Biological heterogeneity in ADNI amnestic mild cognitive impairment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Previous work examining normal controls from the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI) identified substantial biological heterogeneity. We hypothesized that ADNI mild cognitive impairment (MCI) subjects would also exhibit heterogeneity with possible clinical implications. METHODS: ADNI subjects diagnosed with amnestic MCI (n=138) were clustered based on baseline magnetic resonance imaging, cerebrospinal fluid, and serum biomarkers. The clusters were compared with respect to longitudinal atrophy, cognitive trajectory, and time to conversion. RESULTS: Four clusters emerged with distinct biomarker patterns: The first cluster was biologically similar to normal controls and rarely converted to Alzheimer's disease (AD) during follow-up. The second cluster had characteristics of early Alzheimer's pathology. The third cluster showed the most severe atrophy but barely abnormal tau levels and a substantial proportion converted to clinical AD. The fourth cluster appeared to be pre-AD and nearly all converted to AD. CONCLUSIONS: Subjects with MCI who were clinically similar showed substantial heterogeneity in biomarkers.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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".