor (BDNF) is a neurotrophin implicated in the pathogenesis of neurodegenerative diseases and mood disorders; highly expressed in central nervous system, it can be detected in peripheral tissues such as blood, mainly stored in platelets. Wild type huntingtin (HTT) is believed to activate BDNF transcription and transport, mutated HTT is responsible for reduction of BDNF levels by inhibiting both processes. Several studies investigated BDNF in HD patients demostrating lower values in brain, blood and plasma with respect to controls; however results were not always confirmed and this lack of concordance could be due to extreme variability of sampling collection and laboratory techniques. Aims To evaluate BDNF levels in HD and possible correlations with psychiatric and motor scales by using platelet dosage. Methods 12 patients with symptomatic HD (S&F stage II) and 10 controls, matched for age and educational level were investigated by means of neuropsychological tests (MoCa, MMSE, FAB), psychiatric scales (BDI, PBA) and motor evaluation (UHDRS). Blood samples were collected to investigate BDNF platelet levels determined by ELISA. Results HD patients showed statistically significant lower performances at MoCa (p < 0.01) and FAB (p < 0.01). Platelet BDNF was higher in patients (2950.5 ± 749.1 pg/ml) with respect to controls (2481.6 ± 1063.8 pg/ml) but the difference was not statistically significant. Further analysis demonstrated a direct correlation between disease duration and BDNF platelet levels (p < 0.05). Conclusions Our finding of a lack of significant difference in platelet BDNF between HD and controls could suggest along with recent studies on human blood that peripheral levels of BDNF are not informative as HD biomarkers. However, the correlation between BDNF platelet levels and disease duration might indicate that the peripheral BDNF levels can fluctuate in different phases of the disease.

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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.252 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Neurology Neurosurgery & PsychiatrySame topicGenetic Neurodegenerative DiseasesFrench-language works237,207