ArticleFrontiers in neurology
Cerebrospinal fluid proteomics identifies calcyphosine and follistatin-like 1 as exploratory candidate proteins of interest in hydrocephalus.
Article in Frontiers in neurology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Hydrocephalus comprises etiologically heterogeneous disorders that converge on ventricular enlargement but may be associated with distinct protein-abundance patterns within the cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) compartment. This exploratory study compared CSF proteomic profiles in post-hemorrhagic hydrocephalus (PHH) and idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus (iNPH) to characterize CSF protein-abundance patterns associated with these two hydrocephalus and identify proteins for further validation. Methods: Cerebrospinal fluid samples from 11 participants, including five patients with PHH, three with iNPH, and three non-hydrocephalus controls, were analyzed using Olink proximity extension assay proteomics. Normalized protein expression values were assessed by quality-control analysis, differential expression analysis, and functional annotation using Gene Ontology, KEGG, Reactome, InterPro, Disease Ontology, and STRING-based protein interaction analyses. Differentially expressed proteins were screened using nominal Results: All samples passed quality-control criteria. Compared with the non-hydrocephalus control group, both PHH and iNPH showed predominantly downregulated CSF proteomic profiles, with different exploratory protein-abundance patterns. PHH showed relative CAPS elevation together with reduced proteins related to neuronal structural maintenance, synaptic signaling, axon guidance, immune communication, and extracellular regulation. Functional annotation analyses identified overrepresented terms related to inflammatory signaling, cytokine-receptor interaction, cell adhesion, calcium-related signaling, lysosomal clearance, glycan remodeling, and neural pathways. In iNPH, FSTL1 was relatively increased, whereas proteins involved in synaptic function, axon guidance, cell adhesion, growth-factor signaling, extracellular matrix organization, and cellular stress responses were decreased. Enrichment analyses highlighted neural connectivity, receptor-associated signaling, inflammatory pathways, proteostasis, glycosaminoglycan metabolism, and cilium- or centrosome-related processes. ELISA reproduced the direction of the proteomic findings, showing higher CSF CAPS levels in PHH and higher CSF FSTL1 levels in iNPH than in the non-hydrocephalus control group. Discussion: The PHH and iNPH share a ventricular phenotype but exhibit distinct CSF proteomic signatures. CAPS and FSTL1 may represent exploratory proteins of interest within different hydrocephalus-related annotation contexts. These findings require validation in larger, independent, longitudinal cohorts before clinical biomarker inferences are made.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.