Testing a polygenic risk score for morphological microglial activation in Alzheimer’s disease and aging
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Neuroinflammation and the activation of microglial cells are among the earliest events in Alzheimer’s disease (AD). However, direct observation of microglia in living people is not currently possible. Here, we indexed the heritable propensity for neuroinflammation with polygenic risk scores (PRS), using results from a recent genome-wide analysis of a validated post-mortem measure of morphological microglial activation. We sought to determine whether a PRS for microglial activation (PRS mic ) could augment the predictive performance of existing AD PRSs for late-life cognitive impairment. First, PRS mic were calculated and optimized in a calibration cohort (Alzheimer’s Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI), n=450), with resampling. Second, predictive performance of optimal PRS mic was assessed in two independent, population-based cohorts (total n=212,237). Our PRS mic showed no significant improvement in predictive power for either AD diagnosis or cognitive performance. Finally, we explored associations of PRS mic with a comprehensive set of imaging and fluid AD biomarkers in ADNI. This revealed some nominal associations, but with inconsistent effect directions. While genetic scores capable of indexing risk for neuroinflammatory processes in aging are highly desirable, more well-powered genome-wide studies of microglial activation are required. Further, biobank-scale studies would benefit from phenotyping of proximal neuroinflammatory processes to improve the PRS development phase.
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 | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".