MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3111755463 · doi:10.1002/alz.040497

Proteomic analysis of cognitive impairment in responders traumatized by the World Trade Center disaster

2020· article· en· W3111755463 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Benjamin J. Luft, Sean Clouston, Roman Kotov, Evelyn Bromet, Pei Fen Kuan

Bibliographic record

VenueAlzheimer s & Dementia · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicIntensive Care Unit Cognitive Disorders
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCohortDementiaCognitionInternal medicineMedicineMontreal Cognitive AssessmentPosttraumatic stressCognitive impairmentOncologyClinical psychologyPsychologyPsychiatryDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background WTC responders, particularly those with long‐term PTSD, have an increased incidence of mild cognitive impairment (MCI), a prognostic marker of later dementia. In this study, we used proteomics to interrogate the interaction between PTSD and MCI in a cohort of disaster responders. Method The sample included 181 responders to the World Trade Center (WTC) disaster, including 73 with probable PTSD, 61 with MCI, and 81 WTC traumatized controls with neither condition. 34 responders had comorbid PTSD and MCI. PTSD was measured with the Posttraumatic Stress Disorder Checklist (PCL; cut‐point >44). MCI was defined according to NIA‐AA criteria using the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA; cut‐point <23). In total, we profiled 282 proteins with known involvement in relevant biological processes using the Olink Proseek Multiplex Platform. Specifically, we focused on markers of neurodevelopmental processes, cellular regulation, immunological function, cardiovascular disease, inflammatory processes, neurological diseases. Differential expression analysis was conducted to identify protein biomarkers of PTSD, MCI, and co‐occurring PTSD/MCI. Results In total, 46 unique proteins were identified from the combined list of PTSD and MCI associated proteins. Thirty‐seven proteins were differentially expressed in PTSD versus exposed controls at p < 0.05; nine were significant after correcting for multiple comparisons using the false discovery rate (FDR < 0.1). Twenty‐five proteins were differentially expressed in MCI versus exposed controls (p < 0.05); 6 attained an FDR < 0.1. After controlling for PTSD, effect size directions for these 25 MCI‐related proteins were unchanged; 13 remained significant at p < 0.05. Conclusion The current study identified several novel protein biomarkers for PTSD and MCI, which were associated with disease burden characterized by co‐occurrence of the phenotypes. Results indicated that half of the proteins associated with PTSD, and vice versa proteins associated with MCI were found in comorbid PTSD and MCI. The results suggest that identification of protein biomarkers might be useful in development of a plasma‐based assay for early detection of MCI in traumatized patients, especially those showing signs of 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 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)0.000
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.264 · 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 topicIntensive Care Unit Cognitive Disorders→French-language works237,207→