MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4379598707 · doi:10.1093/brain/awad193

Clinical considerations in early-onset cerebral amyloid angiopathy

2023· review· en· W4379598707 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Gargi Banerjee, John Collinge, Nick C. Fox, Tammaryn Lashley, Simon Mead, Jonathan M. Schott, David J. Werring, Natalie S. Ryan

Bibliographic record

VenueBrain · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicAmyloidosis: Diagnosis, Treatment, Outcomes
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUCLH Biomedical Research CentreMedical Research CouncilUK Dementia Research InstituteResearch Trainees Coordinating CentreAlzheimer’s Research UKUniversity College London Hospitals NHS Foundation TrustStroke AssociationRosetrees TrustUniversity of LondonBritish Heart FoundationUniversity College LondonNational Institute for Health and Care ResearchWeston Brain InstituteAlzheimer's Research TrustAlzheimer's SocietyBrain Research UKCenter for Outcomes Research and Evaluation, Yale School of Medicine
KeywordsCerebral amyloid angiopathyMedicineAngiopathyAmyloid (mycology)NeurosciencePsychologyPathologyDementiaDiseaseEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cerebral amyloid angiopathy (CAA) is an important cerebral small vessel disease associated with brain haemorrhage and cognitive change. The commonest form, sporadic amyloid-β CAA, usually affects people in mid- to later life. However, early-onset forms, though uncommon, are increasingly recognized and may result from genetic or iatrogenic causes that warrant specific and focused investigation and management. In this review, we firstly describe the causes of early-onset CAA, including monogenic causes of amyloid-β CAA (APP missense mutations and copy number variants; mutations of PSEN1 and PSEN2) and non-amyloid-β CAA (associated with ITM2B, CST3, GSN, PRNP and TTR mutations), and other unusual sporadic and acquired causes including the newly-recognized iatrogenic subtype. We then provide a structured approach for investigating early-onset CAA, and highlight important management considerations. Improving awareness of these unusual forms of CAA amongst healthcare professionals is essential for facilitating their prompt diagnosis, and an understanding of their underlying pathophysiology may have implications for more common, late-onset, forms of the disease.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.080
GPT teacher head0.398
Teacher spread0.317 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations48
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBrainSame topicAmyloidosis: Diagnosis, Treatment, OutcomesFrench-language works237,207