Development and evaluation of a multiplexed mass spectrometry based assay for measuring candidate peptide biomarkers in Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI) CSF
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: We describe the outcome of the Biomarkers Consortium CSF Proteomics Project (where CSF is cerebral spinal fluid), a public-private partnership of government, academia, nonprofit, and industry. The goal of this study was to evaluate a multiplexed MS-based approach for the qualification of candidate Alzheimer's disease (AD) biomarkers using CSF samples from the AD Neuroimaging Initiative. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Reproducibility of sample processing, analytic variability, and ability to detect a variety of analytes of interest were thoroughly investigated. Multiple approaches to statistical analyses assessed whether panel analytes were associated with baseline pathology (mild cognitive impairment (MCI), AD) versus healthy controls or associated with progression for MCI patients, and included (i) univariate association analyses, (ii) univariate prediction models, (iii) exploratory multivariate analyses, and (iv) supervised multivariate analysis. RESULTS: A robust targeted MS-based approach for the qualification of candidate AD biomarkers was developed. The results identified several peptides with potential diagnostic or predictive utility, with the most significant differences observed for the following peptides for differentiating (including peptides from hemoglobin A, hemoglobin B, and superoxide dismutase) or predicting (including peptides from neuronal pentraxin-2, neurosecretory protein VGF (VGF), and secretogranin-2) progression versus nonprogression from MCI to AD. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: These data provide potential insights into the biology of CSF in AD and MCI progression and provide a novel tool for AD researchers and clinicians working to improve diagnostic accuracy, evaluation of treatment efficacy, and early diagnosis.
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 | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".