Immunological predictors of cognitive impairment in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Проведено комплексное обследование 81 пациента с сахарным диабетом второго типа в сочетании с хроническим цереброваскулярным заболеванием.В ходе нейропсихологического обследования с использованием Монреальской шкалы оценки когнитивных функций (МоСА) и краткой шкалы оценки психического статуса (MMSE) сформированы три группы, включающие пациентов без когнитивных нарушений (I группа), больных с легкими когнитивными нарушениями (II группа) и пациентов с умеренными когнитивными нарушениями (III группа).У всех пациентов отмечено повышение уровня белка S100В в плазме крови, которое было наиболее выраженным у больных I группы.Иммунологическое обследование выявило связь между когнитивными нарушениями и содержанием сывороточных аутоантител -к NMDA-рецепторам (к дофамину, дофаминовым рецепторам 2 типа (DR2) и к белку S100В.Уровни аутоантител по мере нарастания когнитивных нарушений увеличивались, особенно к NMDA и DR2.По данным корреляционного анализа у пациентов всех трех групп отмечены сильные связи между уровнем аутоантител к белку S100В и уровнем аутоантител к NMDA-рецепторам, к дофамину и DR2.Ключевые слова: сахарный диабет 2 типа, когнитивные нарушения, аутоантитела, NMDA-рецепторы, дофаминовые рецепторы, белок S100ВA comprehensive examination of 81 patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus in combination with chronic cerebrovascular disease was carried out.In the course of a neuropsychological examination using the Montreal Cognitive Assessment Scale (MoSA) and the Mini Mental Status Assessment Scale (MMSE) three groups were formed, including patients without cognitive deterioration (group I), patients with mild cognitive impairment (group II) and patients with moderate cognitive impairment (group III).All patients showed an increase in the level of S100B protein in blood plasma, which was most pronounced in patients of group I. Immunological survey revealed a relation between cognitive impairment and the content of serum autoantibodiesto NMDA receptors (to dopamine, dopamine type 2 receptors (DR2) and to protein S100B.Autoantibody levels increased with increasing cognitive impairment, notably to NMDA and DR2.According to the correlation analysis in patients of all three groups it was marked the strong associations between the level of autoantibodies to the S100B protein and the level of autoantibodies to NMDA receptors, to dopamine and DR2.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".