Nuances in Alzheimer’s Genetic Risk Reveal Differential Predictions of Non-demented Memory Aging Trajectories: Selective Patterns by APOE Genotype and Sex
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Apolipoprotein E (APOE) is a prominent genetic risk factor for Alzheimer's disease (AD) and a frequent target for associations with non-demented and cognitively impaired aging. APOE offers a unique opportunity to evaluate two dichotomous comparisons and selected gradations of APOE risk. Some evidence suggests that APOE effects may differ by sex and emerge especially in interaction with other AD-related biomarkers (e.g., vascular health). METHODS: Longitudinal trajectories of non-demented adults (n = 632, 67% female, Mage = 68.9) populated a 40-year band of aging. Focusing on memory performance and individualized memory trajectories, a sequence of latent growth models was tested for predictions of (moderation between) APOE and pulse pressure (PP) as stratified by sex. The analyses (1) established robust benchmark PP effects on memory trajectories, (2) compared predictions of alternative dichotomous groupings (ε4- vs ε4+, ε2- vs ε2+), and (3) examined precision-based predictions by disaggregated APOE genotypes. RESULTS: Healthier (lower) PP was associated with better memory performance and less decline. Therefore, all subsequent analyses were conducted in the interactive context of PP effects and sex stratification. The ε4-based dichotomization produced no differential genetic predictions. The ε2-based analyses showed sex differences, including selective protection for ε2-positive females. Exploratory follow-up disaggregated APOE genotype analyses suggested selective ε2 protection effects for both homozygotic and heterozygotic females. CONCLUSION: Precision analyses of AD genetic risk will advance the understanding of underlying mechanisms and improve personalized implementation of interventions.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".