Longitudinal change in memory performance as a strong endophenotype for Alzheimer's disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Although large-scale genome-wide association studies (GWAS) have been conducted on AD, few have been conducted on continuous measures of memory performance and memory decline. METHODS: We conducted a cross-ancestry GWAS on memory performance (in 27,633 participants) and memory decline (in 22,365 participants; 129,201 observations) by leveraging harmonized cognitive data from four aging cohorts. RESULTS: We found high heritability for two ancestry backgrounds. Further, we found a novel ancestry locus for memory decline on chromosome 4 (rs6848524) and three loci in the non-Hispanic Black ancestry group for memory performance on chromosomes 2 (rs111471504), 7 (rs4142249), and 15 (rs74381744). In our gene-level analysis, we found novel genes for memory decline on chromosomes 1 (SLC25A44), 11 (BSX), and 15 (DPP8). Memory performance and memory decline shared genetic architecture with AD-related traits, neuropsychiatric traits, and autoimmune traits. DISCUSSION: We discovered several novel loci, genes, and genetic correlations associated with late-life memory performance and decline. HIGHLIGHTS: Late-life memory has high heritability that is similar across ancestries. We discovered four novel variants associated with late-life memory. We identified four novel genes associated with late-life memory. Late-life memory shares genetic architecture with psychiatric/autoimmune traits.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".