Clinical Assessment of the Effect of Tetrabenazine on Functional Scales in Huntington Disease: A Pilot Open Label Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Tetrabenazine is a monoamine depleter with a well-documented effect against chorea associated with Huntington disease (HD). There is a paucity of data about how reduction in chorea relates to better performance on motor, gait, cognitive, and psychiatric assessments. Methods: We designed an open label tetrabenazine withdrawal study to test performance using validated scales. The following instruments were used to assess cognitive, behavioral, and motor function in 10 patients with documented HD: The Montreal Cognitive Assessment, Beck Depression Inventory II, Dynamic Gait Index (DGI), Jebsen Hand Test, Timed 25-foot walk, Berg Balance Test (BBT), QuickDASH, and the Unified Huntington Disease Rating Scale (UHDRS) Motor, Stroop Color Word, Behavioral Assessment, Functional Checklist, and Independence Scale. Results: Subjects performed significantly better while on tetrabenazine as measured by the DGI (p=0.041), BBT (p=0.007), and the UHDRS Total Motor (p=0.009), Maximum Chorea (p=0.005), and Stroop Color-Word tests (p=0.028). Discussion: This pilot study demonstrates tetrabenazine’s potential effects beyond improvement in chorea.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".