Differentiating amyloid beta spread in autosomal dominant and sporadic Alzheimer’s disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Amyloid-beta deposition is one of the hallmark pathologies in both sporadic Alzheimer’s disease and autosomal-dominant Alzheimer’s disease, the latter of which is caused by mutations in genes involved in amyloid-beta processing. Despite amyloid-beta deposition being a centrepiece to both sporadic Alzheimer’s disease and autosomal-dominant Alzheimer’s disease, some differences between these Alzheimer’s disease subtypes have been observed with respect to the spatial pattern of amyloid-beta. Previous work has shown that the spatial pattern of amyloid-beta in individuals spanning the sporadic Alzheimer’s disease spectrum can be reproduced with high accuracy using an epidemic spreading model which simulates the diffusion of amyloid-beta across neuronal connections and is constrained by individual rates of amyloid-beta production and clearance. However, it has not been investigated whether amyloid-beta deposition in the rarer autosomal-dominant Alzheimer’s disease can be modelled in the same way, and if so, how congruent the spreading patterns of amyloid-beta across sporadic Alzheimer’s disease and autosomal-dominant Alzheimer’s disease are. We leverage the epidemic spreading model as a data-driven approach to probe individual-level variation in the spreading patterns of amyloid-beta across three different large-scale imaging datasets (2 sporadic Alzheimer’s disease, 1 autosomal-dominant Alzheimer’s disease). We applied the epidemic spreading model separately to the Alzheimer’s Disease Neuroimaging initiative (n = 737), the Open Access Series of Imaging Studies (n = 510) and the Dominantly Inherited Alzheimer’s Network (n = 249), the latter two of which were processed using an identical pipeline. We assessed inter- and intra-individual model performance in each dataset separately and further identified the most likely subject-specific epicentre of amyloid-beta spread. Using epicentres defined in previous work in sporadic Alzheimer’s disease, the epidemic spreading model provided moderate prediction of the regional pattern of amyloid-beta deposition across all three datasets. We further find that, whilst the most likely epicentre for most amyloid-beta–positive subjects overlaps with the default mode network, 13% of autosomal-dominant Alzheimer’s disease individuals were best characterized by a striatal origin of amyloid-beta spread. These subjects were also distinguished by being younger than autosomal-dominant Alzheimer’s disease subjects with a default mode network amyloid-beta origin, despite having a similar estimated age of symptom onset. Together, our results suggest that most autosomal-dominant Alzheimer’s disease patients express amyloid-beta spreading patterns similar to those of sporadic Alzheimer’s disease, but that there may be a subset of autosomal-dominant Alzheimer’s disease patients with a separate, striatal phenotype.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".