Longitudinal progression of choroid plexus enlargement is associated with female sex, cognitive decline and ApoE E4 homozygote status
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction Choroid plexus (CP)-related mechanisms have been implicated in the pathogenesis of neurodegenerative diseases, including Alzheimer’s disease. In this pilot study, we aimed to elucidate the association between longitudinal changes in CP volume, sex and cognitive impairment. Methods We assessed longitudinal changes in CP volume in a cohort of n = 613 subjects across n = 2,334 datapoints from ADNI 2 and ADNI-GO, belonging to cognitively unimpaired (CN), stable mild cognitive impairment (MCI), clinically diagnosed Alzheimer’s disease dementia (AD) or convertor (to either AD or MCI) subgroups. CP volume was automatically segmented and used as a response variable in linear mixed effect models with random intercept clustered by patient identity. Temporal effects of select variables were assessed by interactions and subgroup analyses. Results We found an overall significant increase of CP volume in time (14.92 mm3 per year, 95% confidence interval, CI (11.05, 18.77), p < 0.001). Sex-disaggregated results showed an annual rate of increase 9.48 mm3 in males [95% CI (4.08, 14.87), p < 0.001], and 20.43 mm3 in females [95% CI (14.91, 25.93), p < 0.001], indicating more than double the rate of increase in females, which appeared independent of other temporal variables. The only diagnostic group with a significant CP increase as compared to CN was the convertors group, with an increase of 24.88 mm3/year [95% CI (14, 35.82), p < 0.001]. ApoE exhibited a significant temporal effect, with the E4 homozygote group’s CP increasing at more than triple the rate of non-carrier or heterozygote groups [40.72, 95% CI (25.97, 55.46), p < 0.001 vs. 12.52, 95% CI (8.02, 17.02), p < 0.001 for ApoE E4 homozygotes and E4 non-carriers, respectively], and may have modified the diagnostic group relationship. Conclusion Our results contribute to potential mechanisms for sex differences in cognitive impairment with a novel finding of twice the annual choroid plexus enlargement in females and provide putative support for CP-related mechanisms of cognitive deterioration and its relationship to ApoE E4.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".