MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7118854830 · doi:10.1002/alz70856_106677

The Utility of White Matter Hyperintensities as A Prognostic Biomarker in Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis

2025· article· en· W7118854830 on OpenAlexaffabout
Katherine Chadwick, Isabelle Lajoie, Yashar Zeighami, Sanjay Kalra, Mahsa Dadar

Bibliographic record

VenueAlzheimer s & Dementia · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAmyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis Research
Canadian institutionsWomen and Children’s Health Research InstituteUniversity of AlbertaMontreal Neurological Institute and HospitalDouglas Mental Health University InstituteMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHyperintensityAmyotrophic lateral sclerosisWhite matterNeuroimagingContext (archaeology)Magnetic resonance imagingFluid-attenuated inversion recoveryMultiple sclerosis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background While sclerosis of the corticospinal and corticobulbar white matter tracts is a key pathological feature of Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis (ALS) and previous work in the context of other neurodegenerative diseases has established the link between white matter hyperintensities (WMHs) as magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) markers of white matter damage and disease progression, WMHs remain unexplored in ALS. The present work investigates the relationship between presence and progression of WMHs and disease severity and survival in ALS patients. Method We included longitudinal MRI and clinical data of 232 ALS patients and 207 matched controls from the Canadian ALS Neuroimaging Consortium (CALSNIC) (Kalra et al. 2019). T1‐weighted and FLAIR MRIs were used to perform WMH segmentation using BISON pipeline (Figure 1) (Dadar et al. 2021). Patients with survival data ( N = 110) were categorized as “short” ( N = 45) or “long” ( N = 65) survivors based on their time‐to‐outcome from the baseline MRI with a 24‐month cut‐off threshold. Linear mixed effect modeling was employed to investigate the differences in WMH burden and longitudinal progression between the ALS patients as well as survival groups and matched controls, and to assess the relationship between WMH progression and disease severity as measured by ALSFRS‐R. Age and sex were considered as covariates and participant IDs as random effects. Result Compared to healthy controls, ALS patients had significantly greater longitudinal WMH progression (911.5 mm3/year, p < 0.0001) (Figure 2A). Furthermore, patients in the short survival group experienced greater WMH progression than those in the long survival group (1006 mm3/year, p < 0.0001) (Figure 2B). Finally, for every 500 mm3 increase in WMH volume, the ALSFRS‐R scores decreased by a full point ( p < 0.001) (Figure 3A). While both survival groups experienced increased disease severity with increased WMH volume ( p < 0.001), their rates of change did not significantly differ (Figure 3B). Conclusion This study has shown, for the first time, that ALS patients present with greater WMH progression, and that WMH progression is linked to disease severity and survival in patients, highlighting the utility of WMH as a biomarker of disease progression and prognosis in ALS.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.256 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlzheimer s & Dementia→Same topicAmyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis Research→French-language works237,207→