Body Mass Index and Polygenic Risk for Alzheimer’s Disease Predict Conversion to Alzheimer’s Disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Body mass index (BMI) is a risk factor for Alzheimer's disease (AD) although the relationship is complex. Obesity in midlife is associated with increased risk for AD, whereas evidence supports both higher and lower BMI increasing risk for AD in late life. This study examined the influence of individual differences in genetic risk for AD to further clarify the relationship between late-life BMI and conversion to AD. Participants included 52 individuals diagnosed as having mild cognitive impairment (MCI) at baseline who converted to AD within 24 months and 52 matched MCI participants from the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI) cohort. BMI was measured at baseline. Genetic risk for AD was assessed via genome-wide polygenic risk scores. Conditional logistic regression models were run to determine if BMI and polygenic risk predicted conversion to AD. Results showed an interaction between BMI and genetic risk, such that individuals with lower BMI and higher polygenic risk were more likely to convert to AD relative to individuals with higher BMI. These results remained significant after adjusting for cerebrospinal fluid biomarkers of AD. Exploratory sex-stratified analyses revealed this relationship only remained significant in males. These results show that higher genetic risk in the context of lower BMI predicts conversion to AD in the next 24 months, particularly among males. These findings suggest that genetic risk for AD in the context of lower BMI may serve as a prodromal risk factor for future conversion to AD.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".