MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2804936366 · doi:10.1007/s00204-018-2222-z

Intermittent convection-enhanced delivery of GDNF into rhesus monkey putamen: absence of local or cerebellar toxicity

2018· article· en· W2804936366 on OpenAlexaff
Matthias Luz, Philip C. Allen, John Bringas, Chris Boiko, Diane E. Stockinger, Kristen J. Nikula, Owen T. Lewis, Max Woolley, H.C. Fibiger, Krystof S. Bankiewicz, Erich Mohr

Bibliographic record

VenueArchives of Toxicology · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNerve injury and regeneration
Canadian institutionsMedGenesis Therapeutix (Canada)
FundersPfizerUniversity of California, DavisUniversity of BristolMichael J. Fox Foundation for Parkinson's Research
KeywordsGlial cell line-derived neurotrophic factorNeurotrophic factorsMedicineAnesthesiaPutamenSpinal cordEndocrinologyInternal medicinePharmacologyReceptor

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Glial cell line-derived neurotrophic factor (GDNF) has demonstrated neurorestorative and neuroprotective effects in rodent and nonhuman primate models of Parkinson's disease. However, continuous intraputamenal infusion of GDNF (100 µg/day) resulted in multifocal cerebellar Purkinje cell loss in a 6-month toxicity study in rhesus monkeys. It was hypothesized that continuous leakage of GDNF into the cerebrospinal fluid compartment during the infusions led to down-regulation of GDNF receptors on Purkinje cells, and that subsequent acute withdrawal of GDNF then mediated the observed cerebellar lesions. Here we present the results of a 9-month toxicity study in which rhesus monkeys received intermittent intraputamenal infusions via convection-enhanced delivery. Animals were treated with GDNF (87.1 µg; N = 14) or vehicle (N = 6) once every 4 weeks for a total of 40 weeks (11 treatments). Four of the GDNF-treated animals were utilized in a satellite study assessing the impact of concomitant catheter repositioning prior to treatment. In the main study, eight animals (5 GDNF, 3 control) were euthanized at the end of the treatment period, along with the four satellite study animals, while the remaining eight animals (5 GDNF, 3 control) were euthanized at the end of a 12-week recovery period. There were no GDNF-related adverse effects and in particular, no GDNF-related microscopic findings in the brain, spinal cord, dorsal root ganglia, or trigeminal ganglia. Therefore, 87.1 µg/4 weeks is considered the no observed adverse effect level for GDNF in rhesus monkeys receiving intermittent, convection-enhanced delivery of GDNF for 9 months.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.752

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.023
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.260 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations19
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArchives of ToxicologySame topicNerve injury and regenerationFrench-language works237,207