Differential Effect of APOE <i>ɛ</i> 4 Status and Elevated Pulse Pressure on Functional Decline in Cognitively Normal Older Adults
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE: The APOE ɛ4 allele and increased vascular risk have both been independently linked to cognitive impairment and dementia. Since few studies have characterized how these risk factors affect everyday functioning, we investigated the relationship between APOE ɛ4 genotype and elevated pulse pressure (PP) on functional change in cognitively normal participants from the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI). METHODS: 738 normally aging participants underwent APOE genotyping, and baseline PP was calculated from blood pressure indices. The Functional Activities Questionnaire (FAQ) was completed by participants' informant at baseline and 6, 12, 24, 36, and 48-month follow-up visits. Multiple linear regression and multilevel modeling were used to examine the effects of PP and APOE ɛ4 genotype on cross-sectional and longitudinal FAQ scores, respectively. RESULTS: Adjusting for demographic and clinical covariates, results showed that both APOE ɛ4 status and elevated PP predicted greater functional difficulty trajectories across four years of follow-up. Interestingly, however, elevated PP was associated with greater functional decline over time in ɛ4 non-carriers versus carriers. CONCLUSION: Results show that, although APOE ɛ4 status is the prominent predictor of functional difficulty for ɛ4 carriers, an effect of arterial stiffening on functional difficulty was observed in non-carriers. Future studies are needed in order to clarify the etiology of the association between PP and different brain aging processes, and further explore its utility as a marker of dementia risk. The present study underscores the importance of targeting modifiable risk factors such as elevated PP to prevent or slow functional decline and pathological brain aging.
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 | 0.000 | 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".