Investigating Interventions in Alzheimer's Disease with Computer Simulation Models
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Progress in the development of therapeutic interventions to treat or slow the progression of Alzheimer's disease has been hampered by lack of efficacy and unforeseen side effects in human clinical trials. This setback highlights the need for new approaches for pre-clinical testing of possible interventions. Systems modelling is becoming increasingly recognised as a valuable tool for investigating molecular and cellular mechanisms involved in ageing and age-related diseases. However, there is still a lack of awareness of modelling approaches in many areas of biomedical research. We previously developed a stochastic computer model to examine some of the key pathways involved in the aggregation of amyloid-beta (Aβ) and the micro-tubular binding protein tau. Here we show how we extended this model to include the main processes involved in passive and active immunisation against Aβ and then demonstrate the effects of this intervention on soluble Aβ, plaques, phosphorylated tau and tangles. The model predicts that immunisation leads to clearance of plaques but only results in small reductions in levels of soluble Aβ, phosphorylated tau and tangles. The behaviour of this model is supported by neuropathological observations in Alzheimer patients immunised against Aβ. Since, soluble Aβ, phosphorylated tau and tangles more closely correlate with cognitive decline than plaques, our model suggests that immunotherapy against Aβ may not be effective unless it is performed very early in the disease process or combined with other therapies.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".