A Hypoxia-Inflammation Cycle and Multiple Sclerosis: Mechanisms and Therapeutic Implications
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose of Review: Multiple sclerosis (MS) is a complex neurodegenerative disease characterized by inflammation, demyelination, and neurodegeneration. Significant hypoxia exists in brain of people with MS (pwMS), likely contributing to inflammatory, neurodegenerative, and vascular impairments. In this review, we explore the concept of a negative feedback loop between hypoxia and inflammation, discussing its potential role in disease progression based on evidence of hypoxia, and its implications for therapeutic targets. Recent Findings: ), as well as through blood-based biomarkers such as Glucose Transporter-1 (GLUT-1). We outline the potential for the hypoxia-inflammation cycle to drive tissue damage even in the absence of plaques. Inflammation can drive hypoxia through blood-brain barrier (BBB) disruption and edema, mitochondrial dysfunction, oxidative stress, vessel blockage and vascular abnormalities. The hypoxia can, in turn, drive more inflammation. Summary: The hypoxia-inflammation cycle could exacerbate neuroinflammation and disease progression. We explore therapeutic approaches that target this cycle, providing information about potential treatments in MS. There are many therapeutic approaches that could block this cycle, including inhibiting hypoxia-inducible factor 1-α (HIF-1α), blocking cell adhesion or using vasodilators or oxygen, which could reduce either inflammation or hypoxia. This review highlights the potential significance of the hypoxia-inflammation pathway in MS and suggests strategies to break the cycle. Such treatments could improve quality of life or reduce rates of progression.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
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".