Single-subject gray matter networks predict future cortical atrophy in preclinical Alzheimer's disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The development of preventive strategies in early-stage Alzheimer's disease (AD) requires measures that can predict future brain atrophy. Gray matter network measures are related to amyloid burden in cognitively normal older individuals and predict clinical progression in preclinical AD. Here, we show that within individuals with preclinical AD, gray matter network measures predict hippocampal atrophy rates, whereas other AD biomarkers (total gray matter volume, cerebrospinal fluid total tau, and Mini-Mental State Examination) do not. Furthermore, in brain areas where amyloid is known to start aggregating (i.e. anterior cingulate and precuneus), disrupted network measures predict faster atrophy in other distant areas, mostly involving temporal regions, which are associated with AD. When repeating analyses in age-matched, cognitively unimpaired individuals without amyloid or tau pathology, we did not find any associations between network measures and hippocampal atrophy, suggesting that the associations are specific for preclinical AD. Our findings suggest that disrupted gray matter networks may indicate a treatment opportunity in preclinical AD individuals but before the onset of irreversible atrophy and cognitive impairment.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".