Evidence of Filamin A loss of solubility at the prodromal stage of neuropathologically-defined Alzheimer’s disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Alzheimer's disease (AD) is a multifactorial disorder diagnosed through the assessment of amyloid-beta (Aβ) and tau protein depositions. Filamin A (FLNA) could be a key partner of both Aβ and tau pathological processes and may be an important contributor to AD progression. The main aim of this study was to describe the differences in FLNA levels across clinicopathologic groups. Methods: From parietal cortex samples of 57 individuals (19 with no cognitive impairment (NCI), 19 mild cognitively impaired (MCI) and 19 with dementia) from the Religious Orders Study (ROS), we quantified total tau, phosphorylated tau (pTau), FLNA, synaptophysin, vesicular acetylcholine transporters (VAChT) and choline acetyltransferase (ChAT) by Western blot. Aβ42 and neuritic plaques (NP) were quantified by ELISA and Bielschowsky silver impregnation, respectively. AD staging was determined using ABC method combining Thal, Braak and the CERAD staging. From this, clinicopathologic stages of AD were established by subdividing subjects with neuropathological AD between preclinical AD, prodromal AD and AD dementia (ADD). Receiver operating characteristics analyses were performed to predict AD neuropathology from FLNA quantifications. Results: < 0.05 False discovery rate-corrected). No correlation of FLNA with tau measures was found. Insoluble FLNA levels were significantly higher in the prodromal AD, ADD and intermediate ABC groups. This was consistent with significantly lower levels of soluble FLNA specifically in prodromal AD. Insoluble (AUC: 0.830) and soluble FLNA levels (AUC: 0.830) as well as the ratio of soluble over insoluble FLNA (AUC: 0.852), were excellent predictors of prodromal AD among subjects with MCI from the ROS cohort. Discussion: We observed opposite level changes between insoluble and soluble FLNA in prodromal AD. As this stage coincides with the appearance of cognitive symptoms, this may be a key event in the transition from preclinical to prodromal AD. Insoluble FLNA could be useful to identify prodromal AD among subjects with an MCI, indicating that it might be a hallmark of prodromal 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".