Genome-Wide Association Analysis across Endophenotypes in Alzheimer’s Disease: Main Effects and Disease Stage-Specific Interactions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The underlying genetic susceptibility for Alzheimer's disease (AD) is not yet fully understood. The heterogeneous nature of the disease challenges genetic association studies. Endophenotype approaches can help to address this challenge by more direct interrogation of biological traits related to the disease. AD endophenotypes based on amyloid-β, tau, and neurodegeneration (A/T/N) biomarkers and cognitive performance were selected from the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI) cohort (N = 1565). A genome-wide association study (GWAS) of quantitative phenotypes was performed using an SNP main effect and an SNP by Diagnosis interaction (SNP × DX) model to identify disease stage-specific genetic effects. Nine loci were identified as study-wide significant with one or more A/T/N endophenotypes in the main effect model, as well as additional findings significantly associated with cognitive measures. These nine loci include SNPs in or near the genes APOE, SRSF10, HLA-DQB1, XKR3, and KIAA1671. The SNP × DX model identified three study-wide significant genetic loci (BACH2, EP300, and PACRG-AS1) with a neuroprotective effect in later AD stage endophenotypes. An endophenotype approach identified novel genetic associations and provided insight into the molecular mechanisms underlying the genetic associations that may otherwise be missed using conventional case-control study designs.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".