Serum neurofilament light chain – A potential biomarker for polyneuropathy in type 2 diabetes?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS: To investigate the relationship between neurofilament light chain (NfL) and the presence and severity of diabetic polyneuropathy (DPN). METHODS: We performed cross-sectional analysis of data from 178 participants of the ADDITION-Denmark cohort of people with screen-detected type 2 diabetes and 32 healthy controls. Biobank serum samples were analyzed for NfL using single-molecule array. DPN was defined by Toronto criteria for confirmed DPN. Original and axonal nerve conduction study (NCS) sum z-scores were used as indicators of the severity of DPN and peripheral nerve damage. RESULTS: 39 (21.9%) participants had DPN. Serum NfL (s-NfL) was significantly higher in participants with DPN (18.8 ng/L [IQR 14.4; 27.9]) than in participants without DPN (15.4 ng/L [IQR 11.7; 20.1]). There were no unadjusted s-NfL differences between controls (17.6 ng/L [IQR 12.7; 19.8]) and participants with or without DPN. Higher original and axonal NCS sum z-scores were associated with 10% higher s-NfL (10.2 and 12.1% [95% CI's 4.0; 16.8 and 6.6; 17.9] per 1 SD). The AUC of s-NfL for DPN was 0.63 (95% CI 0.52; 0.73). CONCLUSIONS: S-NfL is unlikely to be a reliable biomarker for the presence of DPN. S-NfL is however associated tothe severity of the nerve damage underlying DPN.
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 | 0.007 | 0.012 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".