ApoE4 effects on automated diagnostic classifiers for mild cognitive impairment and Alzheimer's disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Biomarkers are the only feasible way to detect and monitor presymptomatic Alzheimer's disease (AD). No single biomarker can predict future cognitive decline with an acceptable level of accuracy. In addition to designing powerful multimodal diagnostic platforms, a careful investigation of the major sources of disease heterogeneity and their influence on biomarker changes is needed. Here we investigated the accuracy of a novel multimodal biomarker classifier for differentiating cognitively normal (NC), mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and AD subjects with and without stratification by ApoE4 genotype. 111 NC, 182 MCI and 95 AD ADNI participants provided both structural MRI and CSF data at baseline. We used an automated machine-learning classifier to test the ability of hippocampal volume and CSF Aβ, t-tau and p-tau levels, both separately and in combination, to differentiate NC, MCI and AD subjects, and predict conversion. We hypothesized that the combined hippocampal/CSF biomarker classifier model would achieve the highest accuracy in differentiating between the three diagnostic groups and that ApoE4 genotype will affect both diagnostic accuracy and biomarker selection. The combined hippocampal/CSF classifier performed better than hippocampus-only classifier in differentiating NC from MCI and NC from AD. It also outperformed the CSF-only classifier in differentiating NC vs. AD. Our amyloid marker played a role in discriminating NC from MCI or AD but not for MCI vs. AD. Neurodegenerative markers contributed to accurate discrimination of AD from NC and MCI but not NC from MCI. Classifiers predicting MCI conversion performed well only after ApoE4 stratification. Hippocampal volume and sex achieved AUC = 0.68 for predicting conversion in the ApoE4-positive MCI, while CSF p-tau, education and sex achieved AUC = 0.89 for predicting conversion in ApoE4-negative MCI. These observations support the proposed biomarker trajectory in AD, which postulates that amyloid markers become abnormal early in the disease course while markers of neurodegeneration become abnormal later in the disease course and suggests that ApoE4 could be at least partially responsible for some of the observed disease heterogeneity.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".