Amyloid-β and hyperphosphorylated tau synergy drives metabolic decline in preclinical Alzheimer’s disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study was designed to test the interaction between amyloid-β and tau proteins as a determinant of metabolic decline in preclinical Alzheimer’s disease (AD). We assessed 120 cognitively normal individuals with [ 18 F]florbetapir positron emission tomography (PET) and cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) measurements at baseline, as well as [ 18 F]fluorodeoxyglucose ([ 18 F]FDG) PET at baseline and at 24 months. A voxel-based interaction model was built to test the associations between continuous measurements of CSF biomarkers, [ 18 F]florbetapir and [ 18 F]FDG standardized uptake value ratios (SUVR). We found that the synergistic interaction between [ 18 F]florbetapir SUVR and CSF phosphorylated tau (p-tau) measurements, rather than the sum of their independent effects, was associated with a 24-month metabolic decline in basal and mesial temporal, orbitofrontal, and anterior and posterior cingulate cortices ( P <0.001). In contrast, interactions using CSF amyloid-β 1–42 and total tau biomarkers did not associate with metabolic decline over a time frame of 24 months. The interaction found in this study further support the framework that amyloid-β and hyperphosphorylated tau aggregates synergistically interact to cause downstream AD neurodegeneration. In fact, the regions displaying the metabolic decline reported here were confined to brain networks affected early by amyloid-β plaques and neurofibrillary tangles. Preventive clinical trials may benefit from using a combination of amyloid-β PET and p-tau biomarkers to enrich study populations of cognitively normal subjects with a high probability of disease progression in studies, using [ 18 F]FDG as a biomarker of efficacy.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 |
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".