Lesion Network Localization of Seizure Freedom following MR-guided Laser Interstitial Thermal Ablation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Treatment-resistant epilepsy is a common and debilitating neurological condition, for which neurosurgical cure is possible. Despite undergoing nearly identical ablation procedures however, individuals with treatment-resistant epilepsy frequently exhibit heterogeneous outcomes. We hypothesized that treatment response may be related to the brain regions to which MR-guided laser ablation volumes are functionally connected. To test this, we mapped the resting-state functional connectivity of surgical ablations that either resulted in seizure freedom (N = 11) or did not result in seizure freedom (N = 16) in over 1,000 normative connectomes. There was no difference seizure outcome with respect to the anatomical location of the ablations, and very little overlap between ablation areas was identified using the Dice Index. Ablations that did not result in seizure-freedom were preferentially connected to a number of cortical and subcortical regions, as well as multiple canonical resting-state networks. In contrast, ablations that led to seizure-freedom were more functionally connected to prefrontal cortices. Here, we demonstrate that underlying normative neural circuitry may in part explain heterogenous outcomes following ablation procedures in different brain regions. These findings may ultimately inform target selection for ablative epilepsy surgery based on normative intrinsic connectivity of the targeted volume.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".