Ventricular anteroposterior ratio is the most reliable feature to differentiate bvFTD from healthy controls and other dementias
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Using morphometric analysis, we recently found ventricular expansion to be the most prominent differentiator of behavioural‐variant frontotemporal dementia (bvFTD) from healthy controls and a potentially sensitive marker of disease progression [Manera et al. 2019]. Here, we performed volumetric analysis on the lateral ventricles to find a reliable differentiator of bvFTD from Alzheimer’s Disease (AD), mild cognitive impairment (MCI), the language variants of FTD (Semantic‐Variant, SV, and Progressive‐Nonfluent‐Aphasia, PNFA), and controls. Method We included 825 subjects (59 bvFTD, 28 SV, 30 PNFA, 322 MCI, 127 AD, and 259 controls) with a total of 3800 timepoints from the Alzheimer’s Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI) and the Frontotemporal Lobar Degeneration Neuroimaging Initiative (FTLDNI). Lateral ventricles were automatically segmented for all timepoints, using a previously validated pipeline. Using a lobe atlas, ventricular volumes (VV) were calculated for frontal, parietal, temporal, and occipital lobes in the left and right hemispheres. Using coronal slice y=120 in the brain atlas, ventricles were also divided into anterior and posterior halves. All volumes were normalized for intracranial volume and log‐transformed to achieve normal distribution. Regression models were used to assess volumetric and ratio differences between cohorts at baseline (Model1:feature∼1+Diagnostic‐Group+Age+Sex). Longitudinal mixed‐effects models were used to assess longitudinal differences in ventricular features (antero‐posterior ventricular ratio and total VV) between bvFTD and other cohorts (Model2:feature∼1+ Diagnostic‐Group +Age+ Diagnostic‐Group:Age+Sex+1|ID). The variables of interest were Diagnostic‐Group (Model 1) and the interaction between Diagnostic‐Group and Age (Diagnostic‐Group:Age, Model 2). ID was considered as a categorical random effect. All results were corrected for multiple comparisons (Bonferroni). Result Figures 1 and 2 show the volumetric and ratio differences between cohorts. Controlling for age and sex, the antero‐posterior ratio was the only feature that was significantly different in bvFTD (Mean±SD:1.37±0.47) compared to all other diagnostic groups (Controls:1.00±0.24,p<0.001; MCI: 0.97±0.22,p<0.001; AD: 0.92±0.22,p<0.001; SV:1.00±0.22,p<0.001; PNFA:1.12±0.48,p=0.004). Total ventricle volume increased with age in all cohorts (p<0.001,Figure 3). bvFTD patients showed a faster increase in the ventricular antero‐posterior ratio compared to all other diagnostic groups (Figure 4, p<0.01). Conclusion The antero‐posterior ratio of the lateral ventricles, in both cross‐sectional and longitudinal analyses, was the most reliable ventricular feature differentiating bvFTD from controls and other dementias.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".