From mechanisms to future therapy: a synopsis of isolated REM sleep behavior disorder as early synuclein-related disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Parkinson disease (PD), dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB) and multiple system atrophy are synucleinopathies, characterized by neuronal loss, gliosis and the abnormal deposition of α-synuclein in vulnerable areas of the nervous system. Neurodegeneration begins however several years before clinical onset of motor, cognitive or autonomic symptoms. The isolated form of REM sleep behavior disorder (RBD), a parasomnia with dream enactment behaviors and excessive muscle activity during REM sleep, is an early stage synucleinopathy. The neurophysiological hallmark of RBD is REM sleep without atonia (RWSA), i.e. the loss of physiological muscle atonia during REM sleep. RBD pathophysiology is not fully clarified yet, but clinical and basic science suggest that ɑ-syn pathology begins in the lower brainstem where REM atonia circuits are located, including the sublaterodorsal tegmental/subcoeruleus nucleus and the ventral medulla, then propagates rostrally to brain regions such as the substantia nigra, limbic system, cortex. Genetically, there is only a partial overlap between RBD, PD and DLB, and individuals with iRBD may represent a specific subpopulation. A genome-wide association study identified five loci, which all seem to revolve around the GBA1 pathway. iRBD patients often show subtle motor, cognitive, autonomic and/or sensory signs, neuroimaging alterations as well as biofluid and tissue markers of neurodegeneration (in particular pathologic α-synuclein aggregates), which can be useful for risk stratification. Patients with iRBD represent thus the ideal population for neuroprotective/neuromodulating trials. This review provides insights into these aspects, highlighting and substantiating the central role of iRBD in treatment development strategies for synucleinopathies.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.010 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
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".