Inexpensive, non-invasive biomarkers predict Alzheimer transition using machine learning analysis of the Alzheimer’s Disease Neuroimaging (ADNI) database
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging (ADNI) database is an expansive undertaking by government, academia, and industry to pool resources and data on subjects at various stage of symptomatic severity due to Alzheimer's disease. As expected, magnetic resonance imaging is a major component of the project. Full brain images are obtained at every 6-month visit. A range of cognitive tests studying executive function and memory are employed less frequently. Two blood draws (baseline, 6 months) provide samples to measure concentrations of approximately 145 plasma biomarkers. In addition, other diagnostic measurements are performed including PET imaging, cerebral spinal fluid measurements of amyloid-beta and tau peptides, as well as genetic tests, demographics, and vital signs. ADNI data is available upon review of an application. There have been numerous reports of how various processes evolve during AD progression, including alterations in metabolic and neuroendocrine activity, cell survival, and cognitive behavior. Lacking an analytic model at the onset, we leveraged recent advances in machine learning, which allow us to deal with large, non-linear systems with many variables. Of particular note was examining how well binary predictions of future disease states could be learned from simple, non-invasive measurements like those dependent on blood samples. Such measurements make relatively little demands on the time and effort of medical staff or patient. We report findings with recall/precision/area under the receiver operator curve after application of CART, Random Forest, Gradient Boosting, and Support Vector Machines, Our results show (i) Random Forests and Gradient Boosting work very well with such data, (ii) Prediction quality when applied to relatively easily obtained measurements (Cognitive scores, Genetic Risk and plasma biomarkers) achieve results that are competitive with magnetic resonance techniques. This is by no means an exhaustive study, but instead an exploration of the plausibility of defining a series of relatively inexpensive, broad population based tests.
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 | 0.004 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
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".