A Subpopulation of Spikes Predicts Successful Epilepsy Surgery Outcome
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Epileptic spikes are the traditional interictal electroencephalographic (EEG) biomarker for epilepsy. Given their low specificity for identifying the epileptogenic zone (EZ), they are given only moderate attention in presurgical evaluation. This study aims to demonstrate that it is possible to identify specific spike features in intracranial EEG that optimally define the EZ and predict surgical outcome. METHODS: We analyzed spike features on stereo-EEG segments from 83 operated patients from 2 epilepsy centers (37 Engel IA) in wakefulness, non-rapid eye movement sleep, and rapid eye movement sleep. After automated spike detection, we investigated 135 spike features based on rate, morphology, propagation, and energy to determine the best feature or feature combination to discriminate the EZ in seizure-free and non-seizure-free patients by applying 4-fold cross-validation. RESULTS: The rate of spikes with preceding gamma activity in wakefulness performed better for surgical outcome classification (4-fold area under receiver operating characteristics curve [AUC] = 0.755 ± 0.07) than the seizure onset zone, the current gold standard (AUC = 0.563 ± 0.05, p = 0.015) and the ripple rate, an emerging seizure-independent biomarker (AUC = 0.537 ± 0.07, p = 0.006). Channels with a spike-gamma rate exceeding 1.9/min had an 80% probability of being in the EZ. Combining features did not improve the results. INTERPRETATION: Resection of brain regions with high spike-gamma rates in wakefulness is associated with a high probability of achieving seizure freedom. This rate could be applied to determine the minimal number of spiking channels requiring resection. In addition to quantitative analysis, this feature is easily accessible to visual analysis, which could aid clinicians during presurgical evaluation. ANN NEUROL 2023;93:522-535.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".