MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412789442 · doi:10.18103/mra.v13i5.6555

Comparison of Patients with Leber’s Hereditary Optic Neuropathy Mutations to Patients with Other Optic Neuritis Manifestation Diseases

2025· article· en· W4412789442 on OpenAlexaff
Marah Elkabouli, Mario Kontolemos, Vered Tsehmaister, Eduardo Portela de Oliveira, Nerses Nersesyan, Hong-An Nguyen, Nooran Badeeb, Danah Alberiki, Carolina Rush, Rustum Karanjia

Bibliographic record

VenueMedical Research Archives · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicErythrocyte Function and Pathophysiology
Canadian institutionsOttawa Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLeber's hereditary optic neuropathyOptic neuritisMedicineOptic neuropathyOphthalmologyDermatologyNeuritisOptic nerveMultiple sclerosisSurgeryPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: The onset of vision loss in Leber’s Hereditary Optic Neuropathy (LHON) is often mistaken for other types of optic neuritis. This study compares the prevalence of brain imaging findings at time of onset in affected LHON patients and other types of optic neuritis; namely Clinically Isolated Syndrome, Multiple Sclerosis, Myelin Oligodendrocyte antibody, and Neuromyelitis Optica. Methods: A masked analysis of MRIs from a group of genetically confirmed LHON patients was compared to MRIs from the sex and age-matched Optic Neuritis group. Brain imaging obtained within 12 months of the onset of visual loss were used. Results: We identified 23 LHON patients with a total of 46 affected eyes. The average age at time of diagnosis was 45 ± 13.3 years old. Retrospective analysis of previously interpreted MRIs was completed and revealed that the most affected optic nerve segment was the optic chiasm (39.1%) followed by the orbital segment and optic tract each with 34.8% patient involvement. Canalicular involvement was observed in 29.2% of patients and intracranial segment involvement was observed in 17.2% of patients. Ten of the 23 LHON identified patients were matched to their optic neuritis group based on age and sex. Eight males and two females with a total of 20 affected eyes were included. All patients had a confirmed genetic mutation with a median age of 33 (IQR 26 – 39) years (range 22 – 62 years) at time of diagnosis. The time interval from vision loss to MRI (TIVM) ranged from 1 to 12 months in all 20 affected eyes. The median TIVM was 1 (IQR 1 – 4) month. The ON group consisted of four patient groups based on diagnosis. We included ten patients with clinically isolated syndrome with thirteen affected eyes with a median age of 34.5 (IQR 25 – 44) years (range 15 – 57 ) at time of diagnosis, ten multiple sclerosis patients with eleven affected eyes and a median age of 32.5 (IQR 30 – 37) years (range, 22 – 65 years), ten myelin oligodendrocyte antibody patients with fourteen affected eyes and median age of 32.5 (IQR 30 – 41) years (range, 24 – 61 years) at time of diagnosis, and three neuromyelitis optica patients (2 males and 1 female) with four affected eyes; median age of 30 (IQR 25 – 45) years (range 25 – 45 years) at time of diagnosis. Conclusion: Our results illustrate that chiasmal involvement is more common in LHON patients than in ON patients (specifically in the myeline oligodendrocyte antibody group) during the first year of vision loss p=0.057. Optic tract involvement was also more common in the LHON cohort compared to the optic neuritis cohort (specifically when compared the clinically isolated syndrome and multiple sclerosis groups) p=0.087 in both groups. White matter involvement was only seen in one LHON patient (in the periventricular region). When compared to the optic neuritis cohort, brain white matter involvement was seen in 70%, 80%, and 80% (p=0.02, p=0.006, and p=0.006) in each of the clinically isolated syndrome, multiple sclerosis and myeline oligodendrocyte antibody groups respectively. Brain white matter involvement was not observed in any of the neuromyelitis optica patients. Regression analysis revealed a slight trend that higher involvement might be associated with slightly worse visual acuity, but this trend is not statistically significant p = 0.246. Only one patient with an involvement along the optic chiasm presented with normal visual acuity of 20/30 and 20/40, right eye and left eye respectively.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score0.430

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.355
Teacher spread0.331 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedical Research ArchivesSame topicErythrocyte Function and PathophysiologyFrench-language works237,207