Resting-State Network Alterations Differ between Alzheimer’s Disease Atrophy Subtypes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Several Alzheimer's disease (AD) atrophy subtypes were identified, but their brain network properties are unclear. We analyzed data from two independent datasets, including 166 participants (103 AD/63 controls) from the DZNE-longitudinal cognitive impairment and dementia study and 151 participants (121 AD/30 controls) from the AD neuroimaging initiative cohorts, aiming to identify differences between AD atrophy subtypes in resting-state functional magnetic resonance imaging intra-network connectivity (INC) and global and nodal network properties. Using a data-driven clustering approach, we identified four AD atrophy subtypes with differences in functional connectivity, accompanied by clinical and biomarker alterations, including a medio-temporal-predominant (S-MT), a limbic-predominant (S-L), a diffuse (S-D), and a mild-atrophy (S-MA) subtype. S-MT and S-D showed INC reduction in the default mode, dorsal attention, visual and limbic network, and a pronounced reduction of "global efficiency" and decrease of the "clustering coefficient" in parietal and temporal lobes. Despite severe atrophy in limbic areas, the S-L exhibited only marginal global network but substantial nodal network failure. S-MA, in contrast, showed limited impairment in clinical and cognitive scores but pronounced global network failure. Our results contribute toward a better understanding of heterogeneity in AD with the detection of distinct differences in functional connectivity networks accompanied by CSF biomarker and cognitive differences in AD subtypes.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".