MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3111004744 · doi:10.1002/alz.044223

Posterior cortical atrophy in Southeast Asia: Clinical and biomarker profile

2020· article· en· W3111004744 on OpenAlexaff
Levinia Lim, Benjamin Wong, Ashwati Vipin, Eveline Franco da Silva, Linda Lay Hoon Lim, Esther Vanessa Chua, Tanya‐Marie Yuen Oi Choong, Nyu Mei Mei, Hui Jin Chiew, Shahul Hameed, Simon Kang Seng Ting, Adeline Su Lyn Ng, Kok Pin Ng, Nagaendran Kandiah

Bibliographic record

VenueAlzheimer s & Dementia · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAtrophyMedicinePosterior cortical atrophyNeuroradiologyCohortHyperintensityNeurologyDementiaBiomarkerTemporal lobeInternal medicineCognitive declinePsychologyPediatricsMagnetic resonance imagingRadiologyDiseasePsychiatryEpilepsy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Posterior Cortical Atrophy (PCA) has been widely studied internationally, but there is limited data on its clinical and biomarker characteristics among Southeast Asians. We aim to describe a case series of PCA patients in this part of the world and explore how the new PCA consensus classification (Crutch et al., 2017) could be applied in this cohort. Method A retrospective review of the Singapore Young Onset Dementia (YOD) research database from a tertiary neurology center was performed. Available demographic, clinical and biomarker data of patients with a clinical diagnosis of PCA were extracted. Result Of 290 patients with YOD, ten patients (5 males; 5 females) with a clinical diagnosis of PCA were identified. Mean (SD) age of onset was 54.70 (4.11), duration between symptom onset and neurological consultation was 3.90 (1.45) years. All patients reported insidious onset and gradual progression of symptoms. Upon neurological examination, principle types of cognitive deficits seen were acalculia (80%), finger agnosia (70%), simultagnosia (60.0%) and agraphia (50%). In another sub‐group with available MRI scans (n=7), all showed biparietal cortical atrophy, five (71.0%) had concomitant bilateral medial temporal lobe atrophy and white matter hyperintensities of varying severity was noted in four (57.0%) patients. Among patients with known APOE genotyping (n=8), there was one e2e3 six e3e3 and one e4e4. Findings on cerebrospinal Ab‐42 and tau levels was available (n=7), mean (SD) of Ab‐42, phosphor‐tau and total tau levels were 525.1 (195.5)pg/ml, 72.1 (22.9)pg/ml and 611.3 (246.9)pg/ml respectively. Based on the new consensus classification for PCA (Crutch et al., 2017) and incorporating the CSF Ab‐42 criterion cut‐off for AD by Dubois et al. (2014), our series consists of one PCA‐AD (10.0%) and nine PCA‐pure (90.0%) However, if the CSF tau/ Ab‐42 ratio >0.52 (Duits et al., 2014) for biomarker diagnosis of AD is used, there would be seven PCA‐AD (70%) and three PCA‐plus (30%). Conclusion PCA patients tend to present late in clinic and greater awareness on the presentation of PCA is needed for earlier diagnosis and timely intervention. Also, the sensitivity of the different CSF criteria for AD in diagnosing PCA‐AD would require further analyses in larger cohorts.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.061
GPT teacher head0.355
Teacher spread0.293 · 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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlzheimer s & Dementia→Same topicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research→French-language works237,207→