MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4236491504 · doi:10.1016/j.jalz.2016.06.135

IC‐P‐105: Uncovering The Relationship Between β‐Amyloid and Glucose Metabolism in Mild Cognitive Impairment

2016· article· en· W4236491504 on OpenAlexaff
Félix Carbonell, Donald G. McLaren, Alex Zijdenbos, Barry J. Bedell

Bibliographic record

VenueAlzheimer s & Dementia · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsMcGill University Health CentreUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAmyloid (mycology)Apolipoprotein EInternal medicinePosterior cingulateCarbohydrate metabolismEndocrinologyPittsburgh compound BMedicineAlzheimer's diseasePsychologyPathologyNeuroscienceCognitionDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recent PET studies have interrogated the relationship between β-amyloid load, glucose metabolism, and apolipoprotein E ε4 (APOE ε4) genotype. It has been reported that APOE ε4, and not aggregated fibrillar β-amyloid, contributes to glucose hypometabolism in cognitively normal and MCI subjects. The major limitation of these studies is the representation of the overall β-amyloid burden by a single measurement taken from the mean SUVR from a composite region-of-interest (ROI) or dichotomization into low or high β-amyloid burden. We utilized a Singular Value Decomposition (SVD) approach to reveal patterns of cross-correlation structure between glucose metabolism, as measured by [18F]FDG PET, and β-amyloid, as measured by [18F]florbetapir PET, in 274 MCI subjects from the ADNI study. SVD yields a set of eigenimages and individual subject loadings (i.e. components) corresponding to both β-amyloid and glucose metabolism. The β-amyloid subject loadings for the first component represent the β-amyloid burden maximally related to metabolism. To identify regions where metabolism is statistically related to β-amyloid burden, we regressed β-amyloid subject loadings against FDG in a general linear model (GLM) that included age, gender, and APOE ε4 status as covariates. The first SVD component accounted for 86% of the total variability explained by the cross-correlation between β-amyloid and glucose metabolism. The stronger weights in the first β-amyloid eigenimage (Figure 1A) correspond to the medial prefrontal and posterior cingulate cortices, and inferior temporal and fusiform gyri. The highest negative values of first metabolic eigenimage (Figure 1B) are spatially located in regions that GLM identified as having significant negative correlations, which are not explained by the APOE ε4 effect, between the β-amyloid loadings and FDG, particularly in the angular gyrus and posterior cingulate cortex (Figure 2A). For comparison, no significant regions were observed using a whole cortex average of β-amyloid burden (Figure 2B). Multivariate, cross-correlation analyses can uncover complex brain patterns not found with univariate statistical analysis approaches. These results support the notion that it is the spatially distributed, rather than focal, accumulation of β-amyloid that is associated with metabolic dysfunction. Future work will expand this analysis to identify the pattern of β-amyloid maximally related to metabolic connectivity. Surface projections for β-amyloid (A) and glucose metabolism (B) eigenimages corresponding to first component in the SVD analysis. Negative values in the metabolic eigenimage (B) indicate a negative correlation with the β-amyloid subject loadings. The β-amyloid subject loadings are based on the spatial weights of the β-amyloid eigenimage (A). The highest values in the β-amyloid eigenimage correspond to regions where β-amyloid is maximally related to glucose metabolism. Surface projections of β-amyloid-glucose metabolism regression models. (A) Significant regression results for SVD-derived β-amyloid burden versus glucose metabolism. The significant regions include areas within the angular gyrus and the posterior cingulate cortex. Results are FDR-corrected (q<0.05). (B) Regression results for mean β-amyloid burden using a whole cortex ROI. No significant relationships were observed.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.323
Teacher spread0.276 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlzheimer s & Dementia→Same topicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research→French-language works237,207→