MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3193370765 · doi:10.3233/jad-210570

Cognitive Effects of the BET Protein Inhibitor Apabetalone: A Prespecified Montreal Cognitive Assessment Analysis Nested in the BETonMACE Randomized Controlled Trial

2021· article· en· W3193370765 on OpenAlexaffabout
Jeffrey L. Cummings, Gregory G. Schwartz, Stephen J. Nicholls, Aziz Khan, Chris Halliday, Peter P. Tóth, Michael Sweeney, Jan O. Johansson, Norman C.W. Wong, Ewelina Kulikowski, Kamyar Kalantar‐Zadeh, Kenneth Lebioda, Henry N. Ginsberg, Bengt Winblad, Henrik Zetterberg, Kausik K. Ray

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Alzheimer s Disease · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicProtein Degradation and Inhibitors
Canadian institutionsResverlogix (Canada)
FundersNational Institute on AgingNational Institute of General Medical SciencesNIHR Imperial Biomedical Research CentreNational Institute for Health and Care Research
KeywordsMontreal Cognitive AssessmentRandomized controlled trialDementiaMedicineCognitive declineCognitionInternal medicineEffects of sleep deprivation on cognitive performancePsychiatryDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Epigenetic changes may contribute importantly to cognitive decline in late life including Alzheimer's disease (AD) and vascular dementia (VaD). Bromodomain and extra-terminal (BET) proteins are epigenetic "readers" that may distort normal gene expression and contribute to chronic disorders. OBJECTIVE: To assess the effects of apabetalone, a small molecule BET protein inhibitor, on cognitive performance of patients 70 years or older participating in a randomized trial of patients at high risk for major cardiovascular events (MACE). METHODS: The Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) was performed on all patients 70 years or older at the time of randomization. 464 participants were randomized to apabetalone or placebo in the cognition sub-study. In a prespecified analysis, participants were assigned to one of three groups: MoCA score≥26 (normal performance), MoCA score 25-22 (mild cognitive impairment), and MoCA score≤21 (dementia). Exposure to apabetalone was equivalent in the treatment groups in each MoCA-defined group. RESULTS: Apabetalone was associated with an increased total MoCA score in participants with baseline MoCA score of≤21 (p = 0.02). There was no significant difference in change from baseline in the treatment groups with higher MoCA scores. In the cognition study, more patients randomized to apabetalone discontinued study drug for adverse effects (11.3% versus 7.9%). CONCLUSION: In this randomized controlled study, apabetalone was associated with improved cognition as measured by MoCA scores in those with baseline scores of 21 or less. BET protein inhibitors warrant further investigation for late life cognitive disorders.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.147
Threshold uncertainty score0.465

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.273 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
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

Citations25
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Alzheimer s DiseaseSame topicProtein Degradation and InhibitorsFrench-language works237,207