MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7132963377

Targeting a different mechanism for treatment of demyelinating disease using vitamin B12 in combination therapy

2003· dissertation· W7132963377 on OpenAlexaff
Thomas A Nguyen

Bibliographic record

VenueTSpace · 2003
Typedissertation
Language
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeurogenesis and neuroplasticity mechanisms
Canadian institutionsBibliothèque et Archives nationales du QuébecBibliographical Society of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRemyelinationCombination therapyMyelinVitamin B12Proteolipid protein 1Myelin basic proteinPaclitaxelMyelin proteolipid protein
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The process of demyelination involves complex, multifactorial mechanisms. Our ND4 transgenic mouse model, an over-expressor of the proteolipid protein (PLP) alternatively-pliced variant DM20 which exhibits spontaneous demyelination, was used for this study. Paclitaxel was recently demonstrated to be an effective agent in combating demyelination within this mouse model. IFN-β treatment, a current widely employed therapeutic agent, was used for comparison. In this study, Vitamin B12 was used in combination with paclitaxel as a novel treatment to combat demyelination, resulting in more effective and sustained attenuation of clinical signs. Changes to HPLC profiles of myelin basic protein (MBP) were observed after different therapies, indicating modifications to MBP. Combination treatments with Vitamin B 12 resulted in changes of MBP methylation, which were more similar to patterns exhibited by the normal mice. This indicates a potential role of Vitamin B12 in promoting remyelination or protective of further degradation by enhancing myelin stability.

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.065
GPT teacher head0.349
Teacher spread0.284 · 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 designBench or experimental
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
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTSpace→Same topicNeurogenesis and neuroplasticity mechanisms→French-language works237,207→