Testing a longitudinal compensation model in premanifest Huntington’s disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The initial stages of neurodegeneration are commonly marked by normal levels of cognitive and motor performance despite the presence of structural brain pathology. Compensation is widely assumed to account for this preserved behaviour, but despite the apparent simplicity of such a concept, it has proven incredibly difficult to demonstrate such a phenomenon and distinguish it from disease-related pathology. Recently, we developed a model of compensation whereby brain activation, behaviour and pathology, components key to understanding compensation, have specific longitudinal trajectories over three phases of progression. Here, we empirically validate our explicit mathematical model by testing for the presence of compensation over time in neurodegeneration. Huntington's disease is an ideal model for examining longitudinal compensation in neurodegeneration as it is both monogenic and fully penetrant, so disease progression and potential compensation can be monitored many years prior to diagnosis. We defined our conditions for compensation as non-linear longitudinal trajectories of brain activity and performance in the presence of linear neuronal degeneration and applied our model of compensation to a large longitudinal cohort of premanifest and early-stage Huntington's disease patients from the multisite Track-On HD study. Focusing on cognitive and motor networks, we integrated progressive volume loss, task and resting state functional MRI and cognitive and motor behaviour across three sequential phases of neurodegenerative disease progression, adjusted for genetic disease load. Multivariate linear mixed models were fitted and trajectories for each variable tested. Our conceptualization of compensation was partially realized across certain motor and cognitive networks at differing levels. We found several significant network trends that were more complex than that hypothesized in our model. These trends suggest changes to our theoretical model where the network effects are delayed relative to performance effects. There was evidence of compensation primarily in the prefrontal component of the cognitive network, with increased effective connectivity between the left and right dorsolateral prefrontal cortex. Having developed an operational model for the explicit testing of longitudinal compensation in neurodegeneration, it appears that general patterns of our framework are consistent with the empirical data. With the proposed modifications, our operational model of compensation can be used to test for both cross-sectional and longitudinal compensation in neurodegenerative disease with similar patterns to Huntington's disease.
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 | 0.014 | 0.023 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".