The ketogenic diet as a potential prevention or therapeutic strategy for AD
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Diet is a powerful modulator of brain health. The ketogenic diet (KD), a very low carbohydrate diet, is remarkably effective in treating refractory epilepsy; 50‐70% of patients have >50% seizure reduction and 30% have >90% seizure reduction. Although the mechanisms underlying its effectiveness are not definitively known, reduction of neuronal hyperexcitability and neuroprotective effects of ketones have been demonstrated, as has reduction in AD pathology in rodent models. We tested the effect of a 6‐week Modified Mediterranean‐like KD (MMKD) compared with a low‐fat American Heart Association Diet (AHAD) on AD biomarkers and memory. Method The study used a randomized crossover design in which participants consumed either a MMKD (5‐10% of total daily calories obtained from carbohydrates) or the control AHAD (∼15% of calories obtained from fat per day) for 6 weeks, followed by a 6‐week washout period during which participants were instructed to resume their pre‐study diet, after which the second diet was consumed for 6 weeks. Diets were equicaloric with participants’ normal diet. Compliance was verified by measuring blood ketone levels. CSF collection, pseudocontinuous arterial spin label (pcASL) MRI, 11C‐AcAc/18F FDG Positron Emission Tomography (PET), and memory testing (Z score composite constructed from Story Recall and Free and Cued Selective Reminding Test) were performed at baseline and at the end of each intervention. Result A total of 20 participants completed both diets, with 3 participants discontinuing the study early. Mean compliance rates for completers were 90% for the MMKD and 95% for AHAD. The MMKD was associated with increased CSF Aβ42 and decreased tau. Cerebral perfusion increased after the MMKD in AD regions of interest, and whole‐brain ketone uptake increased on 11C‐AcAc PET. No changes in these outcomes were observed following the AHAD. Memory performance improved after both diets. Conclusion The MKKD intervention favorably influenced CSF AD biomarkers, cerebral perfusion, and memory. These results provide the basis for an ongoing Phase II study using a longer intervention in a larger sample of adults with MCI.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".