Does Loss of Integrity of the Cingulum Bundle Link Amyloid-β Accumulation and Neurodegeneration in Alzheimer’s Disease?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Alzheimer's disease is characterized by the accumulation of amyloid-β (Aβ) into plaques, aggregation of tau into neurofibrillary tangles, and neurodegenerative processes including atrophy. However, there is a poorly understood spatial discordance between initial Aβ deposition and local neurodegeneration. OBJECTIVE: Here, we test the hypothesis that the cingulum bundle links Aβ deposition in the cingulate cortex to medial temporal lobe (MTL) atrophy. METHODS: 21 participants with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) from the UMC Utrecht memory clinic (UMCU, discovery sample) and 37 participants with MCI from Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI, replication sample) with available Aβ-PET scan, T1-weighted and diffusion-weighted MRI were included. Aβ load of the cingulate cortex was measured by the standardized uptake value ratio (SUVR), white matter integrity of the cingulum bundle was assessed by mean diffusivity and atrophy of the MTL by normalized MTL volume. Relationships were tested with linear mixed models, to accommodate multiple measures for each participant. RESULTS: We found at most a weak association between cingulate Aβ and MTL volume (added R2 <0.06), primarily for the posterior hippocampus. In neither sample, white matter integrity of the cingulum bundle was associated with cingulate Aβ or MTL volume (added R2 <0.01). Various sensitivity analyses (Aβ-positive individuals only, posterior cingulate SUVR, MTL sub region volume) provided similar results. CONCLUSION: These findings, consistent in two independent cohorts, do not support our hypothesis that loss of white matter integrity of the cingulum is a connecting factor between cingulate gyrus Aβ deposition and MTL atrophy.
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 | 0.005 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 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".