Differential effects of Down's syndrome and Alzheimer's neuropathology on default mode connectivity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Down's syndrome is a chromosomal disorder that invariably results in both intellectual disability and Alzheimer's disease neuropathology. However, only a limited number of studies to date have investigated intrinsic brain network organisation in people with Down's syndrome, none of which addressed the links between functional connectivity and Alzheimer's disease. In this cross‐sectional study, we employed 11 C‐Pittsburgh Compound‐B (PiB) positron emission tomography in order to group participants with Down's syndrome based on the presence of fibrillar beta‐amyloid neuropathology. We also acquired resting state functional magnetic resonance imaging data to interrogate the connectivity of the default mode network; a large‐scale system with demonstrated links to Alzheimer's disease. The results revealed widespread positive connectivity of the default mode network in people with Down's syndrome ( n = 34, ages 30–55, median age = 43.5) and a stark lack of anti‐correlation. However, in contrast to typically developing controls ( n = 20, ages 30–55, median age = 43.5), the Down's syndrome group also showed significantly weaker connections in localised frontal and posterior brain regions. Notably, while a comparison of the PiB‐negative Down's syndrome group ( n = 19, ages 30–48, median age = 41.0) to controls suggested that alterations in default mode connectivity to frontal brain regions are related to atypical development, a comparison of the PiB‐positive ( n = 15, ages 39–55, median age = 48.0) and PiB‐negative Down's syndrome groups indicated that aberrant connectivity in posterior cortices is associated with the presence of Alzheimer's disease neuropathology. Such distinct profiles of altered connectivity not only further our understanding of the brain physiology that underlies these two inherently linked conditions but may also potentially provide a biomarker for future studies of neurodegeneration in people with Down's syndrome.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".