Abstract WP479: Associations Between Vascular Risk, Amyloid Burden and Incident Dementia: The ARIC-PET Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Midlife vascular risk factors (MVRF) are associated with incident dementia. Similarly, amyloid β(Aβ) and neurodegeneration (e.g.brain volumes), as parts of the Alzheimer’s Disease (AD) ATN framework, are associated with cognition. Whether vascular and AD-associated factors contribute to dementia independently or interact synergistically to reduce cognitive ability is not well understood. Methods: Recruited from 3 U.S. communities, ARIC-PET participants were followed from 1987-89 (45-64 yo) through 2016-17 (74-94 yo). Cognition was evaluated in 2011-13 (ages 69-88), and twice more, every 2-3 years. In 2011-13, nondemented ARIC-PET participants had a brain MRI, with measurement of white matter hyperintensities (WMH) and brain volumes, with florbetapir (Aβ) PET scans in 2012-14; global cortical standardized uptake value ratio (SUVR) was log-transformed and standardized. Dementia was classified by expert review, as well as phone and medical record surveillance. The relative contributions of vascular risk (MVRF, WMH volume) and AD pathology (elevated Aβ SUVR, smaller AD signature region volumes) to incident dementia were evaluated with Cox proportional hazards regression. Results: In 298 individuals, 36 developed dementia. In models with key MVRF, demographics, and Aβ SUVR, hypertension and Aβ each independently predicted dementia risk (per SD of Aβ SUVR: HR 2.57, 95% CI 1.72-3.84; hypertension: HR 2.57, 95% CI 1.16-5.67), but didn’t interact on dementia risk. WMH (per SD: HR 1.51, 95% CI 1.03-2.20) and Aβ SUVR (per SD: HR 2.52, 95% CI 1.83-3.47) each contributed to incident dementia but WMH lost significance when MVRF were added to the model. Smaller AD signature regions were associated with incident dementia, independent of Aβ SUVR, and remained significant after adjustment for MVRF (HR per SD 2.18, 95% CI 1.18-4.01). Conclusions: Midlife hypertension and late-life Aβ independently contribute to dementia risk, but don’t synergize on a multiplicative scale. Neurodegeneration (e.g.smaller AD signature region volume) is also associated with incident dementia, independent of Aβ and MVRF. Multiple pathways leading to dementia should be considered when evaluating risk factors and interventions to reduce the burden of dementia.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".