MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407149329 · doi:10.3390/biomedicines13020357

Identifying Biomarkers for Remyelination and Recovery in Multiple Sclerosis: A Measure of Progress

2025· review· en· W4407149329 on OpenAlexaff
Vito A. G. Ricigliano, Silvia Marenna, Serena Borrelli, Valentina Camera, Edgar Carnero Contentti, Natalia Szejko, Christos Bakirtzis, Sanja Gluščević, Sara Samadzadeh, Hans-Peter Hartung, Krzysztof Selmaj, Bruno Stankoff, Gıancarlo Comı

Bibliographic record

VenueBiomedicines · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMultiple Sclerosis Research Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersBrugmann FoundationUniwersytet WarszawskiKoning BoudewijnstichtingGenesis PharmaAlexion PharmaceuticalsTeva Pharmaceutical IndustriesWarszawski Uniwersytet MedycznyCelltrionTourette Association of AmericaMinisterstwo ZdrowiaBiogenGuthy-Jackson Charitable FoundationSanofiFondation CharcotFondazione Italiana Sclerosi MultiplaAstraZenecaEli Lilly and CompanyAmgen
KeywordsRemyelinationMultiple sclerosisMyelinMedicineNeuroscienceMagnetic resonance imagingRegeneration (biology)Clinical trialPathologyBiologyRadiologyCentral nervous systemImmunology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Multiple sclerosis (MS) pathology is characterized by acute and chronic inflammation, demyelination, axonal injury, and neurodegeneration. After decades of research into MS-related degeneration, recent efforts have shifted toward recovery and the prevention of further damage. A key area of focus is the remyelination process, where researchers are studying the effects of pharmacotherapy on myelin repair mechanisms. Multiple compounds are being tested for their potential to foster remyelination in different clinical settings through the application of less or more complex techniques to assess their efficacy. Objective: To review current methods and biomarkers to track myelin regeneration and recovery over time in people with MS (PwMS), with potential implications for promyelinating drug testing. Methods: Narrative review, based on a selection of PubMed articles discussing techniques to measure in vivo myelin repair and functional recovery in PwMS. Results: Non-invasive tools, such as structural Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) and Positron Emission Tomography (PET), are being implemented to track myelin repair, while other techniques like evoked potentials, functional MRI, and digital markers allow the assessment of functional recovery. These methods, alone or in combination, have been employed to obtain precise biomarkers of remyelination and recovery in various clinical trials on MS. Conclusions: Combining different techniques to identify myelin restoration in MS could yield novel biomarkers, enhancing the accuracy of clinical trial outcomes for remyelinating therapies in PwMS.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.858
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.233
GPT teacher head0.413
Teacher spread0.179 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations11
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiomedicinesSame topicMultiple Sclerosis Research StudiesFrench-language works237,207