MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2955853528 · doi:10.3174/ajnr.a6103

Diagnosis and Prediction of Relapses in Susac Syndrome: A New Use for MR Postcontrast FLAIR Leptomeningeal Enhancement

2019· article· en· W2955853528 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Sarah Coulette, Augustin Lecler, Édouard Saragoussi, Kévin Zuber, Julien Savatovsky, Romain Deschamps, Olivier Gout, Candice Sabben, Jennifer Aboab, A. Affortit, Frédérique Charbonneau, Michaël Obadia

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Neuroradiology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRetinal and Optic Conditions
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMcMaster University
KeywordsMedicineFluid-attenuated inversion recoveryClinically isolated syndromeMultiple sclerosisMagnetic resonance imagingRadiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<h3>BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE:</h3> Leptomeningeal enhancement can be found in a variety of neurologic diseases such as Susac Syndrome. Our aim was to assess its prevalence and significance of leptomeningeal enhancement in Susac syndrome using 3T postcontrast fluid-attenuated inversion recovery MR imaging. <h3>MATERIALS AND METHODS:</h3> From January 2011 to December 2017, nine consecutive patients with Susac syndrome and a control group of 73 patients with multiple sclerosis or clinically isolated syndrome were included. Two neuroradiologists blinded to the clinical and ophthalmologic data independently reviewed MRIs and assessed leptomeningeal enhancement and parenchymal abnormalities. Follow-up MRIs (5.9 MRIs is the mean number per patient over a median period of 46 months) of patients with Susac syndrome were reviewed and compared with clinical and retinal fluorescein angiographic data evaluated by an independent ophthalmologist. Fisher tests were used to compare the 2 groups, and mixed-effects logistic models were used for analysis of clinical and imaging follow-up of patients with Susac syndrome. <h3>RESULTS:</h3> Patients with Susac syndrome were significantly more likely to present with leptomeningeal enhancement: 5/9 (56%) versus 6/73 (8%) in the control group (<i>P</i> = .002). They had a significantly higher leptomeningeal enhancement burden with ≥3 lesions in 5/9 patients versus 0/73 (<i>P</i> &lt; .001). Regions of leptomeningeal enhancement were significantly more likely to be located in the posterior fossa: 5/9 versus 0/73 (<i>P</i> &lt; .001). Interobserver agreement for leptomeningeal enhancement was good (κ = 0.79). There was a significant association between clinical relapses and increase of both leptomeningeal enhancement and parenchymal lesion load: OR = 6.15 (<i>P</i> = .01) and OR = 5 (<i>P</i> = .02), respectively. <h3>CONCLUSIONS:</h3> Leptomeningeal enhancement occurs frequently in Susac syndrome and could be helpful for diagnosis and in predicting clinical relapse.

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)0.004
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.249 · 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

Citations33
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of NeuroradiologySame topicRetinal and Optic ConditionsFrench-language works237,207