Plasma glial fibrillary acidic protein as a biomarker of blood-brain barrier integrity in patients with occult cerebral small vessel disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the association between plasma glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP) levels and blood-brain barrier (BBB) integrity in patients with occult cerebral small vessel disease (CSVD). METHODS: This retrospective study included patients with occult CSVD (CSVD group, n = 68) and age-matched individuals without CSVD (control group, n = 61). Demographic and clinical characteristics were compared between groups. Cognitive function was assessed using the Montreal Cognitive Assessment-B (MoCA-B). Plasma GFAP levels were measured, and all participants underwent sequential magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) to evaluate BBB integrity. Patients were stratified based on total MRI burden of CSVD into moderate/severe and none/mild load groups. Risk factors associated with moderate/severe CSVD load were analyzed. RESULTS: The prevalence of hyperlipidemia was significantly higher in the CSVD group than in the control group (P = 0.020), and MoCA-B scores were significantly lower. In the CSVD group, plasma GFAP levels were negatively correlated with total cholesterol (r = -0.281, P = 0.020) and low-density lipoprotein (r = -0.282, P = 0.020), as well as with MoCA-B scores (r = -0.440, P = 0.0002). MRI analysis revealed that brain regions showing significant correlations with elevated plasma GFAP levels exhibited BBB disruption and cortical thinning. CONCLUSION: Elevated plasma GFAP levels are associated with cognitive impairment and BBB disruption in patients with occult CSVD. GFAP may serve as a potential biomarker for evaluating BBB integrity in this population.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".