Sex, Apolipoprotein E ε4 Status, and Hippocampal Volume in Mild Cognitive Impairment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Subjects with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) have been shown to have reduced hippocampal volumes relative to normal elderly control subjects. The presence of the apolipoprotein E epsilon4 (APOE*E4) allele has been associated with greater hippocampal atrophy in women than in men with Alzheimer disease. This relationship has not been demonstrated in MCI. OBJECTIVE: To examine the relationship between APOE genotype and hippocampal volume in men and women with MCI. DESIGN: This study evaluated MCI in 193 subjects (86 women and 107 men) participating in a multicenter clinical trial, all of whom underwent magnetic resonance imaging at their baseline visit. We evaluated the association among the number of APOE*E4 alleles, memory performance, and hippocampal volume in men and women with tests of means and multiple linear regressions. RESULTS: Compared with MCI subjects with no APOE*E4 alleles, women with 1 or 2 APOE*E4 alleles were found to have significantly reduced hippocampal volume, whereas men only showed a significant reduction in hippocampal volume when carrying 2 APOE*E4 alleles. Worsening of performance on a delayed word recall task (Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale cognitive subscale) showed an identical pattern in association with APOE*E4 allele dose and sex. Furthermore, when controlling for memory performance on delayed word recall, the APOE*E4 effect on hippocampal volumes was attenuated in men, but remained significant in women. CONCLUSION: The APOE*E4 genotype status appears to have a greater deleterious effect on gross hippocampal pathology and memory performance in women than in men.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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".