Association of PET‐based stages of amyloid deposition with neuropathological markers of Aβ pathology
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To determine if PET-based stages of regional amyloid deposition are associated with neuropathological phases of Aβ pathology. METHODS: We applied data-driven regional frequency-based and a-priori striatum-based PET staging approaches to ante-mortem 18F-Florbetapir-PET scans of 30 cases from the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative autopsy cohort, and used Bayesian regression analysis to study the associations of these in vivo amyloid stages with neuropathological Thal phases of regional Aβ plaque distribution and with semi-quantitative ratings of neocortical and striatal plaque densities. RESULTS: Bayesian regression revealed extreme evidence for an association of both PET-based staging approaches with Thal phases, and these associations were about 44 times more likely for frequency-based stages and 89 times more likely for striatum-based stages than for global cortical 18F-Florbetapir-PET signal. Early (i.e., neocortical-only) PET-based amyloid stages also predicted the absence of striatal/diencephalic cored plaques. Receiver operating characteristics curves revealed highly accurate discrimination between low/high Thal phases and the presence/absence of regional plaques. The median areas under the curve were 0.99 for frequency-based staging (95% credibility interval 0.97-1.00), 0.93 for striatum-based staging (0.83-1.00), and 0.87 for global 18F-Florbetapir-PET signal (0.72-0.98). INTERPRETATION: Our data indicate that both regional frequency- and striatum-based amyloid-PET staging approaches were superior to standard global amyloid-PET signal for differentiating between low and high degrees of regional amyloid pathology spread. Despite this, we found no evidence for the ability of either staging scheme to differentiate between low and moderate degrees of amyloid pathology which may be particularly relevant for early, preclinical stages of Alzheimer's disease.
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 | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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".