MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2996615980 · doi:10.1016/j.jalz.2019.08.195

Brain imaging measurements of fibrillar amyloid‐β burden, paired helical filament tau burden, and atrophy in cognitively unimpaired persons with two, one, and no copies of the <i>APOE ε4</i> allele

2019· article· en· W2996615980 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Valentina Ghisays, Dhruman D. Goradia, Hillary Protas, Robert Bauer, Vivek Devadas, Pierre N. Tariot, Val J. Lowe, David S. Knopman, Ronald C. Petersen, Clifford R. Jack, Richard J. Caselli, Yi Su, Kewei Chen, Eric M. Reiman

Bibliographic record

VenueAlzheimer s & Dementia · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institute on AgingNational Institutes of HealthW. Garfield Weston FoundationGHR FoundationWeston Brain InstituteArizona Department of Health Services
KeywordsPittsburgh compound BAtrophyEntorhinal cortexApolipoprotein EMagnetic resonance imagingMedicinePositron emission tomographyNeurodegenerationNuclear medicineAmyloid (mycology)PathologyInternal medicineAlzheimer's diseaseHippocampusRadiologyDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: We previously characterized associations between brain imaging measurements of amyloid-β (Aβ) plaque burden and apolipoprotein E (APOE) ε4 gene dose in a small number of cognitively unimpaired late-middle-aged APOE ε4 homozygotes (HMs), heterozygotes (HTs), and noncarriers (NCs). We now characterize cross-sectional Aβ plaque, tau tangle, and cortical atrophy (neurodegeneration) measurements, classifications, and associations with age in a larger number of unimpaired HMs, HTs, and NCs over a wider age range. METHODS: C Pittsburgh compound B (Aβ) positron emission tomography (PET), flortaucipir (tau) PET, and volumetric magnetic resonance imaging data from 164 study participants of age 47-86 years, including 26 APOE ε4 HMs, 48 HTs, and 90 NCs matched for age and sex. RESULTS: Aβ PET measurements rose, plateaued at the respective ages of 68 and 76, and then declined with age in unimpaired HM and HT groups. Compared with NCs, these two groups began to have significantly higher Aβ PET measurements at ages 62 and 70, respectively, and no longer had significantly higher measurements by ages 71 and 78, respectively. They began to have significantly higher entorhinal cortex tau PET measurements at ages 66 and 70, respectively, and no longer had significantly higher measurements by ages 74 and 78, respectively. Brain atrophy measurements tended to decline slowly with age in all three genetic groups. Their elevated tau PET measurements were attributable to those with positive Aβ PET scans. 41.0%, 18.0%, and 5.0% of the 47- to 70-year-old HMs, HTs, and NCs and 25.0%, 79.0%, and 38.0% of the 71- to 86-year-old HMs, HTs, and NCs had positive Aβ PET scans, and the long-term recall memory scores are significantly higher in the older HMs than in HT and NC groups, suggesting resistance to Aβ deposition in those HMs who remained unimpaired at older ages. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides information about Aβ plaque burden, tau tangle burden, and neurodegeneration in cognitively unimpaired persons at three levels of genetic risk for AD. Unimpaired APOE ε4 HMs can be studied before their 70s to evaluate the understanding of factors, processes, and interventions involved in the predisposition to and prevention of AD, and after their 70s, to discover factors, processes, and interventions involved in the resilience or resistance to and prevention of AD.

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)0.001
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 score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.244 · 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

Citations40
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlzheimer s & DementiaSame topicDementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchFrench-language works237,207