Characterization of lymphopenia in patients with MS treated with dimethyl fumarate and fingolimod
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Lymphopenia is a common occurrence of disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) for relapsing-remitting MS (RRMS). The aim of this study was to dissect the prevalence of various lymphocyte subsets in patients with RRMS treated with 2 DMTs commonly associated with lymphopenia, dimethyl fumarate (DMF), and fingolimod (FTY). METHODS: Multicolor flow cytometry and multiplex assays were used to identify up to 50 lymphocyte subpopulations and to examine the expression of multiple cytokines in selected patients. We compared patients untreated (NT) or treated with FTY or DMF who did (DMF-L) or did not (DMF-N) develop lymphopenia. RESULTS: All FTY patients developed lymphopenia in both T-cell and B-cell compartments. CD41 T cells were more affected by this treatment than CD81 cells. In the B-cell compartment, the CD271IgD2 subpopulation was reduced. T cells but not B cells were significantly reduced in DMF-L. However, within the B cells, CD271 cells were significantly lower. Both CD41 and CD81 subpopulations were reduced in DMF-L. Within the remaining CD41 and CD81 compartments, there was an expansion of the naive subpopulation and a reduction of the effector memory subpopulation. Unactivated lymphocyte from DMF-L patients had significantly higher levels of interferon-γ, interleukin (IL)-12, IL-2, IL-4, IL-6, and IL-1β compared with DMF-N. In plasma, TNFβ was significantly higher in DMF-N and DMF-L compared with NT, whereas CCL17 was significantly higher in DMF-L compared with NT and DMF-N. CONCLUSIONS: This study shows that different treatments can target different lymphocyte compartments and suggests that lymphopenia can induce compensatory mechanisms to maintain immune homeostasis.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".