Association of ventricular size on executive function and attention is modified by <i>Apolipoprotein E</i> and moderated by pulse pressure in Alzheimer's disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Genetic, structural imaging, and vascular risk factors are key determinants of cognitive differences in Alzheimer’s disease (AD). We investigated synergistic associations between three risk factors from each domain on cognition in AD. We focused on (1) whether structural imaging predicts cognitive performance, (2) and is differentially represented by genetic risk and (3) further moderated by vascular risk. Specifically, whether ventricular enlargement predicts EF and attention and whether this is differentially represented by Apolipoprotein E(APOE) and further moderated by pulse pressure (PP). Methods We used AD patients (n=321; mean age=71.6(9.6) years; %female=53) from the Sunnybrook Dementia Study (SDS). First, we performed a confirmatory factor analysis to build EF and attention latent factors using five standardized cognitive tests (EF:Wisconsin card sorting test, digit symbol substitution, phonemic fluency, attention:forward and backward digit span). Second, we tested whether ventricular size predicts EF and attention performance at baseline. Third, we tested an APOE effect modification where a different relationship is observed for ventricular size on EF and attention in context of APOE stratification. Fourth, we tested whether PP moderates any effect modification by APOE risk on ventricular size and EF and attention. PP was calculated using systolic minus diastolic blood pressure and divided into low and high groups using the mean PP. Results The best fitting model was observed with a two factor EF and attention model (χ2(df)= 4.059(4),p=0.3981; RMSEA (90% CI)=0.007(0.000‐0.085); CFI=1.000; SRMR= 0.023). Increase in ventricular size predicted lower EF (β=‐10.743, SE=4.538, p=0.018) and attention (β=‐13.342, SE=4.762, p=0.005) performance only in the APOE ɛ4+ risk group. This APOE effect modification was further moderated by PP where only APOE ɛ4+ risk carriers with low PP had poorer EF (β=‐16.553, SE=6.002, p=0.006) and attention (β=‐17.054, SE=6.225, p=0.006) performance with higher ventricular size. Conclusions EF and attention risk associated with ventricular enlargement was only present in AD patients carrying the APOE ɛ4 allelic risk and further magnified in adults with low PP. Genetic risk stratification in combination with structural imaging and modifiable vascular risk factors may identify AD patients at magnified risk for accelerated decline with potential opportunities for novelinterventions and precision medicine.
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 | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".