Monitoring Alzheimer’s Disease Progression in Mild Cognitive Impairment Stage Using Machine Learning-Based FDG-PET Classification Methods
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: We previously introduced a machine learning-based Alzheimer's Disease Designation (MAD) framework for identifying AD-related metabolic patterns among neurodegenerative subjects. OBJECTIVE: We sought to assess the efficiency of our MAD framework for tracing the longitudinal brain metabolic changes in the prodromal stage of AD. METHODS: MAD produces subject scores using five different machine-learning algorithms, which include a general linear model (GLM), two different approaches of scaled subprofile modeling, and two different approaches of a support vector machine. We used our pre-trained MAD framework, which was trained based on metabolic brain features of 94 patients with AD and 111 age-matched cognitively healthy (CH) individuals. The MAD framework was applied on longitudinal independent test sets including 54 CHs, 51 stable mild cognitive impairment (sMCI), and 39 prodromal AD (pAD) patients at the time of the clinical diagnosis of AD, and two years prior. RESULTS: The GLM showed excellent performance with area under curve (AUC) of 0.96 in distinguishing sMCI from pAD patients at two years prior to the time of the clinical diagnosis of AD while other methods showed moderate performance (AUC: 0.7-0.8). Significant annual increment of MAD scores were identified using all five algorithms in pAD especially when it got closer to the time of diagnosis (p < 0.001), but not in sMCI. The increased MAD scores were also significantly associated with cognitive decline measured by Mini-Mental State Examination in pAD (q < 0.01). CONCLUSION: These results suggest that MAD may be a relevant tool for monitoring disease progression in the prodromal stage of AD.
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 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".