MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3112242715 · doi:10.1002/alz.037267

Different relationship of cross‐regional correlations of progression of local cortical thickness and local SUVR <sup>18</sup>F‐flortaucipir PET values to strength of connectivity

2020· article· en· W3112242715 on OpenAlexaff
Jean‐Paul Soucy, Fatameh Mohammadi, Thomas Boulier, Valentine Hortelan, Pedro Rosa‐Neto, Tharick A. Pascoal, Mélissa Savard, Min Su Kang, Sulantha Mathotaarachchi, Joseph Therriault, Habib Benali

Bibliographic record

VenueAlzheimer s & Dementia · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicFunctional Brain Connectivity Studies
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityMcGill University Health CentreConcordia UniversityMontreal Neurological Institute and Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAtrophyHippocampal formationStatisticNeurosciencePathologyMedicineBiologyMathematicsStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background We have demonstrated in vivo in humans that spatial progression of tau distribution and atrophy in Alzheimer’s is largely driven by connectivity (Soucy et al, HAI2020). Nevertheless, local tau accumulation and atrophy should not progress in parallel during disease evolution. Atrophy keeps worsening, while local tau density (SUVRs estimated with PET) initially increases but could then decline because of tissue loss. Therefore, despite the impact of connectivity on progression of both local atrophy and SUVRs, it likely will not remain the same for both over time. This is what we tested in this work. Method We studied 35 AD subjects from ADNI with 2 PET studies (18F‐florbetapir) at times Ta/Tb (mean elapsed time = 438 days, median = 454), and a T1 MRI at Ta. Eighteen subjects were non‐progressors (NP) and 17 were progressors (P) based on change between Ta/b hippocampal SUVRs values. This criterion was considered to represent how far advanced patients were in their disease. Moran I statistic was used to measure autocorrelations between connectivity and T1 MRI‐defined cortical thickness at Ta or tau PET SUVR values at both times Ta and Tb in NP and P subjects in regions separately analyzed based the “intensity” of their connectivity as defined by a standard connectivity map (Human Connectome Project). We defined 3 groups of regions from thresholds separating poorly connected from moderately connected (0.01) and moderately connected from highly connected ones (0.021). Result In both NPs and Ps, regions with high connectivity showed higher Z‐score (4.06) of the Moran I value for correlations between regions’ cortical thickness than those with low (2.64)/moderate (2.17) connectivity. For SUVR values however, in both NPs and Ps and at both time points, Z‐scores were always lower for the highly connected regions than for those with moderate/low connectivity. Conclusion The way connectivity influences correlations of atrophy across regions is indeed different from the way it affects correlations of tau deposition, likely for the reasons we hypothesized above to guide the progression of each parameter. Models of tau propagation across the brain will need to factor in ongoing atrophy but reversible accumulation of tau.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.078
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.244 · 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

Citations1
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlzheimer s & Dementia→Same topicFunctional Brain Connectivity Studies→French-language works237,207→