A polymorphism in lipoprotein lipase affects the severity of Alzheimer's disease pathophysiology
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Emerging evidences indicate a role for lipoprotein lipase (LPL) in degenerative states. Genetic variations in the LPL gene were previously associated to lipid imbalance and coronary artery disease (CAD) risk and severity, a condition that shares pathological features with common Alzheimer's disease (AD). To evaluate whether these genetic variations associate with the risk and pathophysiology of common AD, autopsy-confirmed patients (242 controls, 153 AD) were genotyped for a PvuII single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP; rs285; referred to as the P+ allele) of LPL. Brain LPL mRNA levels, cholesterol levels, amyloid concentration, senile plaques and neurofibrillary tangles density counts were measured and contrasted with specific LPL genotypes. When adjusted for age and sex, homozygosity for the P+ allele resulted in an odds ratio of 2.3 for the risk of developing AD. More importantly, we report that the presence of the P+ allele of LPL significantly affects its mRNA expression level (n = 51; P = 0.026), brain tissue cholesterol levels (n = 55; P = 0.0013), neurofibrillary tangles (n = 52; P = 0.025) and senile plaque (n = 52; P = 0.022) densities. These results indicate that a common polymorphism in the lipoprotein lipase gene modulates the risk level for sporadic AD in the eastern Canadian population but more importantly, indirectly modulates the pathophysiology of the brain in autopsy-confirmed cases.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".