Dynamic Amyloid and Metabolic Signatures of Delayed Recall Performance within the Clinical Spectrum of Alzheimer’s Disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Associations between pathophysiological events and cognitive measures provide insights regarding brain networks affected during the clinical progression of Alzheimer’s disease (AD). In this study, we assessed patients’ scores in two delayed episodic memory tests, and investigated their associations with regional amyloid deposition and brain metabolism across the clinical spectrum of AD. We assessed the clinical, neuropsychological, structural, and positron emission tomography (PET) baseline measures of participants from the Alzheimer’s Disease Neuroimaging Initiative. Subjects were classified as cognitively normal (CN), or with early (EMCI) or late (LMCI) mild cognitive impairment, or AD dementia. The memory outcome measures of interest were logical memory 30 min delayed recall (LM30) and Rey Auditory Verbal Learning Test 30 min delayed recall (RAVLT30). Voxel-based [18F]florbetapir and [18F]FDG uptake-ratio maps were constructed and correlations between PET images and cognitive scores were calculated. We found that EMCI individuals had LM30 scores negatively correlated with [18F]florbetapir uptake on the right parieto-occipital region. LMCI individuals had LM30 scores positively associated with left lateral temporal lobe [18F]FDG uptake, and RAVLT30 scores positively associated with [18F]FDG uptake in the left parietal lobe and in the right enthorhinal cortex. Additionally, LMCI individuals had LM30 scores negatively correlated with [18F]florbetapir uptake in the right frontal lobe. For the AD group, [18F]FDG uptake was positively correlated with LM30 in the left temporal lobe and with RAVLT30 in the right frontal lobe, and [18F]florbetapir uptake was negatively correlated with LM30 scores in the right parietal and left frontal lobes. The results show that the association between regional brain metabolism and the severity of episodic memory deficits is dependent on the clinical disease stage, suggesting a dynamic relationship between verbal episodic memory deficits, AD pathophysiology, and clinical disease stages.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".