Associations between texture of T1‐weighted magnetic resonance imaging and radiographic pathologies in Alzheimer’s disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Texture analysis of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) brain scans have been proposed as a promising tool in the early diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease (AD), but its biological correlates remain unknown. In this study, we examined the relationship between MRI texture features and AD pathology. METHODS: The study included 150 participants who had a 3.0T T1-weighted image, amyloid-β positron emission tomography (PET), and tau PET within 3 months of each other. In each of six brain regions (hippocampus, precuneus, and entorhinal, middle temporal, posterior cingulate and superior frontal cortices), linear regression analyses adjusting for age and sex was performed to examine the effects of regional amyloid-β and tau burden on regional texture features. We also compared neuroimaging measures based on pathological severity using ANOVA. RESULTS: In all regions, tau burden (p < 0.05), but not amyloid-β burden, were associated with a certain texture feature that varied with the region's cytoarchitecture. Specifically, autocorrelation and cluster shade were associated with tau burden in allocortical and periallocortical regions, whereas entropy and contrast were associated with tau burden in neocortical regions. Mean signal intensity of each region did not show any associations with AD pathology. The values of the region-specific textures also varied across groups of varying pathological severity. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that textures of T1-weighted MRI reflect changes in the brain that are associated with regional tau burden and the local cytoarchitecture. This study provides insight into how MRI texture can be used for detection of microstructural changes in 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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".