Association Between Psychosis Phenotype and APOE Genotype on the Clinical Profiles of Alzheimer's Disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Psychosis is a common phenomenon in Alzheimer's disease (AD). The APOE ε4 allele is the strongest genetic risk factor for the development of AD, but its association with psychosis remains unclear. OBJECTIVE: We investigated the associations between psychosis, subdivided into delusions and hallucinations, as well as APOE ε4 allele on cognitive and functional outcomes. Secondarily, we investigated the associations between APOE ε4, Lewy bodies, and psychosis. METHODS: Data from the National Alzheimer's Coordinating Center (NACC) were used. Nine hundred patients with a confirmed diagnosis of AD based on the NIA-AA Reagan were included in the analysis. Global cognition was assessed using the Mini-Mental State Exam (MMSE) and functional status was assessed using the Functional Activities Questionnaire (FAQ). Psychosis status was determined using the Neuropsychiatric Inventory Questionnaire (NPI-Q). Factorial design was used to assess the effects of psychosis and APOE ε4, as well as their interaction. RESULTS: Psychosis and the presence of APOE ε4 were both associated with lower MMSE scores, while only psychosis was associated with higher FAQ scores. Furthermore, patients with hallucinations had lower MMSE and higher FAQ scores than patients with only delusions. There was a significant interaction effect between psychosis and APOE ε4 on MMSE scores, with APOE ε4 negatively affecting patients with hallucinations-only psychosis. APOE ε4 was positively associated with the presence of Lewy body pathology, and both were found to be more prevalent in psychotic patients, with a stronger association with hallucinations. CONCLUSION: Psychosis in AD was associated with greater cognitive and functional impairments. Patients with hallucinations-with or without delusions-conferred even greater deficits compared to patients with only delusions. The APOE ε4 allele was associated with worse cognition, especially for patients with hallucination-only psychosis. APOE ε4 may mediate cognitive impairment in the hallucinations phenotype through the development of Lewy bodies. Our findings support that subtypes of psychosis should be evaluated separately.
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 | 0.003 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".