P.019 Motor evoked potentials as a new biomarker in multiple sclerosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Motor evoked potentials (MEP’S) measure myelin/axonal integrity of the central nervous system. MEP’s reliability and correlation to conventional clinical measures in multiple sclerosis (MS) patients have yet to be demonstrated. Alemtuzumab is a high efficacy therapy used in patients with MS. Its longitudinal impact on electrophysiological measures has yet to be examined. Methods: This is a single center, observational study. 10 patients with MS who received their first cycle of alemtuzumab within less than 3 months were evaluated with both clinical and MEP’s measures at baseline and every 6 months thereafter for 36 months. MEP’s were repeated two weeks after every time point. We report our preliminary analyses. Results: Patient follow-up ranges from 6 to 36 months. The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) between two consecutive time points were good with values of 0.774 for the biceps and 0.867 for the tibialis anterior with p values less than 0.0005 for both. The correlation for the biceps MEP’s to the 9 hole peg test (9HPT) was 0.51 with p less than 0.0005 and for the tibialis anterior MEP’s to the 6 minute walk test (6MWT) was -0.411 with p=0.01. Conclusions: Our preliminary analyses demonstrate that MEP results are reproducible and correlate with clinical measures.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".