Applicability of multiple quantitative magnetic resonance methods in genetic brain white matter disorders
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) measures of tissue microstructure are important for monitoring brain white matter (WM) disorders like leukodystrophies and multiple sclerosis. They should be sensitive to underlying pathological changes. Three whole-brain isotropic quantitative methods were applied and compared within a cohort of controls and leukodystrophy patients: two novel myelin water imaging (MWI) techniques (multi-compartment relaxometry diffusion-informed MWI: MCR-DIMWI, and multi-echo T2 relaxation imaging with compressed sensing: METRICS) and neurite orientation dispersion and density imaging (NODDI). METHODS: For 9 patients with different leukodystrophies (age range 0.4-62.4 years) and 15 control subjects (2.3-61.3 years), T1-weighted MRI, fluid-attenuated inversion recovery, multi-echo gradient echo with variable flip angles, METRICS, and multi-shell diffusion-weighted imaging were acquired on 3 Tesla. MCR-DIMWI, METRICS, NODDI, and quality control measures were extracted to evaluate differences between patients and controls in WM and deep gray matter (GM) regions of interest (ROIs). Pearson correlations, effect size calculations, and multi-level analyses were performed. RESULTS: MCR-DIMWI and METRICS-derived myelin water fractions (MWFs) were lower and relaxation times were higher in patients than in controls. Effect sizes of MWF values and relaxation times were large for both techniques. Differences between patients and controls were more pronounced in WM ROIs than in deep GM. MCR-DIMWI-MWFs were more homogeneous within ROIs and more bilaterally symmetrical than METRICS-MWFs. The neurite density index was more sensitive in detecting differences between patients and controls than fractional anisotropy. Most measures obtained from MCR-DIMWI, METRICS, NODDI, and diffusion tensor imaging correlated strongly with each other. CONCLUSION: This proof-of-concept study shows that MCR-DIMWI, METRICS, and NODDI are sensitive techniques to detect changes in tissue microstructure in WM disorders.
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 | 0.014 | 0.032 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".