MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3121207762 · doi:10.1111/epi.16820

Antibody Prevalence in Epilepsy before Surgery (APES) in drug‐resistant focal epilepsy

2021· article· en· W3121207762 on OpenAlexaff
Yi Li, Sarah Tymchuk, John J. Barry, Srikanth Muppidi, Scheherazade Le

Bibliographic record

VenueEpilepsia · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicEpilepsy research and treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEpilepsyMedicineEtiologyEpilepsy surgeryDrug Resistant EpilepsyInternal medicineRefractory (planetary science)Prospective cohort studyAntibodyArea under the curvePediatricsSurgeryImmunologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Objective There is a growing recognition of immune‐mediated causes in patients with focal drug‐resistant epilepsy (DRE); however, they are not systematically assessed in the pre‐surgical diagnostic workup. Early diagnosis and initiation of immunotherapy is associated with a favorable outcome in immune‐mediated seizures. Patients with refractory focal epilepsy with neuronal antibodies (Abs) tend to have a worse surgical prognosis when compared to other etiologies. Methods We studied the prevalence of serum Abs in patients ≥18 years of age with DRE of unknown cause before surgery. We proposed and calculated a clinical APES (Antibody Prevalence in Epilepsy before Surgery) score for each subject, which was modified based on Dubey's previously published APE2 score. Results` A total of 335 patients were screened and 86 subjects were included in final analysis. The mean age at the time of recruitment was 44.84 ± 14.86 years, with age at seizure onset 30.89 ± 19.88 years. There were no significant differences among baseline clinical features between retrospective and prospective sub‐cohorts. The prevalence of at least one positive Ab was 33.72%, and central nervous system (CNS)–specific Abs was 8.14%. APES score ≥4 showed slightly better overall prediction (area under the curve [AUC]: 0.84 vs 0.74) and higher sensitivity (100% vs 71.4%), with slightly lower but similar specificity (44.3% vs 49.4%), when compared to APE2 score ≥4. For subjects who had available positron emission tomography (PET) results and all components of APES score (n = 60), the sensitivity of APES score ≥4 yielded a similar prediction potential with an AUC of 0.80. Significance Our findings provide persuasive evidence that a subset of patients with focal DRE have potentially immune‐mediated causes. We propose an APES score to help identify patients who may benefit from a workup for immune etiologies during the pre‐surgical evaluation for focal refractory epilepsy with unknown cause.

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)0.002
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.294 · 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

Citations16
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEpilepsiaSame topicEpilepsy research and treatmentFrench-language works237,207