Progression and regression of nerve fibre pathology and dysfunction early in diabetes over 5 years
Bibliographic record
Abstract
It has traditionally been suggested that the early development of diabetic sensorimotor polyneuropathy (DSPN) is characterized by predominant and progressive injury to small nerve fibres followed by large fibre impairment. We alternatively hypothesized that small and large fibre damage due to DSPN in type 1 and type 2 diabetes could develop in parallel and may not only be progressive but also reversible. Participants from the German Diabetes Study baseline cohort with recent-onset type 1/type 2 diabetes (n = 350/570) and age-matched glucose-tolerant control individuals (Control 1/Control 2: n = 114/190) were assessed using nerve conduction studies, thermal detection thresholds, vibration perception thresholds, neuropathy symptom scores, neuropathy disability scores and intraepidermal nerve fibre density (IENFD) in skin biopsies (type 1/type 2 diabetes: n = 102/226; Control 1/Control 2: n = 109/208). Subsets of participants with type 1/type 2 diabetes were followed for 5 years (n = 184/307; IENFD subset: n = 18/69). DSPN was defined by the Toronto Consensus criteria. At baseline, DSPN was present in 8.1% and 13.3% of the type 1 and type 2 diabetes groups, respectively. The most frequently abnormal tests in the lower limbs below or above the 2.5th and 97.5th centiles of the controls were the IENFD (13.7%) and individual nerve conduction studies (up to 9.4%) in type 1 diabetes participants and IENFD (21.8%), malleolar vibration perception thresholds (17.5%), and individual nerve conduction studies (up to 11.8%) in those with type 2 diabetes, whereas thermal detection threshold abnormalities did not differ between the control and diabetes groups. After 5 years, the highest progression rates from the normal to the abnormal range in type 2 diabetes participants were found for IENFD (18.8%) by -4.1 ± 2.8 fibres/mm, malleolar vibration perception threshold (18.6%) by 9.1 ± 20.2 µm and nerve conduction studies (15.0%) by 3.7 ± 1.5 points, while vice versa the highest regression rates were observed for neuropathy disability scores (11.2%) by -3.1 ± 1.3 points, sural nerve amplitudes (9.1%) by 4.7 ± 3.0 µV, IENFD (8.7%) by 1.4 ± 1.3 fibres/mm, and neuropathy symptom scores (8.2%) by -5.8 ± 1.6 points. In type 1 diabetes participants, no major progression was seen after 5 years, but subclinical DSPN regressed in 10.3%. These findings point to early parallel damage to both small and large nerve fibres in well-controlled recent-onset type 2 and, to a lesser extent, type 1 diabetes. After 5 years, peripheral nerve morphology and function and clinical measures progress to the abnormal range in type 2 diabetes, but initial nerve alterations are also reversible to a meaningful degree.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".