Argyrophilic grain disease in individuals younger than 75 years: clinical variability in an under‐recognized limbic tauopathy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Argyrophilic grain disease (AGD) is a limbic-predominant 4R-tauopathy. AGD is thought to be an age-related disorder and is frequently detected as a concomitant pathology with other neurodegenerative conditions. There is a paucity of data on the clinical phenotype of pure AGD. In elderly patients, however, AGD pathology frequently associates with cognitive decline, personality changes, urine incontinence and cachexia. In this study, clinicopathological findings were analysed in individuals younger than 75. METHODS: Patients were identified retrospectively based on neuropathological examinations during 2006-2017 and selected when AGD was the primary and dominant pathological finding. Clinical data were obtained retrospectively through medical records. RESULTS: In all, 55 patients (2% of all examinations performed during that period) with AGD were identified. In seven cases (13%) AGD was the primary neuropathological diagnosis without significant concomitant pathologies. Two patients were female, median age at the time of death was 64 years (range 51-74) and the median duration of disease was 3 months (range 0.5-36). The most frequent symptoms were progressive cognitive decline, urinary incontinence, seizures and psychiatric symptoms. Brain magnetic resonance imaging revealed mild temporal atrophy. CONCLUSIONS: Argyrophilic grain disease is a rarely recognized limbic tauopathy in younger individuals. Widening the clinicopathological spectrum of tauopathies may allow identification of further patients who could benefit from tau-based therapeutic strategies.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".