Alzheimer’s Disease Polygenic Risk Score Is Not Associated With Cognitive Decline Among Older Adults With Type 2 Diabetes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives Multiple risk loci for late-onset Alzheimer’s disease (LOAD) have been identified. Type 2 diabetes (T2D) is a risk factor for cognitive decline, dementia and Alzheimer’s disease (AD). We investigated the association of polygenic risk score (PRS) for LOAD with overall cognitive functioning and longitudinal decline, among older adults with T2D. Methods The study included 1046 Jewish participants from the Israel Diabetes and Cognitive Decline (IDCD) study, aged ≥ 65 years, diagnosed with T2D, and cognitively normal at baseline. The PRS included variants from 26 LOAD associated loci (at genome-wide significance level), and was calculated with and without APOE. Outcome measures, assessed in 18 months intervals, were global cognition and the specific domains of episodic memory, attention/working memory, executive functions, and language/semantic categorization. Random coefficient models were used for analysis, adjusting for demographic variables, T2D-related characteristics, and cardiovascular factors. Additionally, in a subsample of 202 individuals, we analyzed the association of PRS with the volumes of total gray matter, frontal lobe, hippocampus, amygdala, and white matter hyperintensities. Last, the association of PRS with amyloid beta (Aβ) burden was examined in 44 participants who underwent an 18F-flutemetamol PET scan. Results The PRS was not significantly associated with overall functioning or decline in global cognition or any of the specific cognitive domains. Similarly, following correction for multiple testing, there was no association with Aβ burden and other brain imaging phenotypes. Conclusion Our results suggest that the cumulative effect of LOAD susceptibility loci is not associated with a greater rate of cognitive decline in older adults with T2D, and other pathways may underlie this link.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".