Topographical metal burden correlates with brain atrophy and clinical severity in Wilson's disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Quantitative susceptibility mapping (QSM) is a post-processing technique that creates brain susceptibility maps reflecting metal burden through tissue magnetic susceptibility. We assessed topographic differences in magnetic susceptibility between participants with and without Wilson's disease (WD), correlating these findings with clinical severity, brain volume, and biofluid copper and iron indices. METHODS: A total of 43 patients with WD and 20 unaffected controls, were recruited. QSM images were derived from a 3T MRI scanner. Clinical severity was defined using the minimal Unified Wilson's Disease Rating Scale (M-UWDRS) and Montreal Cognitive Assessment scoring. Differences in magnetic susceptibilities between groups were evaluated using general linear regression models, adjusting for age and sex. Correlations between the susceptibilities and clinical scores were analyzed using Spearman's method. RESULTS: In age- and sex-adjusted analyses, magnetic susceptibility values were increased in WD patients compared with controls, including caudate nucleus, putamen, globus pallidus, and substantia nigra (all p < 0.01). Putaminal susceptibility was greater with an initial neuropsychiatric presentation (n = 25) than with initial hepatic dysfunction (n = 18; p = 0.04). Susceptibility changes correlated negatively with regional brain volume in almost all topographic regions. Serum ferritin, but not serum copper or ceruloplasmin, correlated positively with magnetic susceptibility level in the caudate nucleus (p = 0.04), putamen (p = 0.04) and the hippocampus (p = 0.03). The dominance of magnetic susceptibility in cortical over subcortical regions correlated with M-UWDRS scores (p < 0.01). CONCLUSION: The magnetic susceptibility changes could serve as a surrogate marker for patients with WD.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".