Peer Review #3 of "APOE genotype and age modifies the correlation between cognitive status and metabolites from hippocampus by a 2D 1H-MRS in non-demented elders (v0.2)"
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose To examine the associations among age, Apolipoprotein E (APOE) genotype, metabolic changes in the hippocampus detected by 2D 1 H magnetic resonance spectroscopy (MRS), and neuropsychological measures of cognition in non-demented elders.Materials and Methods We studied a cohort of 16 cognitively normal controls (CN) and 11 amnestic mild cognitive impairment (aMCI) patients between 66 and 88 years old who were genotyped for APOE genetic polymorphism.Measurements of 2D 1 H-MRS metabolites were obtained in the hippocampus region.Adjusting by age among all subjects, the association between metabolic changes and cognitive function was measured by Spearman partial rank-order correlation.The effect of APOE status was measured by separating the subjects into APOE genotype subgroups, including the APOEε4 carriers and APOEε4 non-carriers.Results In contrast to the CN group matched with age, gender, and education, aMCI patients showed increased myo-inositol (mI)/Creatine (Cr) ratio only in the right hippocampus.No differences were noted on N-acetylaspartate (NAA)/Cr and mI/NAA from bilateral hippocampus, and so was mI/Cr ratio in left hippocampus between aMCI and CN.The mI/Cr ratio from the right hippocampus in non-demented elders was negatively correlated with Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) scores.Whether ε4 genotype or age was added as a covariate, none of the correlation effects remained significant.Additionally, adjusting for age and APOE genotype together, there was no significant correlation between them.Conclusion Since the higher mI/Cr from the right hippocampus of the patients with aMCI than those from CN, the mI/Cr could be a more specific predictor of general cognitive function in aMCI patients.There is an association between higher mI/Cr in right hippocampus and worse cognitive function for the non-demented older adults, and the correlation could be modified by APOE status and age.That provided a window on objectively understanding the mechanism between the brain metabolites and the influence factors in non-demented elders.
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 | 0.009 | 0.063 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.359 | 0.199 |
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".