MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408634032 · doi:10.1016/j.diabres.2025.112098

Serum Neurofilament Light Chain and Structural and Functional Nerve Fiber Loss in Painful and Painless Diabetic Polyneuropathy

2025· article· en· W4408634032 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Laura L. Määttä, Signe T. Andersen, Tina Parkner, Claus Vinter Bødker Hviid, Daniel R. Witte, Jishi John, Mathilde M.V. Pascal, Eleanor Ferris, Georgios Baskozos, Juan D. Ramirez, Solomon Tesfaye, Pallai Shillo, Andrew S.C. Rice, Helen Laycock, Troels S. Jensen, David Bennett, Andreas C. Themistocleous

Bibliographic record

VenueDiabetes Research and Clinical Practice · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPain Mechanisms and Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersSteno Diabetes Center AarhusHorizon 2020Fonden til Lægevidenskabens FremmeMedical Research CouncilWörwag PharmaTrigoCare InternationalMitsubishi Tanabe Pharma CorporationVersus ArthritisRiisfort FondenDiabetesforeningenAstellas PharmaNovo NordiskNovo Nordisk FondenAcademy of Medical SciencesNevroDanish Diabetes AcademyA.P. Møller og Hustru Chastine Mc-Kinney Møllers Fond til almene FormaalProcter and GambleBiotechnology and Biological Sciences Research CouncilWellcome TrustAbbott LaboratoriesAarhus UniversitetshospitalHarvard UniversityPfizerBiogenImperial College LondonSanofiUniversity of the Witwatersrand, JohannesburgEuropean CommissionHorizon 2020 Framework ProgrammeAarhus UniversitetEuropean Foundation for the Study of DiabetesUK Research and InnovationAstraZeneca
KeywordsMedicineDiabetes mellitusPolyneuropathyDiabetic neuropathyInternal medicineEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AIMS: To explore associations between the axonal protein neurofilament light chain (NfL) and severity of diabetic polyneuropathy (DPN) and pain. METHODS: We performed cross-sectional analysis of a subset of the PiNS/DOLORisk cohort of people with DPN with and without neuropathic pain. Biobank samples were analyzed for serum NfL (s-NfL) using single molecule array. DPN was defined by Toronto criteria for probable or confirmed DPN. Painful DPN (PDPN) was evaluated according to IASP criteria. Measures of DPN severity included clinical DPN scales, quantitative sensory testing (QST) and intraepidermal nerve fiber density (IENFD). RESULTS: Participants with confirmed (N = 172) or probable DPN (N = 29) were included. There was no s-NfL difference between participants with DPN (N = 79, 22.8 ng/L [IQR 17.4; 31.3]) and PDPN (N = 122, 22.2 ng/L [16.0; 34.4]). S-NfL was not associated with pain severity or DPN severity evaluated by clinical DPN scales. Higher s-NfL was associated with lower IENFD (13.6 % [95 % CI 3.1; 22.9], unit = 1 fiber/mm, N = 24) and more pronounced loss of nerve fiber function measured by QST (p-trend = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: Higher s-NfL was associated with nerve fiber dysfunction and loss quantified by QST and IENFD, but not with pain or clinical DPN scales. S-NfL may reflect the severity of nerve fiber damage underlying DPN.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.068
Threshold uncertainty score0.725

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.401
Teacher spread0.356 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations5
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDiabetes Research and Clinical PracticeSame topicPain Mechanisms and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207