Genome-wide meta-analysis of CSF biomarkers in Alzheimer’s disease and Parkinson’s disease cohorts
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Amyloid beta (Aβ), phosphorylated tau (p-tau), and total tau (t-tau) in cerebrospinal fluid are established biomarkers for Alzheimer’s disease (AD). In other neurodegenerative diseases, such as Parkinson’s disease (PD), these biomarkers have also been found to be altered, and the molecular mechanisms responsible for these alterations are still under investigation. Moreover, the interplay between these mechanisms and the diverse underlying disease states remains to be elucidated. Objectives To investigate genetic contributions to the AD biomarkers and assess the commonality and heterogeneity of the associations per underlying disease status. Methods We conducted GWAS for the AD biomarkers on subjects from the Parkinson’s Progression Markers Initiative (PPMI), the Fox Investigation for New Discovery of Biomarkers (BioFIND), and the Alzheimer’s Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI) and meta-analyzed with the largest AD GWAS.[7] We tested heterogeneity of associations of interest between different disease statuses (AD, PD, and control). Results We observed three GWAS signals: the APOE locus for Aβ, the 3q28 locus between GEMC1 and OSTN for p-tau and t-tau, and the 7p22 locus (top hit: rs60871478, an intronic variant for DNAAF5 , also known as HEATR2 ) for p-tau. The 7p22 locus is novel and co-localized with the brain DNAAF5 expression. While no heterogeneity from underlying disease status was observed for the above GWAS signals, some disease risk loci suggested disease specific associations with these biomarkers. Conclusions Our study identified a novel association at the intronic region of DNAAF5 associated with increased levels of p-tau across all diseases. We also observed some disease specific genetic associations with these biomarkers.
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 | 0.009 | 0.017 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.021 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".