A Comprehensive Investigation of the Potential Role of Lipoproteins and Metabolite Profile as Biomarkers of Alzheimer’s Disease Compared to the Known CSF Biomarkers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction. While cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) core biomarkers have been considered diagnostic biomarkers for a long time, special attention has been recently dedicated to lipoproteins and metabolites that could be potentially associated with Alzheimer’s disease (AD) neurodegeneration. Herein, we aimed to investigate the relationship between the levels of CSF core biomarkers including Aβ-42, TAU, and P-TAU and plasma lipoproteins and metabolites of patients with AD from the baseline cohort of the Alzheimer’s Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI) database. Method. Using the ADNI database, fourteen subclasses of lipoproteins as well as a number of lipids and fatty acids and low-molecular metabolites including amino acids, ketone bodies, and glycolysis-related metabolites in blood samples were measured as potential noninvasive markers, and their association with the CSF core biomarkers was statistically investigated controlling for age and gender. Results. A total number of 251 AD subjects were included, among whom 71 subjects were negative for the Apo-E ε4 allele and 150 were positive. There was no significant difference between the two groups regarding cognitive assessments, CSF core biomarkers, and lipoproteins and metabolites except the level of Aβ-42 ( p < 0.001 ) and phenylalanine ( p = 0.049 ), which were higher in the negative group. CSF TAU and P-TAU were significantly correlated with medium and small HDL in the negative group, and with extremely large VLDL in the positive group. Our results also indicated significant correlations of metabolites including unsaturated fatty acids, glycerol, and leucine with CSF core biomarkers. Conclusion. Based on our findings, a number of lipoproteins and metabolites were associated with CSF core biomarkers of AD. These correlations showed some differences in Apo-E ε4 positive and negative groups, which reminds the role of Apo-E gene status in the pathophysiology of AD development. However, further research is warranted to explore the exact association of lipoproteins and other metabolites with AD core biomarkers and pathology.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".