Early detection of Alzheimer's disease using M<scp>RI</scp> hippocampal texture
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cognitive impairment in patients with Alzheimer's disease (AD) is associated with reduction in hippocampal volume in magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). However, it is unknown whether hippocampal texture changes in persons with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) that does not have a change in hippocampal volume. We tested the hypothesis that hippocampal texture has association to early cognitive loss beyond that of volumetric changes. The texture marker was trained and evaluated using T1-weighted MRI scans from the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI) database, and subsequently applied to score independent data sets from the Australian Imaging, Biomarker & Lifestyle Flagship Study of Ageing (AIBL) and the Metropolit 1953 Danish Male Birth Cohort (Metropolit). Hippocampal texture was superior to volume reduction as predictor of MCI-to-AD conversion in ADNI (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve [AUC] 0.74 vs. 0.67; DeLong test, p = 0.005), and provided even better prognostic results in AIBL (AUC 0.83). Hippocampal texture, but not volume, correlated with Addenbrooke's cognitive examination score (Pearson correlation, r = -0.25, p < 0.001) in the Metropolit cohort. The hippocampal texture marker correlated with hippocampal glucose metabolism as indicated by fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography (Pearson correlation, r = -0.57, p < 0.001). Texture statistics remained significant after adjustment for volume in all cases, and the combination of texture and volume did not improve diagnostic or prognostic AUCs significantly. Our study highlights the presence of hippocampal texture abnormalities in MCI, and the possibility that texture may serve as a prognostic neuroimaging biomarker of early cognitive impairment.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".