Longitudinal Dynamics of Plasma Neurofilament Light Chain in Hereditary Spastic Paraplegia Type 11 ( <scp>HSP</scp> ‐ <scp> <i>SPG11</i> </scp> ) and Type 15 ( <scp>HSP</scp> ‐ <scp> <i>ZFYVE26</i> </scp> )
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: HSP-SPG11 and HSP-ZFYVE26 are autosomal-recessive forms of hereditary spastic paraplegias (HSPs). As therapeutic trials emerge, validated biomarkers are critically needed. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate plasma neurofilament light chain (pNfL) as a biomarker for neurodegeneration and disease progression. METHODS: We analyzed pNfL levels in 57 patients (36 HSP-SPG11, 21 HSP-ZFYVE26) and matched controls using single-molecule array technology. Longitudinal clinical and biomarker data were collected over 5 years. RESULTS: Baseline pNfL levels were significantly elevated in patients: 33.85 pg/mL (IQR 25.15-47.38) in HSP-SPG11, 46.70 pg/mL (IQR 29.95-54.84) in HSP-ZFYVE26, and 4.90 pg/mL (IQR 3.48-6.90) in controls (P < 0.001). No significant difference was observed between HSP-SPG11 and HSP-ZFYVE26. In matched pair analysis, pNfL showed inverse correlation with age (ρ = -0.463, P < 0.001). Baseline pNfL did not predict future clinical progression. CONCLUSIONS: Elevated pNfL reflects early neuroaxonal injury in HSP-SPG11 and HSP-ZFYVE26; however, it could not be used as a surrogate for disease progression. © 2025 International Parkinson and Movement Disorder Society.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".