MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3047855735 · doi:10.1101/2020.08.05.20158915

Ocular motor biomarkers in Niemann-Pick disease type C: A prospective cross-sectional multicontinental study in 72 patients

2020· preprint· en· W3047855735 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Tatiana Brémovà-Ertl, Larry A. Abel, Mark Walterfang, Ettore Salsano, Anna Ardissone, Vĕra Malinová, Miriam Kolníková, Jordi Gascón Bayarri, Ali Reza Tavasoli, Mahmoud Reza Ashrafi, Yasmina Amraoui, Eugen Mengel, Stefan Kolb, Andreas F. Brecht, Stanislavs Bardins, Michael Strupp

Bibliographic record

VenuemedRxiv · 2020
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLysosomal Storage Disorders Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersSanofi
KeywordsSaccadic maskingSmooth pursuitSpinocerebellar ataxiaAtaxiaMedicineAudiologyCross-sectional studyGazeInternal medicinePsychologyPhysical medicine and rehabilitationPediatricsOphthalmologyEye movementNeuroscienceDiseasePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Niemann-Pick type C (NPC) is a rare lysosomal storage disorder with ocular motor involvement. In a multicontinental, cross-sectional study we characterized ocular motor function in 72 genetically proven patients from twelve countries by means of video-oculography. Interlinking with disease severity, we also searched for ocular motor biomarkers. Our study protocol comprised reflexive and self-paced saccades, smooth pursuit, and gaze-holding in horizontal and vertical planes. Data were compared with those of 158 healthy controls. The Modified Disability Rating Scale, Scale for Assessment and Rating of Ataxia, Spinocerebellar Ataxia Functional Index for neurological status, and Montreal Cognitive Assessment for cognition were also performed. In contrast to previous publications and the common belief that the “downward saccadic system degenerates to greater extent than the upward one”, our measurements of vertical saccades demonstrated that the involvement in both directions was similar. Mean saccadic peak velocity to 20° stimulus was 63.5°/s (SD, 95% CIs of the mean: 59.5, [47.9-79.2]) in NPC patients and 403.1°/s (69.0, [392.0-414.2°/s]) in healthy subjects (p<0.001). Downward saccades yielded 51°/s (68.9, [32.7-69.3]), whilst upward 78.8°/s (65.9, [60.8-96.8]) (p<0.001). Vertical position smooth pursuit gain was 0.649 (0.33, [0.554-0.744]) in NPC and 0.935 (0.149 [0.91-0.959]) in HC (p<0.001). The number of patient-specific saccadic patterns, incl. slow-pursuit like, hypometric and staircase-pattern saccades suggest varying involvement of the saccadic system with fragmentation of the velocity profile as a sign of omnipause neuron dysfunction. Observed compensating strategies, such as blinks to elicit saccades, head and upper body movements to overcome the gaze palsy, should be used clinically to establish a diagnosis. Vertical reflexive saccades were more impaired and slower than self-paced ones. Ocular motor performance depended on age of onset and disease duration. We found that peak velocity and latency of horizontal saccades, vertical saccadic duration and amplitude, and horizontal position smooth pursuit can be used as surrogate parameters for clinical trials, as they showed the strongest correlation to disease severity. By comparing saccadic with pursuit movements, we showed that 98.2% of patients generated vertical saccades (both up and down) that were below the 95% confidence intervals of the controls’ peak velocity. Only 46.9% of patients had smooth pursuit gain lower than that of 95% of healthy controls. Vertical supranuclear saccade palsy and not vertical supranuclear gaze palsy is the hallmark of NPC disease. The distinction between saccadic and gaze palsy is also important in other neurodegenerative diseases and inborn errors of metabolism with ocular motor involvement, such as progressive supranuclear palsy or Gaucher disease type 3.

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)0.002
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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.347
Teacher spread0.311 · 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

Citations1
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuemedRxivSame topicLysosomal Storage Disorders ResearchFrench-language works237,207