Patterns of subregional cerebellar atrophy across epilepsy syndromes: An ENIGMA‐Epilepsy study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Objective The intricate neuroanatomical structure of the cerebellum is of longstanding interest in epilepsy, but has been poorly characterized within the current corticocentric models of this disease. We quantified cross‐sectional regional cerebellar lobule volumes using structural magnetic resonance imaging in 1602 adults with epilepsy and 1022 healthy controls across 22 sites from the global ENIGMA‐Epilepsy working group. Methods A state‐of‐the‐art deep learning‐based approach was employed that parcellates the cerebellum into 28 neuroanatomical subregions. Linear mixed models compared total and regional cerebellar volume in (1) all epilepsies, (2) temporal lobe epilepsy with hippocampal sclerosis (TLE‐HS), (3) nonlesional temporal lobe epilepsy, (4) genetic generalized epilepsy, and (5) extratemporal focal epilepsy (ETLE). Relationships were examined for cerebellar volume versus age at seizure onset, duration of epilepsy, phenytoin treatment, and cerebral cortical thickness. Results Across all epilepsies, reduced total cerebellar volume was observed ( d = .42). Maximum volume loss was observed in the corpus medullare ( d max = .49) and posterior lobe gray matter regions, including bilateral lobules VIIB ( d max = .47), crus I/II ( d max = .39), VIIIA ( d max = .45), and VIIIB ( d max = .40). Earlier age at seizure onset ( = .05) and longer epilepsy duration ( = .06) correlated with reduced volume in these regions. Findings were most pronounced in TLE‐HS and ETLE, with distinct neuroanatomical profiles observed in the posterior lobe. Phenytoin treatment was associated with reduced posterior lobe volume. Cerebellum volume correlated with cerebral cortical thinning more strongly in the epilepsy cohort than in controls. Significance We provide robust evidence of deep cerebellar and posterior lobe subregional gray matter volume loss in patients with chronic epilepsy. Volume loss was maximal for posterior subregions implicated in nonmotor functions, relative to motor regions of both the anterior and posterior lobe. Associations between cerebral and cerebellar changes, and variability of neuroanatomical profiles across epilepsy syndromes argue for more precise incorporation of cerebellar subregional damage into neurobiological models of epilepsy.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".