Metabolomics Analyses of Saliva Detect Novel Biomarkers of Alzheimer’s Disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Using a non-invasive biofluid (saliva), we apply a powerful metabolomics workflow for unbiased biomarker discovery in Alzheimer's disease (AD). We profile and differentiate Cognitively Normal (CN), Mild Cognitive Impairment (MCI), and AD groups. The workflow involves differential chemical isotope labeling liquid chromatography mass spectrometry using dansylation derivatization for in-depth profiling of the amine/phenol submetabolome. The total sample (N = 109) was divided in to the Discovery Phase (DP) (n = 82; 35 CN, 25 MCI, 22 AD) and a provisional Validation Phase (VP) (n = 27; 10 CN, 10 MCI, 7 AD). In DP we detected 6,230 metabolites. Pairwise analyses confirmed biomarkers for AD versus CN (63), AD versus MCI (47), and MCI versus CN (2). We then determined the top discriminating biomarkers and diagnostic panels. A 3-metabolite panel distinguished AD from CN and MCI (DP and VP: Area Under the Curve [AUC] = 1.000). The MCI and CN groups were best discriminated with a 2-metabolite panel (DP: AUC = 0.779; VP: AUC = 0.889). In addition, using positively confirmed metabolites, we were able to distinguish AD from CN and MCI with good diagnostic performance (AUC > 0.8). Saliva is a promising biofluid for both unbiased and targeted AD biomarker discovery and mechanism detection. Given its wide availability and convenient accessibility, saliva is a biofluid that can promote diversification of global AD biomarker research.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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".