Synergistic effect of apolipoprotein E ε4 and butyrylcholinesterase K-variant on progression from mild cognitive impairment to Alzheimer's disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the synergistic effects of the apolipoprotein E (APOE) epsilon4 and butyrylcholinesterase K-variant (BCHE-K) alleles on progression to Alzheimer's disease (AD) in individuals with mild cognitive impairment (MCI). METHODS: This was a post-hoc exploratory analysis from a 3-4-year, randomized, placebo-controlled study of rivastigmine in participants with MCI (InDDEx study). Participants who consented to genetic testing were included in the current analyses. The incidence of progression to AD, cognitive decline and changes in MRI brain volumes were investigated in participants from the placebo arm of the InDDEx study. RESULTS: Of the 1018 participants in the overall study, 464 were successfully genotyped for both APOE and butyrylcholinesterase. Of these, 68 (14.7%) carried > or =1 APOE epsilon4 and > or =1 BCHE-K allele. The presence of APOE epsilon4 was associated with a significantly higher incidence of progression to AD whereas the presence of BCHE-K had no independent effect on progression. A synergistic effect of the combined presence of APOE epsilon4 and BCHE-K on the time to clinical diagnosis of AD and on MRI brain volumes was seen. Progression to AD and hippocampal volumetric loss was greatest in participants who carried both APOE epsilon4 and BCHE-K alleles and lowest in BCHE-K carriers without the APOE epsilon4 allele. CONCLUSION: In MCI, the risk of cognitive decline, hippocampal volumetric loss and progression to AD seems to be the greatest in individuals who carry at least one copy of both the BCHE-K and APOE epsilon4 alleles.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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".