Sex-Specific Cross Tissue Meta-Analysis Identifies Immune Dysregulation in Women with Alzheimer’s Disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT In spite of evidence of females having a greater lifetime risk of developing Alzheimer’s Disease (AD) and greater apolipoprotein E4-related (apoE4) AD risk compared to males, molecular signatures underlying these findings remain elusive. We took a meta-analysis approach to study gene expression in the brains of 1,084 AD patients and age-matched controls and whole blood from 645 AD patients and age-matched controls. Gene-expression, network-based analysis and cell type deconvolution approaches revealed a consistent immune signature in the brain and blood of female AD patients that was absent in males. Machine learning-based classification of AD using gene expression from whole blood in addition to clinical features revealed an improvement in classification accuracy upon stratifying by sex, achieving an AUROC of 0.91 for females and 0.80 for males. These results help identify sex and apoE4 genotype-specific transcriptomic signatures of AD and underscore the importance of considering sex in the development of biomarkers and therapeutic strategies for 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 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 | 0.006 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.010 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".