Alteration of Blood Immune Biomarkers in MCI Patients with Different APOE Genotypes after Cognitive Training: A 1 Year Follow-Up Cohort Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Many studies aim to detect the early phase of dementia. One of the major ways to achieve this is to identify corresponding biomarkers, particularly immune blood biomarkers. The objective of this study was to identify such biomarkers in patients with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) in an experiment that included cognitive training. A group of patients with MCI diagnoses over the age of 65 participated in the study (n = 136). Measurements of cognitive functions (using the Mini-Mental State Examination scale and Montreal Cognitive Assessment) and determination of 27 serum biomarkers were performed twice: on the first visit and on the second visit, one year after the cognitive training. APOE genotypes were also determined. Concentrations of EGF (F = 17; p = 0.00007), Eotaxin (F = 7.17; p = 0.008), GRO (F = 13.42; p = 0.0004), IL-8 (F = 8.16; p = 0.005), MCP-1 (F = 13.46; p = 0.0001) and MDC (F = 5.93; p = 0.016) increased after the cognitive training in MCI patients. All these parameters except IL-8 demonstrated a weak correlation with other immune parameters and were poorly represented in the principal component analysis. Differences in concentrations of IP-10, FGF-2, TGFa and VEGF in patients with MCI were associated with APOE genotype. Therefore, the study identified several immune blood biomarkers that could potentially be associated with changes in cognitive function.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".