Impact of Diagnosis and Therapy on Cognitive Function in Urea Cycle Disorders
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Individuals with urea cycle disorders (UCDs) often present with intellectual and developmental disabilities. The major aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of diagnostic and therapeutic interventions on cognitive outcomes in UCDs. METHODS: This prospective, observational, multicenter study includes data from 503 individuals with UCDs who had comprehensive neurocognitive testing with a cumulative follow-up of 702 patient-years. RESULTS: The mean cognitive standard deviation score (cSDS) was lower in symptomatic than in asymptomatic (p < 0.001, t test) individuals with UCDs. Intellectual disability (intellectual quotient < 70, cSDS < -2.0) was associated with the respective subtype of UCD and early disease onset, whereas height of the initial peak plasma ammonium concentration was inversely associated with neurocognitive outcomes in mitochondrial (proximal) rather than cytosolic (distal) UCDs. In ornithine transcarbamylase and argininosuccinate synthetase 1 deficiencies, we did not find evidence that monoscavenger therapy with sodium or glycerol phenylbutyrate was superior to sodium benzoate in providing cognitive protection. Early liver transplantation appears to be beneficial for UCDs. It is noteworthy that individuals with argininosuccinate synthetase 1 and argininosuccinate lyase deficiencies identified by newborn screening had better neurocognitive outcomes than those diagnosed after the manifestation of first symptoms. INTERPRETATION: Cognitive function is related to interventional and non-interventional variables. Early detection by newborn screening and early liver transplantation appear to offer greater cognitive protection, but none of the currently used nitrogen scavengers was superior with regard to long-term neurocognitive outcome. Further confirmation could determine these variables as important clinical indicators of neuroprotection for individuals with UCDs. ANN NEUROL 2019.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".