Alzheimer’s Disease-Related Metabolic Pattern in Diverse Forms of Neurodegenerative Diseases
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dementia is broadly characterized by cognitive and psychological dysfunction that significantly impairs daily functioning. Dementia has many causes including Alzheimer's disease (AD), dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB), and frontotemporal lobar degeneration (FTLD). Detection and differential diagnosis in the early stages of dementia remains challenging. Fueled by AD Neuroimaging Initiatives (ADNI) (Data used in preparation of this article were obtained from the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI) database. As such, the investigators within ADNI contributed to the design and implementation of ADNI and/or provided data but did not participate in analysis or writing of this report.), a number of neuroimaging biomarkers for AD have been proposed, yet it remains to be seen whether these markers are also sensitive to other types of dementia. We assessed AD-related metabolic patterns in 27 patients with diverse forms of dementia (five had probable/possible AD while others had atypical cases) and 20 non-demented individuals. All participants had positron emission tomography (PET) scans on file. We used a pre-trained machine learning-based AD designation (MAD) framework to investigate the AD-related metabolic pattern among the participants under study. The MAD algorithm showed a sensitivity of 0.67 and specificity of 0.90 for distinguishing dementia patients from non-dementia participants. A total of 18/27 dementia patients and 2/20 non-dementia patients were identified as having AD-like patterns of metabolism. These results highlight that many underlying causes of dementia have similar hypometabolic pattern as AD and this similarity is an interesting avenue for future research.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".