MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4380884166 · doi:10.1002/alz.066873

Analysis of amyloid deposits in the retina and implications for use as a biomarker of Alzheimer’s Disease

2023· article· en· W4380884166 on OpenAlexaff
Melanie C. W. Campbell, Erik Mason, Laura Emptage, Jiyuan Wang, Michael T. Hamel, Rachel Redekop, Monika Kitor, Jennifer M. Strazzeri, Melissa Brooks, Joseph A. Araujo, Chongzhao Ran, Ging‐Yuek Robin Hsiung, Ian R. Mackenzie, Veronica Hirsch‐Reinshagen, Jennifer J. Hunter

Bibliographic record

VenueAlzheimer s & Dementia · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAlzheimer's disease research and treatments
Canadian institutionsVancouver General HospitalUniversity of British ColumbiaVancouver Coastal Health Research InstituteNutreco (Canada)University of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRetinaRetinalAmyloid (mycology)PathologyIn vivoChemistryOphthalmologyMedicineBiologyAnatomyNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background In humans and the naturally occurring canine model of Alzheimer’s disease (AD), we and others observe amyloid deposits in the retina en face. We have previously shown that detecting the number of amyloid deposits with polarised light, using wide field, dye free retinal imaging, can predict the degree of severity of AD pathology in the brain. But some who take thin, transverse retinal sections find amyloid while others do not. Here, we report the surface area of retinal amyloid deposits in human and the canine model of AD. Method Formalin‐fixed retinas from 29 individuals with a moderate to high likelihood of AD (with some comorbidities excluded) and 20 canines were flat‐mounted and imaged in florescence and polarized light (Fig 1). The full retina was imaged for 24 human and 16 canine retinas. For 4 canines, in‐vivo blue light fluorescent retinal images were collected before and after injection of an amyloid dye, CRANAD‐28. Deposits visible only after injection were counted. Fluorescence and polarization images were compared post‐mortem in a canine after an injection of CRANAD‐28. Amyloid deposits were segmented using custom methods. The total area of segmented deposits was then divided by the total retinal area imaged. Result In retinas from individuals with AD brain pathology, the area of the retinal covered by amyloid deposits was on average 0.01% and correlated with the number of deposits (Fig 2). In vivo (Fig 3), the area of the canine retina covered by amyloid deposits was on average 0.29% (Fig 4). In one ex vivo retina, fluorescent and polarization positive deposits had a concurrence of 93% and the average area of fluorescent deposits (0.14%) was larger than the same deposits imaged in polarimetry (0.08%) (Fig. 5). Conclusion These findings and our previous report of an almost constant density of amyloid deposits across the retina, should guide in vivo imaging of amyloid in the retina as a biomarker of AD. Across all human and canine retinas, amyloid deposits covered less than 0.6% of the retinal surface. Careful, extensive sampling is needed. The surface area of amyloid deposits is an additional potential biomarker of disease severity.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.070
GPT teacher head0.362
Teacher spread0.292 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlzheimer s & DementiaSame topicAlzheimer's disease research and treatmentsFrench-language works237,207