Highly Elevated Cerebrospinal Fluid Total Tau Level Reflects Higher Likelihood of Non-Amnestic Subtype of Alzheimer’s Disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) levels of total tau (t-tau) protein are thought to reflect the intensity of the neuronal damage in neurodegeneration, including Alzheimer's disease (AD). The recent link of CSF t-tau to rapidly progressive AD raises the question among other AD clinical variants regarding CSF t-tau. We investigated the clinical phenotypes of AD patients with varying CSF t-tau levels. OBJECTIVE: We tested the hypothesis that highly elevated CSF t-tau level would have a higher likelihood of presenting with atypical non-amnestic variants of AD. METHODS: Retrospective comparative case study of 97 patients evaluated in a memory clinic with clinical presentation and CSF biomarkers consistent with AD. We compared the age, sex, education, APOEɛ4 status, Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) score, clinical phenotype, and MRI volumetric measures by CSF t-tau quartile at baseline. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to evaluate if CSF t-tau levels predict non-amnestic presentations controlling for covariates. RESULTS: Non-amnestic AD had a higher median CSF t-tau level compared to amnestic-AD (p = 0.014). Each 50 pg/ml increase in CSF t-tau was associated with an increase in the odds of having a non-amnestic presentation (7.4%) and aphasia (10.6 %) as the initial presenting symptom even after taking into account; age, sex, education, APOEɛ4, MoCA, and CSF Aβ42. Logopenic AD had higher t-tau and p-tau levels compared to other variants. CONCLUSIONS: Highly elevated CSF t-tau levels could indicate more cortical involvement presenting with early non-amnestic symptoms in atypical AD subtypes, particularly in the logopenic variant.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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".