Staging Alzheimer’s Disease Risk by Sequencing Brain Function and Structure, Cerebrospinal Fluid, and Cognition Biomarkers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study aims to develop a composite biomarker that can accurately measure the sequential biological stages of Alzheimer's disease (AD) on an individual level. We selected 144 subjects from the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative 2 datasets. Ten biomarkers, from brain function and structure, cerebrospinal fluid, and cognitive performance, were integrated using the event-based probabilistic model to estimate their optimal temporal sequence (Soptimal). We identified the numerical order of the Soptimal as the characterizing Alzheimer's disease risk events (CARE) index to measure disease stage. The results show that, in the Soptimal, hippocampal and posterior cingulate cortex network biomarkers occur first, followed by aberrant cerebrospinal fluid amyloid-β and p-tau levels, then cognitive deficit, and finally regional gray matter loss and fusiform network abnormality. The CARE index significantly correlates with disease severity and exhibits high reliability. Our findings demonstrate that use of the CARE index would advance AD stage measurement across the whole AD continuum and facilitate personalized treatment of AD.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 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".