MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3201035602 · doi:10.1101/2021.09.01.21262503

Huntington’s Disease Integrated Staging System (HD-ISS): A Novel Evidence-Based Classification System For Staging

2021· preprint· en· W3201035602 on OpenAlexaff
Sarah J. Tabrizi, Scott Schobel, Emily C. Gantman, Alexandra Mansbach, Beth Borowsky, Pavlina Konstantinova, Tiago Mestre, Jennifer Panagoulias, Christopher A. Ross, Maurice Zauderer, Ariana P. Mullin, Klaus Romero, Sudhir Sivakumaran, Emily C. Turner, Jeffrey D. Long, Cristina Sampaio

Bibliographic record

VenuemedRxiv · 2021
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicGenetic Neurodegenerative Diseases
Canadian institutionsOttawa HospitalUniversity of Ottawa
FundersNational Institutes of HealthMonash UniversityUniversity College LondonCHDI Foundation
KeywordsHuntington's diseaseStage (stratigraphy)DiseaseObservational studyInternal medicinePsychologyMedicineBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Background Despite the monogenic autosomal dominant nature of Huntington’s disease (HD), the current research paradigm is still based on overt clinical phenotypes and does not address disease pathobiology and biomarkers that are evident decades before functional decline. A new research framework is needed to standardize clinical research and enable interventional studies earlier in the course of HD. Methods The HD Regulatory Science Consortium (HD-RSC), a precompetitive Critical Path Institute initiative that includes 37 member organizations, created the Regulatory Science Forum working group (RSF), which includes industry and academic representatives. To generate a new evidenced-based HD Integrated Staging System (HD-ISS) using a formal consensus methodology, the RSF considered prognostic biomarkers, signs, and symptoms of HD, and performed empirical data analysis. We used observational data to calculate healthy-control-based landmark variable cut-offs for Stage classification and to internally validate the framework. Findings The HD-ISS starts with Stage 0, which comprises individuals with ≥ 40 cytosine-adenine-guanine repeats (CAG) in the huntingtin gene ( HTT ), before detectable indications of disease. We concluded that detectable HD progression is verified with measurable indicators of underlying pathophysiology (Stage 1), proceeds to a detectable clinical phenotype (Stage 2), and continues to a decline in function (Stage 3). Operationally, individuals can be unambiguously classified into Stages 1-3 based on CAG-independent thresholds of landmark assessments. Both cross-sectional status and longitudinal HD-ISS Stage progress align with HD natural history, and Stage transitions accelerate as CAG increase. Interpretation The HD-ISS encompasses the full course of HD starting at birth, defined by the presence of the genetic expansion. This new framework aims to standardize language for clinical research and its immediate use will enable further validation. The HD-ISS provides structure to harmonize clinical study populations and facilitates the clinical assessment of interventions earlier in HD to prevent or slow disease progression. Funding CHDI Foundation Inc.

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)0.024
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.034
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.126

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0240.034
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0100.005
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.124
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.187 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations8
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuemedRxiv→Same topicGenetic Neurodegenerative Diseases→French-language works237,207→