Individualized atrophy scores predict dementia onset in familial frontotemporal lobar degeneration
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Some models of therapy for neurodegenerative diseases envision starting treatment before symptoms develop. Demonstrating that such treatments are effective requires accurate knowledge of when symptoms would have started without treatment. Familial frontotemporal lobar degeneration offers a unique opportunity to develop predictors of symptom onset. METHODS: We created dementia risk scores in 268 familial frontotemporal lobar degeneration family members by entering covariate-adjusted standardized estimates of brain atrophy into a logistic regression to classify asymptomatic versus demented participants. The score's predictive value was tested in a separate group who were followed up longitudinally (stable vs. converted to dementia) using Cox proportional regressions with dementia risk score as the predictor. RESULTS: Cross-validated logistic regression achieved good separation of asymptomatic versus demented (accuracy = 90%, SE = 0.06). Atrophy scores predicted conversion from asymptomatic or mildly/questionably symptomatic to dementia (HR = 1.51, 95% CI: [1.16,1.98]). DISCUSSION: Individualized quantification of baseline brain atrophy is a promising predictor of progression in asymptomatic familial frontotemporal lobar degeneration mutation carriers.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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".