Optimizing detection of Alzheimer’s disease in mild cognitive impairment: a 4-year biomarker study of mild behavioral impairment in ADNI and MEMENTO
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Disease-modifying drug use necessitates better Alzheimer disease (AD) detection. Mild cognitive impairment (MCI) leverages cognitive decline to identify the risk group; similarly, mild behavioral impairment (MBI) leverages behavioral change. Adding MBI to MCI improves dementia prognostication over conventional approaches of incorporating neuropsychiatric symptoms (NPS). Here, to determine if adding MBI would better identify AD, we interrogated associations between MBI in MCI, and cerebrospinal fluid biomarkers [β-amyloid (Aβ), phosphorylated-tau (p-tau), and total-tau (tau)-ATN], cross-sectionally and longitudinally. METHODS: Data were from two independent referral-based cohorts, ADNI (mean[SD] follow-up 3.14[1.07] years) and MEMENTO (4.25[1.40] years), collected 2003-2021. Exposure was based on three-group stratification: 1) NPS meeting MBI criteria; 2) conventionally measured NPS (NPSnotMBI); and 3) noNPS. Cohorts were analyzed separately for: 1) cross-sectional associations between NPS status and ATN biomarkers (linear regressions); 2) 4-year longitudinal repeated-measures associations of MBI and NPSnotMBI with ATN biomarkers (hierarchical linear mixed-effects models-LMEs); and 3) rates of incident dementia (Cox proportional hazards regressions). RESULTS: Of 510 MCI participants, 352 were from ADNI (43.5% females; mean [SD] age, 71.68 [7.40] years), and 158 from MEMENTO (46.2% females; 68.98 [8.18] years). In ADNI, MBI was associated with lower Aβ42 (standardized β [95%CI], -5.52% [-10.48-(-0.29)%]; p = 0.039), and Aβ42/40 (p = 0.01); higher p-tau (9.67% [3.96-15.70%]; p = 0.001), t-tau (7.71% [2.70-12.97%]; p = 0.002), p-tau/Aβ42 (p < 0.001), and t-tau/Aβ42 (p = 0.001). NPSnotMBI was associated only with lower Aβ42/40 (p = 0.045). LMEs revealed a similar 4-year AD-specific biomarker profile for MBI, with NPSnotMBI associated only with higher t-tau. MBI had a greater rate of incident dementia (HR [95%CI], 3.50 [1.99-6.17; p < 0.001). NPSnotMBI did not differ from noNPS (HR 0.96 [0.49-1.89]; p = 0.916). In MEMENTO, MBI demonstrated a similar magnitude and direction of effect for all biomarkers, but with a greater reduction in Aβ40. HR for incident dementia was 3.93 (p = 0.004) in MBI, and 1.83 (p = 0.266) in NPSnotMBI. Of MBI progressors to dementia, 81% developed AD dementia. CONCLUSIONS: These findings support a biological basis for NPS that meet MBI criteria, the continued inclusion of MBI in NIA-AA ATN clinical staging, and the utility of MBI criteria to improve identification of patients for enrollment in disease-modifying drug trials or for clinical care.
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 | 0.005 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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".