Resilience to Plasma and Cerebrospinal Fluid Amyloid-β in Cognitively Normal Individuals: Findings From Two Cohort Studies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: To define resilience metrics for cognitive decline based on plasma and cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) amyloid-β (Aβ) and examine the demographic, genetic, and neuroimaging factors associated with interindividual differences among metrics of resilience and to demonstrate the ability of such metrics to predict the diagnostic conversion to mild cognitive impairment (MCI). Methods: In this study, cognitively normal (CN) participants with Aβ-positive were included from the Sino Longitudinal Study on Cognitive Decline (SILCODE, n = 100) and Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI, n = 144). Using a latent variable model of data, metrics of resilience [brain resilience (BR), cognitive resilience (CR), and global resilience (GR)] were defined based on the plasma Aβ and CSF Aβ. Linear regression analyses were applied to investigate the association between characteristics of individuals (age, sex, educational level, genetic, and neuroimaging factors) and their resilience. The plausibility of these metrics was tested using linear mixed-effects models and Cox regression models in longitudinal analyses. We also compared the effectiveness of these metrics with conventional metrics in predicting the clinical progression. Results: Although individuals in the ADNI cohort were older (74.68 [5.65] vs. 65.38 [4.66], p < 0.001) and had higher educational levels (16.3 [2.6] vs. 12.6 [2.8], p < 0.001) than those in the SILCODE cohort, similar loadings between resilience and its indicators were found within both models. BR and GR were mainly associated with age, women, and brain volume in both cohorts. Prediction models showed that higher CR and GR were related to better cognitive performance, and specifically, all types of resilience to CSF Aβ could predict longitudinal cognitive decline. Conclusion: Different phenotypes of resilience depending on cognition and brain volumes were associated with different factors. Such comprehensive resilience provided insight into the mechanisms of susceptibility for Alzheimer's disease (AD) at the individual level, and interindividual differences in resilience had the potential to predict the disease progression in CN people.
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 | 0.004 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".