MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2980337605 · doi:10.1016/j.jalz.2019.06.1036

P1‐431: VASCULAR MEDICAL TREATMENTS INFLUENCE THE ASSOCIATION BETWEEN VASCULAR BURDEN AND AMYLOID PATHOLOGY IN ASYMPTOMATIC INDIVIDUALS AT RISK FOR ALZHEIMER'S DISEASE

2019· article· en· W2980337605 on OpenAlexaff
Theresa Köbe, Julie Gonneaud, Alexa Pichet Binette, Pierre‐François Meyer, Melissa McSweeney, Pedro Rosa‐Neto, John C.S. Breitner, Judes Poirier, Sylvia Villeneuve

Bibliographic record

VenueAlzheimer s & Dementia · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeurological Disorders and Treatments
Canadian institutionsMcGill University Health CentreMcGill UniversityDouglas Mental Health University Institute
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBlood pressureMedicineInternal medicinePulse pressureAsymptomaticDyslipidemiaCardiologyApolipoprotein EEndocrinologyDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The influence of vascular risk factors (VRF) on Alzheimer's disease (AD) pathophysiology remains inconclusive. This study aims to examine the associations of lipids, blood pressure and combined VRF scores with Aß and tau pathology in the preclinical disease stage, considering the moderating impact of vascular drug treatment. Cognitively healthy individuals with family history of AD from the PREVENT-AD cohort were included (mean age: 62 years). Aß-PET [F-NAV-4694] and tau-PET [Flortaucipir] scans were obtained from 120 individuals to examine the association between lipids [total cholesterol, high-density lipoprotein (HDL), low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol], blood pressure [systolic and diastolic blood pressure, pulse pressure], combined VRF scores [CAIDE, FCRP, FHS-CVD (see Figure1 legend)] and global Aß and entorhinal tau SUVR. Individuals were binarized for vascular medication (dyslipidemia and/or hypertensive drugs) to examine interaction effects, using linear regression models. Subsequently, we tested for within-group effects. All models were corrected for age, sex and time difference between VRF and PET measurements, while secondary models also included correction for apolipoproteinE ε4 (APOEε4) status. The analyses were repeated using CSF Aβ1-42 and p-tau biomarkers in 162 PREVENT-AD individuals (67 also included in the PET analyses). In most analyses, we found interactions between VRF and vascular medical treatment on Aß brain deposition (Figure1). In non-treated participants, higher levels of total cholesterol, LDL, systolic blood pressure, pulse pressure and all combined VRF scores were associated with higher Aß-PET deposition (all pnon-treated≤0.04). Similarly, total cholesterol, LDL and the CAIDE risk score were related to lower Aß1-42 in the CSF in non-treated participants only (all pnon-treated≤0.02). While PET results remained almost identical, CSF results were diminished after correction for APOEε4. No associations were found between VRF and tau.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.246 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlzheimer s & DementiaSame topicNeurological Disorders and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207