MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3029427039 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0232785

Retinal nerve fiber layer thickness predicts CSF amyloid/tau before cognitive decline

2020· article· en· W3029427039 on OpenAlexaff
Samuel Asanad, Michele Fantini, William Sultan, Marco Nassisi, Christian Félix, Jessica Wu, Rustum Karanjia, Fred N. Ross‐Cisneros, Abhay P. Sagare, Berislav V. Zloković, Helena C. Chui, Janice M. Pogoda, Xianghong Arakaki, Alfred N. Fonteh, A. Ali, Michael G. Harrington

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGlaucoma and retinal disorders
Canadian institutionsOttawa HospitalUniversity of Ottawa
FundersNational Center for Advancing Translational SciencesNational Institute on Aging
KeywordsNerve fiber layerRetinalInner plexiform layerMedicineOphthalmologyCerebrospinal fluidPathologyLogistic regressionCognitive declineOuter plexiform layerPathologicalInternal medicineDementiaDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Alzheimer's disease (AD) pathology precedes symptoms and its detection can identify at-risk individuals who may benefit from early treatment. Since the retinal nerve fiber layer (RNFL) is depleted in established AD, we tested whether its thickness can predict whether cognitively healthy (CH) individuals have a normal or pathological cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) Aß42 (A) and tau (T) ratio. METHODS: As part of an ongoing longitudinal study, we enrolled CH individuals, excluding those with cognitive impairment and significant ocular pathology. We classified the CH group into two sub-groups, normal (CH-NAT, n = 16) or pathological (CH-PAT, n = 27), using a logistic regression model from the CSF AT ratio that identified >85% of patients with a clinically probable AD diagnosis. Spectral-domain optical coherence tomography (OCT) was acquired for RNFL, ganglion cell-inner plexiform layer (GC-IPL), and macular thickness. Group differences were tested using mixed model repeated measures and a classification model derived using multiple logistic regression. RESULTS: Mean age (± standard deviation) in the CH-PAT group (n = 27; 75.2 ± 8.4 years) was similar (p = 0.50) to the CH-NAT group (n = 16; 74.1 ± 7.9 years). Mean RNFL (standard error) was thinner in the CH-PAT group by 9.8 (2.7) μm; p < 0.001. RNFL thickness classified CH-NAT vs. CH-PAT with 87% sensitivity and 56.3% specificity. CONCLUSIONS: Our retinal data predict which individuals have CSF biomarkers of AD pathology before cognitive deficits are detectable with 87% sensitivity. Such results from easy-to-acquire, objective and non-invasive measurements of the RNFL merit further study of OCT technology to monitor or screen for early AD pathology.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.218 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations54
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONESame topicGlaucoma and retinal disordersFrench-language works237,207