Efficacy of Caffeine in <scp>ADCY5</scp>‐Related Dyskinesia: A Retrospective Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: ADCY5-related dyskinesia is characterized by early-onset movement disorders. There is currently no validated treatment, but anecdotal clinical reports and biological hypotheses suggest efficacy of caffeine. OBJECTIVE: The aim is to obtain further insight into the efficacy and safety of caffeine in patients with ADCY5-related dyskinesia. METHODS: A retrospective study was conducted worldwide in 30 patients with a proven ADCY5 mutation who had tried or were taking caffeine for dyskinesia. Disease characteristics and treatment responses were assessed through a questionnaire. RESULTS: Caffeine was overall well tolerated, even in children, and 87% of patients reported a clear improvement. Caffeine reduced the frequency and duration of paroxysmal movement disorders but also improved baseline movement disorders and some other motor and nonmotor features, with consistent quality-of-life improvement. Three patients reported worsening. CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that caffeine should be considered as a first-line therapeutic option in ADCY5-related dyskinesia. © 2022 International Parkinson and Movement Disorder Society.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".