MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3040830209 · doi:10.3389/fneur.2020.00574

PET Tau Imaging and Motor Impairments Differ Between Corticobasal Syndrome and Progressive Supranuclear Palsy With and Without Alzheimer's Disease Biomarkers

2020· article· en· W3040830209 on OpenAlexafffund
Anna Vasilevskaya, Foad Taghdiri, Namita Multani, Cassandra Jessica Anor, Karen Misquitta, Sylvain Houle, Charles Burke, David F. Tang‐Wai, Anthony E. Lang, Susan H. Fox, Elizabeth Slow, Pablo Rusjan, Maria Carmela Tartaglia

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Neurology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNeurological disorders and treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WindsorWestern UniversityCentre for Addiction and Mental HealthUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health NetworkToronto Western HospitalOccupational Cancer Research Centre
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsProgressive supranuclear palsyCorticobasal degenerationNeuroscienceMedicineDiseaseMotor neurone diseasePsychologyPhysical medicine and rehabilitationAmyotrophic lateral sclerosisPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Frontotemporal lobar degeneration (FTLD)-related syndrome includes Progressive supranuclear palsy (PSP) and Corticobasal syndrome (CBS). PSP is usually caused by a tauopathy but can have associated Alzheimer’s disease (AD) while CBS can be caused by tauopathy, transactive response DNA binding protein 43 kDa or AD pathology. Our aim was to compare the parkinsonian syndromes presenting without AD biomarkers (CBS/PSP-non-AD) to parkinsonian syndromes with AD biomarkers (CBS/PSP-AD). Materials & Methods: Twenty-four patients [11 males, 13 females; age (68.46±7.23)] were recruited for this study. The whole cohort was divided into parkinsonian syndromes without AD biomarkers [N=17; diagnoses (6 CBS, 11 PSP)], and parkinsonian syndromes with AD biomarkers [N=7; diagnoses (6 CBS-AD, 1 PSP-AD)]. Anatomical MRI and PET imaging with tau ligand [18F]-AV1451 tracer was completed. Cerebrospinal fluid analysis or [18F]-AV1451 PET imaging was used to assess for the presence of AD biomarkers. Progressive supranuclear palsy rating scale (PSPRS) and unified Parkinson’s disease rating scale (UPDRS) motor exam were implemented to assess for motor disturbances. Language and cognitive testing were completed. Results: The CBS/PSP-non-AD group [age (70.18±6.65)] was significantly older (p=0.028) than CBS/PSP-AD group [age (64.29±7.32)]. There were no differences between the groups in terms of gender, education, years of disease duration, and disease severity as measured with the Clinical Dementia Rating scale. The CBS/PSP-non-AD group had significantly lower PET Tau Standard Volume Uptake Ratio (SUVR) values compared to the CBS/PSP-AD group in multiple frontal and temporal areas, and inferior parietal (all p<0.03). The CBS/PSP-non-AD group had significantly higher scores compared to CBS/PSP-AD group on PSPRS (p=0.004) and UPDRS motor exam (p=0.045). The CBS/PSP-non-AD group had higher volumes of inferior parietal, precuneus, and hippocampus (all p<0.02); but lower volume of midbrain (p=0.02), compared to the CBS/PSP-AD group. Discussion: The CBS/PSP-non-AD group had higher motor disturbances compared to the CBS/PSP-AD group, however both groups performed similarly on neuropsychological measures. The AD biomarker group had increased global uptake of PET Tau SUVR and lower volumes in AD-specific areas. These results show that the presenting phenotype of CBS and PSP syndromes and the distribution of injury are strongly affected by the presence of AD biomarkers.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.230 · 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

Citations12
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in NeurologySame topicNeurological disorders and treatmentsFrench-language works237,207