Neuroprotection and acidosis induced by cortical spreading depression
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Kenneth K Kwong, Suk-tak Chan Department of Radiology, MGH/MIT/HMS Athinoula A. Martinos Center for Biomedical Imaging, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA We read with interest the article “Cortical spreading depression produces a neuroprotective effect activating mitochondrial uncoupling protein-5” published in Neuropsychiatr Dis Treat by Viggiano et al.1 The authors showed that cerebral spreading depression (CSD) triggered uncoupling protein-5 (UCP-5),1 which had been reported to exert a long-term effect upon neuron protection.2 The result is another piece in CSD literature on modifying gene expressions to provide neuroprotection to subsequent ischemic episodes.3,4 Authors' replyGiovanni Messina1,2Emanuela Viggiano1,3Vincenzo Monda1Antonietta Messina1Fiorenzo Moscatelli2Anna Valenzano2Domenico Tafuri4Vincenzo De Luca5Giuseppe Cibelli2Marcellino Monda1 1Section of Human Physiology and Unit of Dietetic and Sport Medicine, Department of Experimental Medicine, Second University of Naples, Caserta, 2Department of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, University of Foggia, Foggia, 3Department of Medicine, University of Padua, Padua, 4Department of Motor Sciences and Wellness, University of Naples “Parthenope,” Napoli, Italy; 5Department of Psychiatry, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada Thank you for the attention paid to our article entitled: “Cortical spreading depression produces a neuroprotective effect activating mitochondrial uncoupling protein-5”.1 We do agree that cerebral spreading depression (CSD)-induced acidosis is an intriguing aspect of the neuroprotection puzzle. It is well known that CSD is involved in the pathophysiology of migraine, cerebral ischemia, subarachnoid hemorrhage, and traumatic brain injury.2–7 View the original paper by Viggiano and colleagues.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 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".