MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416120302 · doi:10.1177/08977151251393966

Diffusion Alterations at the Gray Matter/White Matter Boundary in Traumatic Encephalopathy Syndrome

2025· article· en· W4416120302 on OpenAlexaff
Tim L. T. Wiegand, Lara Pankatz, Hector Arciniega, Leonard Jung, Fatima Tuz‐Zahra, Sylvain Bouix, Haley Lubeck, Philine Rojczyk, Luisa Sophie Schuhmacher, J. E. Buring, Douglas I. Katz, Yorghos Tripodis, Ofer Pasternak, Suheyla Cetin-Karayumak, Yogesh Rathi, Charles H. Adler, Ann C. McKee, Laura J. Balcer, Charles Bernick, Michael J. Coleman, Elizabeth A. Colasurdo, Alexander Lin, Elaine R. Peskind, Nicholas J. Ashton, Kaj Blennow, Henrik Zetterberg, Michael L. Alosco, Jeffrey L. Cummings, Eric M. Reiman, Robert Stern, Martha E. Shenton, Inga K. Koerte

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neurotrauma · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTraumatic Brain Injury Research
Canadian institutionsÉcole de Technologie SupérieureUniversité du Québec à Montréal
FundersNational Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke
KeywordsChronic traumatic encephalopathyTraumatic brain injuryFractional anisotropyCerebrospinal fluidDiffusion MRIMagnetic resonance imagingConcussionNeurodegenerationEffective diffusion coefficient

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Chronic traumatic encephalopathy (CTE) is a neurodegenerative disease associated with exposure to repetitive head impacts (RHI). In CTE, hyperphosphorylated tau (p-tau) aggregates are found in neurons at the depth of cortical sulci close to the gray matter/white matter (GM/WM) boundary. To date, CTE can only be diagnosed postmortem by neuropathological examination. Traumatic encephalopathy syndrome (TES) is the clinical syndrome purported to be associated with CTE pathology. The aim of this study is to investigate microstructural properties at the GM/WM boundary in individuals with a history of exposure to RHI and clinical features of CTE (i.e., TES). Diffusion magnetic resonance imaging (dMRI), TES diagnoses, and cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) biomarkers were acquired from 165 male former American football players (age: 57.29 ± 8.23 years) from the DIAGNOSE CTE Research Project, a multicenter, observational cohort study. Fractional anisotropy (FA) was measured at the GM/WM boundary of the whole brain. In addition, a widely used method (tract-based spatial statistics [TBSS]) was applied to measure FA of central WM. We used analyses of covariance to test associations between FA and TES. Furthermore, we used linear regressions to test associations between FA and nine CSF biomarkers (i.e., p-tau-181, -217, -231, total tau, amyloid β [Aβ] 1–40 , Aβ 1–42 , glial fibrillary acidic protein [GFAP], neurofilament light [NfL], and soluble triggering receptor expressed on myeloid cells-2 [sTREM2]). We report an association between higher FA at the GM/WM boundary and higher levels of certainty for CTE pathology ( F (1, 147) = 5.781, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.0003–0.003, p = 0.035) as well as neurobehavioral dysregulation ( F (1, 148) = 7.559, 95% CI = 0.001–0.009, p = 0.020), and functional dependence/dementia ( F (1, 148) = 5.046, 95% CI = 0.0004–0.006, p = 0.039). In addition, we report an association between higher FA at the GM/WM boundary and higher CSF p-tau-181 (β = 0.272, 95% CI = 0.078–0.466, p = 0.029) and p-tau-217 (β = 0.295, 95% CI = 0.102–0.488, p = 0.027). FA of the central WM was not associated with TES diagnoses. Taken together, these findings suggest that dMRI at the GM/WM boundary could be used to investigate microstructural alterations suggestive of tau pathology-associated neurodegeneration in individuals with TES, the clinical presentation of CTE. Future studies are needed to validate this approach and to identify clinically useful cutoff values for dMRI metrics.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.058
GPT teacher head0.351
Teacher spread0.293 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of NeurotraumaSame topicTraumatic Brain Injury ResearchFrench-language works237,207