Detection of blood-brain barrier dysfunction using advanced imaging methods to predict seizures in dogs with meningoencephalitis of unknown origin
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The blood-brain barrier (BBB), which separates the intravascular and neuropil compartments, characterizes the vascular bed of the brain and is essential for its proper function. Recent advances in imaging techniques have driven the development of methods for quantitative assessment of BBB permeability. HYPOTHESIS/OBJECTIVES: Permeability of the BBB can be assessed quantitatively in dogs with meningoencephalitis of unknown origin (MUO) and its status is associated with the occurrence of seizures. ANIMALS: Forty dogs with MUO and 12 dogs without MUO. METHODS: Retrospective, prospective cohort study. Both dynamic contrast enhancement (DCE) and subtraction enhancement analysis (SEA) methods were used to evaluate of BBB permeability in affected (DCE, n = 8; SEA, n = 32) and control dogs (DCE, n = 6; SEA, n = 6). Association between BBB dysfunction (BBBD) score and clinical characteristics was examined. In brain regions where BBBD was identified by DCE or SEA magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) analysis, immunofluorescent staining for albumin, glial fibrillary acidic protein, ionized calcium binding adaptor molecule, and phosphorylated mothers against decapentaplegic homolog 2 were performed to detect albumin extravasation, reactive astrocytes, activated microglia, and transforming growth factor beta signaling, respectively. RESULTS: Dogs with BBBD had significantly higher seizure prevalence (72% vs 19%; P = .01) when compared to MUO dogs with no BBBD. The addition of SEA to routine MRI evaluation increased the identification rate of brain pathology in dogs with MUO from 50% to 72%. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPORTANCE: Imaging-based assessment of BBB integrity has the potential to predict risk of seizures in dogs with MUO.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".